|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 17, 2023 13:39:45 GMT
I don't think it would. The pull factor is usually a family member already here or the fact they can speak the language. The point being - why are illegals, asylum seekers call them what you will, in this country accommodated in 3,4 & 5 star hotels, when in France they're accommodated in containers and tents which the EU and UN obviously find acceptable. If I were living in a tent in Calais I would do my best to get to that hotel room in England, complete with pocket money and free mobile. If we treated illegals as the EU do, the pull factor would obviously be diminished. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jul 17, 2023 14:08:06 GMT
I don't think it would. The pull factor is usually a family member already here or the fact they can speak the language. The point being - why are illegals, asylum seekers call them what you will, in this country accommodated in 3,4 & 5 star hotels, when in France they're accommodated in containers and tents which the EU and UN obviously find acceptable. If I were living in a tent in Calais I would do my best to get to that hotel room in England, complete with pocket money and free mobile. If we treated illegals as the EU do, the pull factor would obviously be diminished. Probably something to do with France having to deal with much higher numbers of refugees. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 17, 2023 14:20:54 GMT
The point being - why are illegals, asylum seekers call them what you will, in this country accommodated in 3,4 & 5 star hotels, when in France they're accommodated in containers and tents which the EU and UN obviously find acceptable. If I were living in a tent in Calais I would do my best to get to that hotel room in England, complete with pocket money and free mobile. If we treated illegals as the EU do, the pull factor would obviously be diminished. Probably something to do with France having to deal with much higher numbers of refugees. 'Refugees' lol, if you say so. France is part of the EU who encouraged every vagrant and criminal from western Europe, Africa and the middle east to come to a borderless Europe. They now realise it wasn't such a great idea after all, you may remember in 2017 Merkel publicly apologised for the disaster that was indeed is, mass immigration. And besides, as far as the EU state of France is concerned, it has the same population as the UK with twice the landmass. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 17, 2023 14:22:26 GMT
If this discussion is about the camps in Calais and the (usually very basic) accommodation an asylum seeker receives in the UK, the very obvious answer to the "obvious" if silly question is
The people in Calais have not claimed asylum in france and hence are not legally asylum seekers.
Once they have claimed asylum in the UK, they are asylum seekers and hence are entitled to basic accommodation while their claim is being processed.
People who have claimed asylum in France are accommodated by the French state in as far as I know similar quality accommodation.
The question that should be asked is why have our government mismanaged our system so badly that decision rates are infinitely slower than in France and hence people remain in Government accommodation for far too long, which results in that accommodation becoming full which requires Government to find further accommodation (and costs large sums of money).
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 17, 2023 14:34:45 GMT
For the benefit of outraged lefties who think there are refugees in the EU state of France. Below are a couple of snaps of Kutupulong refugee camp in Bangladesh, it's the biggest refugee camp in the world and the poor sods who are forced to survive there are genuine refugees who are fleeing persecution torture and death. linkThere are no refugees genuine or otherwise, in France.   |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 17, 2023 14:43:33 GMT
There are illegal immigrants in France
There are asylum seekers in France (some of whom will be judged to be eligible for asylum and hence become a refugee in France, some who will not)
There are refugees (people who claimed and were awarded asylum) in France
Some people will travel on from France and claim asylum in the UK.
All of them will be genuine asylum seekers in the UK
Some of them will be judged eligible for asylum in the UK and hence become a refugee. Some will not and (after due process) should leave.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Jul 17, 2023 15:28:16 GMT
There are illegal immigrants in France There are asylum seekers in France (some of whom will be judged to be eligible for asylum and hence become a refugee in France, some who will not) There are refugees (people who claimed and were awarded asylum) in France Some people will travel on from France and claim asylum in the UK. All of them will be genuine asylum seekers in the UK Some of them will be judged eligible for asylum in the UK and hence become a refugee. Some will not and (after due process) should leave. and that’s where we differ. Because a person seeking asylum should be seeking protection from the last country they left in the one they are in. Only the no borders lefties who want to fill this country with the world’s flotsam and jetsam - because they want to see it become a third world shithole see it any other way We are no longer in the EU and no longer forced to dance to its schengen no borders tune. Our politicians need to grow some balls and put things back the way they were. And that means unless you are in fear of persecution or death FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE etc IN THE COUNTRY YOU LAST LEFT - NO ENTRY. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 17, 2023 15:45:35 GMT
The law is what the law is, John. This ground has been covered many times before.
What the law is is nothing remotely to do with the Eu or Schengen
The question in the original post has been answered.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jul 17, 2023 16:18:09 GMT
The law is what the law is, John. This ground has been covered many times before. Why turn it into a legal question? Do you feel incapable of morally justifying fraud and people trafficking? |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 17, 2023 17:13:38 GMT
The answer to the OP was a legal matter Orac and both Red and John then posted info that were legally wrong.
We can talk about moral matters if you wish - I would argue that it is not moral to deny desperate people help or to expect say Greece to cope with people needing help on their own while we hide behind geography to do nothing - but that is very much a different question to the one raised in this thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jul 17, 2023 17:37:41 GMT
Dappy, rather than hiding behind that legalistic fig leaf, why not try your hand morally justifying fraud and people trafficking?
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 17, 2023 17:42:43 GMT
I have explained to you why the law is relevant to this thread.
I have also given you my view of the morality here.
You seem desperate to frame the matter in a silly way. We’ve done this one before. No need for me to spend time demonstrating the same point again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 17, 2023 21:05:46 GMT
The most significant difference between the French and the British 'asylum offers' comes in the matter of accommodation. In terms of healthcare, financial support and ongoing integration the French offer is actually more attractive, the major differentiation is in accommodation.
Rather than accommodating asylum in hotels what the French have done is what the British government aspires to do, that is create asylum hostels from disused public buildings and military facilities. The problem is that supply severely lags behind demand with the result that many asylum seekers (up to half) have to wait months before being assigned a place in a government hostel.
The net result is that many give up or, knowing the situation, never apply for asylum in the first place resulting in the impromptu camps on the Channel coast. It's not that the French authorities organise this by design it's just that they don't take as seriously as the British do their obligations under the EU's reception directives. Another case of the British gold-plating EU regulations when others honour them more in the breach.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jul 17, 2023 23:12:46 GMT
The most significant difference between the French and the British 'asylum offers' comes in the matter of accommodation. In terms of healthcare, financial support and ongoing integration the French offer is actually more attractive, the major differentiation is in accommodation. Rather than accommodating asylum in hotels what the French have done is what the British government aspires to do, that is create asylum hostels from disused public buildings and military facilities. The problem is that supply severely lags behind demand with the result that many asylum seekers (up to half) have to wait months before being assigned a place in a government hostel. The net result is that many give up or, knowing the situation, never apply for asylum in the first place resulting in the impromptu camps on the Channel coast. It's not that the French authorities organise this by design it's just that they don't take as seriously as the British do their obligations under the EU's reception directives. Another case of the British gold-plating EU regulations when others honour them more in the breach. What a load of bollox. The entire European migration crisis was created, designed and promoted from within the inner sanctum of Brussels, although it must be said that in recent years the EU have seen the error of their ways and are attempting to back peddle. And you can bend over and shove EU reception directives where the sun don't shine. I am at a loss to belive that 21st century British politicians are so weak. The British government paid the French £300 million to police their own border, they didn't bother. So Sunak gave them another £125 million, they still didn't bother and Sunak still refers to Macron as his friend. I sit here and wonder if the penny will ever drop. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Jul 18, 2023 7:39:35 GMT
If this discussion is about the camps in Calais and the (usually very basic) accommodation an asylum seeker receives in the UK, the very obvious answer to the "obvious" if silly question is The people in Calais have not claimed asylum in france and hence are not legally asylum seekers.Once they have claimed asylum in the UK, they are asylum seekers and hence are entitled to basic accommodation while their claim is being processed. People who have claimed asylum in France are accommodated by the French state in as far as I know similar quality accommodation. The question that should be asked is why have our government mismanaged our system so badly that decision rates are infinitely slower than in France and hence people remain in Government accommodation for far too long, which results in that accommodation becoming full which requires Government to find further accommodation (and costs large sums of money). The people in Calais who re trying to get to England are "illegal immigrants", dappy. I know you have difficulty with the term but that's what they are. According to EU rules these people who arrive in the EU (usually Italy of Greece) are required to register in the first country that they arrive in. The problem is that most of them do NOT do this and they're just given a train ticket to France to get rid of them. That's because the Schengen agreement means that they can travel all through Europe without showing any papers - so the Europe's "security" is dependent on Italy and Greece, neither of which country have much interest in controlling the illegal traffic because they know that the vast majority of them want to live in 2 or 3 countries - Germany, Sweden and England. Some apply for asylum in France (most don't) but when they are rejected they are then illegal migrants. So virtually ALL of these people living in the camps are illegal migrants NOT "refugees" as you naively suggest. It is the duty of the French govt to treat them as such and not facilitate their onward journey to England, yet this is exactly what the French do. When they arrive here they claim asylum. But since they're from a safe country (France) we should deny them ALL asylum - that's shortly to become law in the UK. Having denied them asylum they should be returned to France (or any other country that will accept them) and they should be detained in secure accommodation - or they disappear into the black economy. It's true that our govt takes too long to process them but it's VERY difficult to process people who have, in almost every case, thrown away their identification. The point is that we should NOT be processing them. They should be ejected. But we have problems in doing that because our Leftie Establishment and judiciary do everything they can to stop us getting rid of them. |
|
