Not what I see with my own eyes. A bloke on Twitter films them every day. Not one woman or child.
So what you read and what is real are two different things.
I read the news today oh boy! Page 2,508
Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ 6th November 2022, 1:20 PMNot what I see with my own eyes. A bloke on Twitter films them every day. Not one woman or child.
So what you read and what is real are two different things.
Home Office figures for the year to June 2022.
Whether there's been a shift in the last 4 months, I don't know.
Quote: Lazzard @ 6th November 2022, 10:20 AMThe logic isn't faulty - an absence in an agreement doesn't mean you can just fill in the gaps with whatever you fancy.
None of that changes the fact that it is a lie to say "The rules say that they should have applied for immigration at the FIRST safe nation that they crossed."
They don't.
Your logic IS faulty. However I admit that I did not do my usual verification of the "The rules say that they should have applied for immigration at the FIRST safe nation that they crossed" statement at the time, because it is so common and because it makes more sense than crossing the EU and then taking an unsafe boat crossing to the UK. However you were equally mistaken in saying "the Refugee Convention, to which we are a signatory, sates that you can seek asylum in any signatory country.", yet I don't see you saying you were lying. The CONVENTION did NOT state that! https://www.unhcr.org/3b66c2aa10.html
~~~
Quote: Lazzard @ 6th November 2022, 10:20 AMIn terms of criminal elements getting in - that's always a possibility and there will be a certain (though small) percentage who abscond.
Again, don't trust the figures for absconding that the usual suspects circulate- these include people who merely missed their first interview.
More mis-information designed to scare people.
Of course, processing facilities in Northern France - as offered by the French & refused by the UK - would mitigate against this greatly, reducing the chances of criminal elemenys entering..
It only takes one to five terrorists to be a real danger of bombing.
If Processing centres in France are being refused by the UK, how come there is a new one in LILLE
" You're right, the Convention does not explicitly state 'country choice' as a right"
First line of my response to your initial post. Not sure what more I can do on that front.
The Lille processing centre was purely for Ukrainian refugees and nothing to do with the facility France have been suggesting. It was heavily criticised for not allowing walk-in appointments and not advertising its location
Quote: Aaron @ 5th November 2022, 11:20 PMWhat's the answer though? I really have no idea.
The answer is Brexit?
Vote leave- to "Take back control of our borders"
Easy!
You've not shut up about it for 6 years Give it a rest.s
Greta Thunberg said it's her job to repeat stuff because she's a Swedish activist. That makes Abba an activist group ! If we need to infiltrate Agnetha's team, I'll do it.
Quote: lofthouse @ 6th November 2022, 6:47 PMThe answer is Brexit?
Vote leave- to "Take back control of our borders"
Easy!
As mentioned before, the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol, overrule the normal quota immigration laws. Brexit is irrelevant in that context. There are no quantitative border rules for genuine-refugees.
You make a good point Bill, trouble is most people don't have time or interest to look into the detail. So given that, should we the public be trusted to vote on such things ? Now we know how's it's panned out, should we be given another chance to vote ? People still seem to be very unsettled about it , remember the Poll tax ? At what point should a government reconsider this ?
Quote: Firkin @ 7th November 2022, 8:48 AMYou make a good point Bill, trouble is most people don't have time or interest to look into the detail. So given that, should we the public be trusted to vote on such things ? Now we know how's it's panned out, should we be given another chance to vote ? People still seem to be very unsettled about it , remember the Poll tax ? At what point should a government reconsider this ?
Not sure there's any going back now - not to how it was.
But I think theres an increasing appetite for a closer relationship with Europe on a common sense level
As long as it's not called "Rejoin" I think the public would be up for some sensible rapprochement, especially on trade.
Some of the brighter ones, in light of the current migrant worries, might have by now worked out that freedom of movement wasn't quite the problem/solution they were told it was.
But I can see some sort of arrangement emerging over the next five/ten years.
I don't mind trading/liaising/working together with Europe. It was just the dictatorial orders that I objected to.
Quote: Chappers @ 7th November 2022, 10:37 AMI don't mind trading/liaising/working together with Europe. It was just the dictatorial orders that I objected to.
Which ones in particular?
Quote: Lazzard @ 7th November 2022, 10:38 AMWhich ones in particular?
The ones the daily mail invented
If you believe in Democracy you should be a Brexit supporter, because the EU is not democratic. It has a Parliament which is not permitted to formulate new laws it can merely vote Yay or Nay to laws formulated by the EU Commission, which is basically a set of unvoted-for civil service workers.
The selection of the President of the EU is (I think) done by the EU Council, which to be true is composed mainly of the individual PMs (or equivalents) of the member countries, so they are mainly voted in, they put forward a list for the EU Parliament to vote upon. This last time they only put ONE candidate forward, so the EU Parliamentary ratification was a for-gone conclusion. { Oh heck, the UK did that last time too so I guess UK parliament is also not democratic}. ....{billwill dissolves into a cloud of bubbles, being unable to formulate a sane comment about a ridiculous Parliamentary System}...
Nice to see free speech absolutist Elon Musk already banning people on twitter for life. Not for hate speech, but for parody and satire.