Brexit

[fitz]

I was referring to the people trafficking.

I think pretty much everyone has been against that. It just seems odd that migrant crossings become big news everytime the government do something unpopular with the large %age of the country....even though we're told these crossings happen so often. Normally a story with a proposed solution that they know won't ever be implimented.

 

[Brown Nose]

Facts about refugees and asylum seekers

What's the difference between a refugee and an asylum seeker? Should people claim asylum in the first safe country they reach? We answer some of the most frequently asked questions about refugees.

www.refugee-action.org.uk

Am I missing something? Nothing there disputes what I posted.

 

[pork pie fox]

Am I missing something? Nothing there disputes what I posted.

No idea. I didn't really get the point you were making, as you said:
"However my understanding is that anyone landing in the UK not in a usual entry point or claiming asylum immediately is entering the country illegally. Most of those crossing the channel are in this category."

This doesn't really help as there was no mention of where they were landing and whether or not they had immediately claimed asylum. I was just putting a link up to some more info on the situation with regards to asylum seekers and you could then hopefully work out if it applied to those you were discussing.

I have no idea how many crossing the channel in such a way do either of these things, for all I know it could be 0%, or it could be 100%, or, more realistically, somewhere in between. The link just hopefully clarifies what the regulations are for those who are genuinely seeking asylum, whatever proportion that may be and hopefully we all don't assume that everyone who does it is doing it for the same reasons.

 

[Ike O'Noclassed]

I think pretty much everyone has been against that. It just seems odd that migrant crossings become big news everytime the government do something unpopular with the large %age of the country....even though we're told these crossings happen so often. Normally a story with a proposed solution that they know won't ever be implimented.

I think a spell of warm weather and calm seas towards the end of the trafficking season is also a factor.

 

[homer]

Even when it was the bears, I knew it was the Immiggants

 

[fitz]

I think a spell of warm weather and calm seas towards the end of the trafficking season is also a factor.

So government policy is weather dependent....got ya

 

[fitz]

Even when it was the bears, I knew it was the Immiggants

I'm not so sure the bears should get off lightly any more.

 

[Brown Nose]

No idea. I didn't really get the point you were making, as you said:
"However my understanding is that anyone landing in the UK not in a usual entry point or claiming asylum immediately is entering the country illegally. Most of those crossing the channel are in this category."

This doesn't really help as there was no mention of where "they" were landing and whether or not "they" had immediately claimed asylum. I was just putting a link up to some more info on the situation with regards to asylum seekers and you could then hopefully work out if it applied to "those" you were discussing.

I have no idea how many crossing the channel in such a way do either of these things, for all I know it could be 0%, or it could be 100%, or, more realistically, somewhere in between. The link just hopefully clarifies what the regulations are for those who are genuinely seeking asylum, whatever proportion that may be and hopefully we all don't assume that everyone who does it is doing it for the same reasons.

Okay fair enough. I do actually know a bit about the asylum process due to my job. The majority of entrants via the boats in the channel are the category I referenced.
However, obviously, it's impossible to say volumes or percentages with any certainty because many successfully cross the channel undetected and, usually, head to London.

If they are intercepted at sea or on landing, they claim asylum. That's what they're told to do anyway. That makes them 'legal' until their case is heard.

 

[Darth Vodka]

However my understanding is that anyone landing in the UK not in a usual entry point or claiming asylum immediately is entering the country illegally.

it's not illegal to cross the channel in a dinghy to seek asylum in the UK

 

[Brown Nose]

it's not illegal to cross the channel in a dinghy to seek asylum in the UK

I didn't say it was.

 

[Darth Vodka]

I didn't say it was.

It's not illegal to land in the UK not in a usual entry point or claim asylum immediately

 

[Robin127]

It's not illegal to land in the UK not in a usual entry point...

But does that put the onus on the landee(?) to report to customs and immigration at some time close to when they arrived?

 

[Darth Vodka]

But does that put the onus on the landee(?) to report to customs and immigration at some time close to when they arrived?

Or claim asylum, yeah

Customs rules for sailing your pleasure craft to, from and within UK waters

Check UK customs rules for private individuals who use a pleasure craft (like a yacht or other boat) for recreational use, or temporarily import one as a non-UK resident.

www.gov.uk

 

[Darth Vodka]

For the UK economy, getting this far was the easy part. Now comes the hard yards.

Getting this far was the easy part. Finishing the job of getting back to pre-pandemic levels is going to be much harder.

www.standard.co.uk

So taxes up, furlough about end , UC going down… buckle up for stagflation

 

[Darth Vodka]

Brexit has become an exercise in quiet damage limitation

London and Brussels have arrived at an uneasy equilibrium that is in everybody’s interest to maintain

www.ft.com

Interesting article in the FT pointing out how the kicking-the-can stalemate will plod on for the foreseeable future

 

[Lako42]

Brexit has become an exercise in quiet damage limitation

London and Brussels have arrived at an uneasy equilibrium that is in everybody’s interest to maintain

www.ft.com

Interesting article in the FT pointing out how the kicking-the-can stalemate will plod on for the foreseeable future

The current rate of inflation increase means some won't be able to kick anything down the road soon.

 

[Darth Vodka]

The current rate of inflation increase means some won't be able to kick anything down the road soon.

huh?

they can certainly keep on delaying border checks in the face of rampant inflation? I fail to see the link?

 

[Matt_B]

huh?

they can certainly keep on delaying border checks in the face of rampant inflation? I fail to see the link?

He's saying that people will be broke/won't have a can to kick soon.

 

[Darth Vodka]

He's saying that people will be broke/won't have a can to kick soon.

oh... he knows it's a metaphor right?

 

[Darth Vodka]

The gloom of leading Brexiteers signals a dark outlook for “independent” Britain

As supermarket shelves lie bare, even prominent Leave voters are beginning to doubt the wisdom of being outside the single market.

www.newstatesman.com

Crikey, the Spectator has twigged too

I wonder if the editors at the Mail and the Sun are thinking of flipping the narrative and being angry at someone (Johnson?) for not delivering on promises