Britain outside the EU

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Hugh

yes, it is, since it was part of your post - unless you are saying that part of your post is irrelevant?

Other than the sort coming here, what groups would be allowed to freely go to another country? Only certain demographics have that freedom.


The European Court of Human Rights has ruled, one more than one occasion, that extradition and deportation matters are administrative matters, and as such there is NO RIGHT to a fair hearing. No hearing, no appeals and so on.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Do you want to compare ourselves to Poland in how we treat people ? That’s your justification?

You know my views on the EU, they’re not without significant issue.

Don’t try and turn this into cheap point scoring, you’re better than that

We're nothing like Poland, They're an EU country preventing asylum seekers entering (walking into) a country they were promised a warm welcome to.

The reality in 'our' situation is that asylum seekers have to cross dangerous waters to get here, and as has been discussed, we and the French can't legally stop them trying to kill themselves.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Pierre

To speed up the process, and reduce any backlog. It doesn’t have to be in our gift to grant any appeal.

That assumes our legal system has a 100% success rate on valid decisions. We don't, and nor does any other country in the world.

We have many miscarriages of justice for our own citizens, and if you start removing the rights of non-citizens to appeal a legal decision, then why shouldn't other countries do the same to UK citizens abroad?

[nomadking]

If being part of the EU was part of a solution, how come they did and still do, reach Calais in the first place? How many other EU countries did they pass through?

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Carth

We're nothing like Poland, They're an EU country preventing asylum seekers entering (walking into) a country they were promised a warm welcome to.

The reality in 'our' situation is that asylum seekers have to cross dangerous waters to get here, and as has been discussed, we and the French can't legally stop them trying to kill themselves.

Then I’m sorry , I’m missing the point in your reference to Poland ?

The reality in ‘our’ situation is that only a small amount of the total population of people who are attempting to get another country are coming to the U.K.

Our press are brilliant at blowing up the issue to make it seem as if we’re the worst affected. There are those in this country who will fall for that, hook line and sinker (apologies if that’s a bad turn of phrase considering recent events)

This is an issue that affects the whole of Europe and demands a coordinated response.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by nomadking

If being part of the EU was part of a solution, how come they did and still do, reach Calais in the first place? How many other EU countries did they pass through?

As many as they liked, as is was their right

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by nomadking

How many other EU countries did they pass through?

As the USA have found with their Mexico border, it's not a simple issue to stop people crossing one.

As for the the internal EU question, do you know many people travel from England to Scotland or England to Wales on a daily basis and vice versa?

Even with the best will in the world, land borders are not easy to seal.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by nomadking

If being part of the EU was part of a solution, how come they did and still do, reach Calais in the first place? How many other EU countries did they pass through?

Because as I said we would have had more of an opportunity to return those arriving to France

Doesn’t matter how many EU countries they’ve been through those travelling don’t have to seek refuge in the first safe country. However, there are far far more people who have requested sanctuary in Germany, Spain & France.

---------- Post added at 19:47 ---------- Previous post was at 19:39 ----------

Originally Posted by BenMcr

As the USA have found with their Mexico border, it's not a simple issue to stop people crossing one.

As for the the internal EU question, do you know many people travel from England to Scotland or England to Wales on a daily basis and vice versa?

Even with the best will in the world, land borders are not easy to seal.

Easier than naval borders, unless your conscience allows you to leave people in the middle of the channel and hope they’re recovered by the French

[Carth]

Channel migrants: France wants 'serious' talks with UK

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59454135

Speaking at the start of the meeting, Mr Darmanin said he wanted to work with the UK to deal with the crisis.

The UK's invitation to the meeting was halted in a diplomatic row with France.

not a very good start then

oh and:

The interior minister added that there had been too many deaths and "we cannot accept that any more people die".

But he also argued that the UK had to assume responsibility by making itself less economically attractive for illegal migrants.

[Jaymoss]

I will consider listening to the French when and only when they accept that they have actively helped immigrants leave by just standing by watching and escorting them into British waters and leaving there. They can point their finger and much as they want but 3 will always point back at them

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

I will consider listening to the French when and only when they accept that they have actively helped immigrants leave by just standing by watching and escorting them into British waters and leaving there. They can point their finger and much as they want but 3 will always point back at them

And if we were to take that attitude then we’ll make 0% progress on the issue

Originally Posted by nomadking

Other than the sort coming here, what groups would be allowed to freely go to another country? Only certain demographics have that freedom.


The European Court of Human Rights has ruled, one more than one occasion, that extradition and deportation matters are administrative matters, and as such there is NO RIGHT to a fair hearing. No hearing, no appeals and so on.

You’re excelling yourself tonight, with

could I and hundreds of thousands of my "own kind"

and

the sort

and

certain demographics

Dancing around what/who you mean, aren’t you?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

And treat humanely and with compassion until such time as the process is completed and a final decision reached.

It seems to me (correct me if I’m wrong) that your issue is with the U.K. infrastructure side of things ?

Yes, we can’t stop them coming. So when they get here we need to process them very quickly and return unsuccessful ones. So others get the message not to try it on chance as failure will result in you going back to square 1.

---------- Post added at 20:46 ---------- Previous post was at 20:41 ----------

Originally Posted by BenMcr

That assumes our legal system has a 100% success rate on valid decisions. We don't, and nor does any other country in the world.

We have many miscarriages of justice for our own citizens, and if you start removing the rights of non-citizens to appeal a legal decision, then why shouldn't other countries do the same to UK citizens abroad?

I’m sure there’s many that do, ask Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe how her appeal’s going?

Besides, refusal of admission is not a mis-carriage of “Justice”, they’re not guilty of anything. They just haven’t proven their right to settle here.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Hugh

You’re excelling yourself tonight, with

and



and

Dancing around what/who you mean, aren’t you?

It's a case of several possibles, ie group comprised of A.N.Other. No specifics needed.

---------- Post added at 21:02 ---------- Previous post was at 21:01 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

Yes, we can’t stop them coming. So when they get here we need to process them very quickly and return unsuccessful ones. So others get the message not to try it on chance as failure will result in you going back to square 1.

---------- Post added at 20:46 ---------- Previous post was at 20:41 ----------



I’m sure there’s many that do, ask Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe how her appeal’s going?

Besides, refusal of admission is not a mis-carriage of “Justice”, they’re not guilty of anything. They just haven’t proven their right to settle here.

They don't have an automatic "right" in the first place. Nothing to prove or disprove.

Anyway, enjoy being with your "own kind"…