Body & Soul2 mins ago
Intercepted??
72 Answers
https:/
So does 'intercepted' mean they helped them get to Dover? That flight to Rwandas (dream on ) is gonna be full
So does 'intercepted' mean they helped them get to Dover? That flight to Rwandas (dream on ) is gonna be full
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by bobbinwales. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I don't have those figures, but I have these for Australia:
'How successful was Australia’s policy of processing asylum'
applications offshore for any migrant who arrives by boat? The figures are for migrants arriving by boat:
1998 200
1999 3,721
2000 2,939
2001 5,561
Offshore processing starts under John Howard
2002 1
2003 53
2004 15
2005 11
2006 60
2007 148
2008 161
Kevin Rudd’s government scraps policy
2009 2,726
2010 6,555
2011 4,565
2012 17,204
2013 20,587
Tony Abbott’s government re-introduces policy
2014 160
2015 0
2016 0
Source: Parliament of Australia
'How successful was Australia’s policy of processing asylum'
applications offshore for any migrant who arrives by boat? The figures are for migrants arriving by boat:
1998 200
1999 3,721
2000 2,939
2001 5,561
Offshore processing starts under John Howard
2002 1
2003 53
2004 15
2005 11
2006 60
2007 148
2008 161
Kevin Rudd’s government scraps policy
2009 2,726
2010 6,555
2011 4,565
2012 17,204
2013 20,587
Tony Abbott’s government re-introduces policy
2014 160
2015 0
2016 0
Source: Parliament of Australia
Irsael have sent "several thousand":
https:/
https:/
Anneasquith
\\Considered a safe heaven , by who ?//
The UNHCR.
https:/
https:/
https:/
\\Considered a safe heaven , by who ?//
The UNHCR.
https:/
https:/
https:/
TTT
You must be humiliated after your toadying post on Friday.
https:/
Time to give the job to somebody who knows their arze from their elbow. Patel is clearly not up to the job.
You must be humiliated after your toadying post on Friday.
https:/
Time to give the job to somebody who knows their arze from their elbow. Patel is clearly not up to the job.
// // Australia will spend nearly $812m (about £400m) on its offshore immigration processing system next year – just under $3.4m for each of the 239 people now held on Nauru or in Papua New Guinea. //
Patel has budgeted a quarter of that - £120m, which would offshore 60 people. We had 254 just yesterday, and look on target to beat last years 28,000.
It would cost over £45 BILLION annually to send our refugees to Rwanda.
Patel has budgeted a quarter of that - £120m, which would offshore 60 people. We had 254 just yesterday, and look on target to beat last years 28,000.
It would cost over £45 BILLION annually to send our refugees to Rwanda.
TORATORATORA 'Irsael have sent "several thousand"'
From your link, you failed to include some important details,
'Israel sent several thousand people to Rwanda and Uganda under a contentious and secretive “voluntary” scheme between 2014 and 2017. Few are believed to have remained there, with many trying to reach Europe.'
From your link, you failed to include some important details,
'Israel sent several thousand people to Rwanda and Uganda under a contentious and secretive “voluntary” scheme between 2014 and 2017. Few are believed to have remained there, with many trying to reach Europe.'
//Is Rwanda all set up and ready to take the men, women, and children by plane to be ‘ processed’.//
A “government spokesman” said last month it was expected that the first flights would be operated in a “matter of weeks or a small number of months”. So the answer is, probably not. As well as that it has been made clear that families will not be split up (though quite why that should be a concern is mysterious as many of those currently in France had no qualms about abandoning their families when they set off for Europe). And just one more point – the facility in Rwanda can cater for just 100 people – i.e. a little under half of yesterday’s arrivals.
//Last I read the was in fact illegal ?//
//it's legal, the act passed last Thursday.//
Alas the government can do what it likes but the proof of the pudding will come when all avenues of appeal both here and in the ECHR in Strasbourg have been exhausted. M’Learned Friends are already sharpening their pencils in preparation for the first challenges.
//That means none of them reached our coast and were not able disappear into the night to work illegally. They were intercepted and taken into custody.//
You seem to be labouring under a misapprehension, Gromit. These people are not “taken into custody.” They have their details taken and are offered board and lodging together with a weekly pocket money allowance. But there is absolutely nothing to prevent them disappearing into the night. They cannot be held in custody because they have committed no crime (though I would argue that they have, but what I think doesn’t matter – after all I’m only one among the millions paying for this fiasco to continue).
//It is about time Patel resigned in shame. A half decent leader would have sacked her months ago.//
It’s pointless laying the blame on successive Home Secretaries. The only way this problem will be solved is to physically prevent illegal migrants landing on these shores. Once they are here there is not a cat in Hell’s chance of them being deported to Rwanda or anywhere else. The Australian scheme worked because most of the migrants were prevented from landing (thus complying properly with the term “intercepts”). They also do not have a Human Rights Act and are not signatories to the ECHR. Here’s a brief description of their process:
“If a person seeking asylum comes to Australia by boat, an Australian navy ship usually stops (or ‘intercepts‘) the boat. The boat is usually required to ‘turn back’ or can be ‘taken back’ to a third country. If the person is taken on board, the government detains the person for checks.
They are then sent to either Nauru or Manus Island in Papua New Guinea. They are detained there until their refugee claims are decided.”
So when asking for the solution to this invasion, the only thing likely to work is to forcibly prevent the landings. I came up with a perfectly simple scheme a couple of weeks ago where large Royal Navy boats would simply pass in close proximity to the rubber boats, at speed and preferably broadside on. That will prevent the landings. No party that is likely to form a government in the UK will countenance such a measure or anything like it so this will go on until there are no more rubber boats left or the UK becomes a worse place to live than the places these chancers have deserted. And I know where my money would go if asked to wager on which of those eventualities would arise first.
A “government spokesman” said last month it was expected that the first flights would be operated in a “matter of weeks or a small number of months”. So the answer is, probably not. As well as that it has been made clear that families will not be split up (though quite why that should be a concern is mysterious as many of those currently in France had no qualms about abandoning their families when they set off for Europe). And just one more point – the facility in Rwanda can cater for just 100 people – i.e. a little under half of yesterday’s arrivals.
//Last I read the was in fact illegal ?//
//it's legal, the act passed last Thursday.//
Alas the government can do what it likes but the proof of the pudding will come when all avenues of appeal both here and in the ECHR in Strasbourg have been exhausted. M’Learned Friends are already sharpening their pencils in preparation for the first challenges.
//That means none of them reached our coast and were not able disappear into the night to work illegally. They were intercepted and taken into custody.//
You seem to be labouring under a misapprehension, Gromit. These people are not “taken into custody.” They have their details taken and are offered board and lodging together with a weekly pocket money allowance. But there is absolutely nothing to prevent them disappearing into the night. They cannot be held in custody because they have committed no crime (though I would argue that they have, but what I think doesn’t matter – after all I’m only one among the millions paying for this fiasco to continue).
//It is about time Patel resigned in shame. A half decent leader would have sacked her months ago.//
It’s pointless laying the blame on successive Home Secretaries. The only way this problem will be solved is to physically prevent illegal migrants landing on these shores. Once they are here there is not a cat in Hell’s chance of them being deported to Rwanda or anywhere else. The Australian scheme worked because most of the migrants were prevented from landing (thus complying properly with the term “intercepts”). They also do not have a Human Rights Act and are not signatories to the ECHR. Here’s a brief description of their process:
“If a person seeking asylum comes to Australia by boat, an Australian navy ship usually stops (or ‘intercepts‘) the boat. The boat is usually required to ‘turn back’ or can be ‘taken back’ to a third country. If the person is taken on board, the government detains the person for checks.
They are then sent to either Nauru or Manus Island in Papua New Guinea. They are detained there until their refugee claims are decided.”
So when asking for the solution to this invasion, the only thing likely to work is to forcibly prevent the landings. I came up with a perfectly simple scheme a couple of weeks ago where large Royal Navy boats would simply pass in close proximity to the rubber boats, at speed and preferably broadside on. That will prevent the landings. No party that is likely to form a government in the UK will countenance such a measure or anything like it so this will go on until there are no more rubber boats left or the UK becomes a worse place to live than the places these chancers have deserted. And I know where my money would go if asked to wager on which of those eventualities would arise first.
According to the right wing think tank Immigration Watch, £25million a year.
// Illegal boat migrant crossings of the English Channel will cost the British taxpayer nearly a quarter of a billion pounds sterling over the next decade, the Migration Watch UK think tank has found. //
Patel wants to spend £120 million offshoring 50-60 people. Leaving 27,950 still here.
It won’t happen. It makes no financial sense.
// Illegal boat migrant crossings of the English Channel will cost the British taxpayer nearly a quarter of a billion pounds sterling over the next decade, the Migration Watch UK think tank has found. //
Patel wants to spend £120 million offshoring 50-60 people. Leaving 27,950 still here.
It won’t happen. It makes no financial sense.
// Why not simply buy all inflatables available and set fire to them? //
I’m sure their is a carbon emission target that forbids that.
There are literally thousands of discarded boats in a yard in Dover.
https:/
I’m sure their is a carbon emission target that forbids that.
There are literally thousands of discarded boats in a yard in Dover.
https:/
