Family & Relationships0 min ago
More Dosh To Do Nothing....
40 Answers
https:/
What will extra dosh do? We need ideas and action to stop the hostile invasion. We'll end up with the border farce getting new boats so they can transport them here quicker.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. 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.
"The BSC [Border Security Command] will also coordinate the work of intelligence agencies and law enforcement with European counterparts and will be getting extra funds for:
An extra 300 staff to strengthen global partnerships and deliver new legislation
An additional 100 specialist investigators and intelligence officers for the National Crime Agency (NCA), to tackle criminals involved in people smuggling
New NCA technology around advanced data exploitation, to boost collaboration with European partners investigating trafficking networks
Creating a new specialist intelligence unit examining information from key police forces
Boosting the Crown Prosecution Service’s ability to deliver charging decisions more quickly on international organised crime cases"
Not exactly, "nothing", is it,
"Not exactly, "nothing", is it,"
Not exactly nothing, no. But neither is it exacly anything that will address the problem.
The problem is people arriving here in small boats. The list you've provided will enable a few hundred more jobs to be created in cosy offices poring over data, intelligence and the like and forming "partnerships" wih other agencies similarly equipped.
When they've done that it needs people to get out there and physically stop the arrivals either by preventing them from setting out from France in dangerous craft, or preventing them landing here if they do.
Nothing in that list will do that.
"<:0) sour grapes."
It isn't sour grapes and it's nothing to do with party politics - it's far too important for that childish nonsense.
I have been criticising the Tory government ever since this problem began. They did nothing to stop it and now, despite bland promises to the contrary, this latest mob seems intent on following the same line.
spending money on this would seem to be the necessary precondition for doing anything though i agree it is not sufficient alone. quite how anyone expects this issue or a any other issue to be solved without investment is beyond me. you want results and you also don't want to pay for them. that's not realistic
untitled no amount of money can help if there is no method. We need clear ideas and action that is possible. We first must get round all our own trobbery and change the law untill it cannot be resisted. Why have we not got agents crawling all over everywhere killing the smugglers and sabotaging the boats and the infrastructure? Tell the border farce to get innto the channel and physically stop them getting into British waters instead of acting as a ferry service. Spend money on that by all means. Buy them more boats by all means. What they are spending on now is just more of the same inneffective posturing. ....and yes I blame the blues equally.
" quite how anyone expects this issue or a any other issue to be solved without investment is beyond me."
We have a navy, an army, a police force and a border force, already bought and paid for. We also have armies of civil servants. There are more people employed by the MoD (63,700) than are enlisted in the Royal Navy (31,900) and the RAF (28,500) combined). Their number have increased by 5% in the last five years despite the numbers enlisted in the three services declining by that same amount in that time. Some of them should be able to help strengthen global partnerships and exploit the data or whatever.
No, they didn't fix it because they were prevented from fixing it. Labour has thrown away the money spent on Rwanda - even though their mates in the EU have similar plans - and they are now simply expanding the already over-bloated Civil Service and in the process are throwing eye-watering sums of good money after bad - as always.
"ha! brilliant. just do it with that or whatever. 🤣"
The money proposed will only pay for people. There are 63,000 people already in the MoD. Their numbers have increased in proportion to the decrease in headcount in the three services which suggests they may be a little over-staffed. Some of the extra 3,000 who have been recruited whilst the forces headcount declined can be re-assigned to undertake these tasks.
Much of what has been proposed in return for this £75m is nebulous waffle - ideally suited to civil servants.
My "whatever" refers to the tripe dished up by the PM in the guise of "doing something." And that something is largely employing more people to undertake fruitless and often pointless tasks. e.g:
" An extra 300 staff to strengthen global partnerships and deliver new legislation"
We don't need new legislation. We have all the legislation we need and we can't or won't enforce it. And if he thinks our "global partners" are going to do anything to stem the flow of people illegally migrating to Europe he should think again.
"An additional 100 specialist investigators and intelligence officers for the National Crime Agency (NCA), to tackle criminals involved in people smuggling"
The people involved in people smuggling by and large do not operate from the UK so whatever is set up will have no jurisdiction in wherever they do operate from.
"Boosting the Crown Prosecution Service’s ability to deliver charging decisions more quickly on international organised crime cases"
To charge whom? (see above).
However, speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Kevin Saunders (former chief immigration officer for the UK) said "unfortunately what the prime minister is trying to do is not feasible".
The UK would only be able to prosecute and jail people smugglers "in the UK and the majority of people smugglers are actually based in the Middle East and Turkey", Mr Saunders said.
Under the UK's asylum system "you can't deport failed asylum seekers" who destroy documents, Mr Saunders said.
Without official documents, the UK is often unable to prove the asylum seekers country of origin meaning their home countries will refuse to take them."
Mr Saunders probably knows more about this than Mr Starmer or his advisers and what he says is perfectly true. The only way to put a stop to this is to physically prevent the arrivals setting foot in the UK. Nothing in Mr Starmer's speech (or our £75m) does anything towards achieving that.
