Stop The Boats

I've yet to see an answer to any of the questions @Malced has asked. What limit would everyone put on immigration/asylum numbers, and how would you treat those who can't come here because the number has been reached? If you wouldn't put any limit on it, how do you plan the country's infrastructure when you have no idea year on year how many people will decide to come? There might be a million jobs now, but that won't always be the case. And what about housing? School places? GP access? These things take time to plan. Many of those coming might become teachers, or builders, or GP's but it doesn't happen overnight, it needs proper planning.
I think most people in the UK understand we need immigration, but also that there needs to be a system to manage it properly so we don't just "allow" people here, we welcome them and are able to offer them a life rather than just an existence.

I suspect these questions have been swerved by everyone because no-one actually has an easy answer.
 
Malced said:
What don't you understand about 'based on recent polls?'

I'm surprised any adult doesn't have an idea about how polls work, and how the results are interpreted and applied. But in order to help you out, I'm happy to explain that polls are considered as a representative indication. They're a convenient way to quickly gauge opinion.

8 out of 10 women noticed their hair was softer and shinier when using Pantene Pro-V. Now if you've ask all the women in your life whether they've been consulted on this, you'll probably find they haven't. But Pantene have used what is known as a poll or a survey.

I suspect you actually knew how polls worked, because I'm sure you don't question the one's which show Labour with a significant lead over the Tory's. ;-)
Click to expand...
If 8 out of 10 cats all prefer Whiskas do the other 2 prefer Lesley Judd?
 
Malced said:
What don't you understand about 'based on recent polls?'

I'm surprised any adult doesn't have an idea about how polls work, and how the results are interpreted and applied. But in order to help you out, I'm happy to explain that polls are considered as a representative indication. They're a convenient way to quickly gauge opinion.

8 out of 10 women noticed their hair was softer and shinier when using Pantene Pro-V. Now if you've ask all the women in your life whether they've been consulted on this, you'll probably find they haven't. But Pantene have used what is known as a poll or a survey.

I suspect you actually knew how polls worked, because I'm sure you don't question the one's which show Labour with a significant lead over the Tory's. ;-)
Click to expand...
Malced.

You're at the bottom of the hole. Stop digging or the walls will collapse on you.

I'd miss you!
 
Rishi Sunak is up Shit Creek without a paddle.

Who's going to volunteer to send this boat person back?
 
Of course, Sir Mo Farah was trafficked into this country in a small boat as a child. This legislation would see him deported and banned from these shores indefinitely with no appeal.
 
BFC_53 said:
I've yet to see an answer to any of the questions @Malced has asked. What limit would everyone put on immigration/asylum numbers, and how would you treat those who can't come here because the number has been reached? If you wouldn't put any limit on it, how do you plan the country's infrastructure when you have no idea year on year how many people will decide to come? There might be a million jobs now, but that won't always be the case. And what about housing? School places? GP access? These things take time to plan. Many of those coming might become teachers, or builders, or GP's but it doesn't happen overnight, it needs proper planning.
I think most people in the UK understand we need immigration, but also that there needs to be a system to manage it properly so we don't just "allow" people here, we welcome them and are able to offer them a life rather than just an existence.

I suspect these questions have been swerved by everyone because no-one actually has an easy answer.
Click to expand...
Emigration was a lot more than the 45,000 coming over in small boats, to put it in perspective.
 
Wizaard said:
Of course, Sir Mo Farah was trafficked into this country in a small boat as a child. This legislation would see him deported and banned from these shores indefinitely with no appeal.
Click to expand...

Perhaps focus on the details more and not the rhetoric. The newly suggested rules don’t apply to under-18s.
 
Wizaard said:
Emigration was a lot more than the 45,000 coming over in small boats, to put it in perspective.
Click to expand...
In the year up to June 2022, the UK Net Migration was a record high of over half a million. So you can't take one aspect of immigration, and compare it in isolation to emigration figures as it serves no logical purpose. It comparing apples with eggs.
Again, with respect, you're incredibly selective on what you wish to acknowledge.
We've still no clue on what your approach to this should be. Open doors, a limit, no-limit, or only when we have job vacancies, or only if the numbers coming in don't exceed the emigration figures.
I've been clear. The boat-crossings are inhumane, dangerous, criminal and see people being exploited. The numbers keep going up, so something has to be done. You're selective stat to put things in perspective doesn't at all mean anything or tell us what you would do when the numbers rise again and blow the emigration figure ....out of the water.
 
BFC_53 said:
I've yet to see an answer to any of the questions @Malced has asked. What limit would everyone put on immigration/asylum numbers, and how would you treat those who can't come here because the number has been reached? If you wouldn't put any limit on it, how do you plan the country's infrastructure when you have no idea year on year how many people will decide to come? There might be a million jobs now, but that won't always be the case. And what about housing? School places? GP access? These things take time to plan. Many of those coming might become teachers, or builders, or GP's but it doesn't happen overnight, it needs proper planning.
I think most people in the UK understand we need immigration, but also that there needs to be a system to manage it properly so we don't just "allow" people here, we welcome them and are able to offer them a life rather than just an existence.

I suspect these questions have been swerved by everyone because no-one actually has an easy answer.
Click to expand...
You don't really need to put a figure on it. The situation will naturally sort itself out.

If too many people came here and this country didn't have the infrastructure to cope, they would then go to somewhere else that had better conditions.

At the moment, we are still stinking rich compared to many other countries around the world so it is still worth coming here. The UK is on a gradual path of decline however, accelerated by Brexit. That will continue and there are predictions now that Poland and Hungary will overtake the UK in prosperity within a decade if the current trajectory of our economies continues.

So as time goes by and the UK economy and infrastructure crumbles, we won't be a destination of choice and less boat trips will occur.
 
BigHandsOliverKahn said:
You don't really need to put a figure on it. The situation will naturally sort itself out.

If too many people came here and this country didn't have the infrastructure to cope, they would then go to somewhere else that had better conditions.

At the moment, we are still stinking rich compared to many other countries around the world so it is still worth coming here. The UK is on a gradual path of decline however, accelerated by Brexit. That will continue and there are predictions now that Poland and Hungary will overtake the UK in prosperity within a decade if the current trajectory of our economies continues.

So as time goes by and the UK economy and infrastructure crumbles, we won't be a destination of choice and less boat trips will occur.
Click to expand...
It must be difficult constantly living under a dark cloud.
 
Malced said:
In the year up to June 2022, the UK Net Migration was a record high of over half a million. So you can't take one aspect of immigration, and compare it in isolation to emigration figures as it serves no logical purpose. It comparing apples with eggs.
Again, with respect, you're incredibly selective on what you wish to acknowledge.
We've still no clue on what your approach to this should be. Open doors, a limit, no-limit, or only when we have job vacancies, or only if the numbers coming in don't exceed the emigration figures.
I've been clear. The boat-crossings are inhumane, dangerous, criminal and see people being exploited. The numbers keep going up, so something has to be done. You're selective stat to put things in perspective doesn't at all mean anything or tell us what you would do when the numbers rise again and blow the emigration figure ....out of the water.
Click to expand...
Not at all. I get why you're upset over those coming over in small boats, but who's to say they are any less worthy of remaining than those coming via legal routes? As it is, they won't get the opportunity to make their case and won't ever be able to try. These people won't know that the law has changed so to say it will deter them is nonsense.
 
Wizaard said:
Not at all. I get why you're upset over those coming over in small boats, but who's to say they are any less worthy of remaining than those coming via legal routes? As it is, they won't get the opportunity to make their case and won't ever be able to try. These people won't know that the law has changed so to say it will deter them is nonsense.
Click to expand...

I can see your viewpoint but I do think that it will deter them. The migrants, especially the economic migrants, are well clued up on how the system works. Eventually they’ll be disincentivised from giving several thousand euros to the people smugglers when they’re savvy enough to realise they’ll not be granted asylum.
 
Malced said:
I can see your viewpoint but I do think that it will deter them. The migrants, especially the economic migrants, are well clued up on how the system works. Eventually they’ll be disincentivised from giving several thousand euros to the people smugglers when they’re savvy enough to realise they’ll not be granted asylum.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that a lot of the people who turn up in the back of lorries have no idea where they are, just not where they set off from.
 
Why aren't the French patrolling their coastline?
They could/should stop all these boats fairly easily I would think.
 
Davepick said:
Why aren't the French patrolling their coastline?
They could/should stop all these boats fairly easily I would think.
Click to expand...
Because we left the EU so no longer have any voice or power to put pressure on France to do anything about it. Previously we had 26 other allied countries who could put France under the spotlight. Now, it's an opportunity to disperse the problem outside of the EU. They were never going to look this particular gift horse in the mouth.

Voters were warned this would happen but just labelled it Project Fear.
 
I have a suggestion that might appeal to those who think refugees are costing the country too much in resources. It has been said that these “economic migrants” each pay around £10k to the smuggling gangs to come across the Channel in dangerous dinghies.

Then why doesn’t the Govt simply announce that the Application Fee for entering the UK and being considered for settlement is £10k per person? A purely capitalist approach, which should be totally acceptable to the “you deserve what you earn” Conservatives.

Of course, the Govt would have to say that, if in the process of being considered the applicant is found to be a serious criminal or dangerous gang member or suchlike, permission would be refused. With no refunds.

A bit like the points system the Govt was suggesting a few years ago. And acceptance would give them a safe journey over on a Channel ferry. That should crystallise a few minds, and might put the smuggling gangs out of business. (BTW, It’s the same argument for legalising drugs).

£10k per person would be enough to cover the costs of settling in a family for their first year, and helping them become useful citizens. The problem is that Home Office is known to be totally disfunctional, run by idiots and currently unable to cope with the current refugee inflow. They would need a lot more people and better facilities. And I am not sure what would come first: the assessment or the ferry trip.

And who or what is to differentiate between an”economic migrant” and a true refugee? The ability to pay? 🧐
 
Last edited:
I watched the news today where various members of the public were being asked for their views on the boats.

Does the media contact the local idiots society to put forward people to be interviewed.?

All bar one couldn't string a coherent sentence together. By pure coincidence they all seemed to be racist. The only intelligent reply came from a well dressed lady who said she had no problem with the country accepting these people.

There's a direct correlation between stupidity and racist views- and these are the people the Tories are courting to try and inflict more electoral pain on us.

Heaven help us.
 
Ollygon said:
I watched the news today where various members of the public were being asked for their views on the boats.

Does the media contact the local idiots society to put forward people to be interviewed.?

All bar one couldn't string a coherent sentence together. By pure coincidence they all seemed to be racist. The only intelligent reply came from a well dressed lady who said she had no problem with the country accepting these people.

There's a direct correlation between stupidity and racist views- and these are the people the Tories are courting to try and inflict more electoral pain on us.

Heaven help us.
Click to expand...
So to summarise, the one person who agreed with your views was 'well-dressed' and 'intelligent'.
Those that didn't were idiots, incoherent, and racist.
Now I wonder, could this just be your extreme bias shining through loud and clear?
How dare the media bring on people to express a view to which is different to the one you hold?
Just out of interest, were the incoherent, racist idiots, not well-dressed?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Malced said:
So to summarise, the one person who agreed with your views was 'well-dressed' and 'intelligent'.
Those that didn't were idiots, incoherent, and racist.
Now I wonder, could this just be your extreme bias shining through load and clear?
How dare the media bring on people to express a view to which is different to the one you hold?
Just out of interest, were the incoherent, racist idiots, not well-dressed?
Click to expand...
To be fair. They were all called Malced so I suppose it's understandable.
 
Wizaard said:
Focus on the details...
Click to expand...
Ok you've still not addressed any of the difficult questions.
But let's go with your Mo Farah example. Are you saying that we should have uncontrolled immigration because we might find a future Olympian?
One Olympian doesn't justify uncontrolled immigration, in the same way that if one immigrant murders someone, it doesn't make a case to stop all immigration.
So I suspect this Mo Farah example is just another smoke screen whilst you continue to avoid the difficult questions.

I've just been watching the evening news, and I'm heartened as much as Ollygon is disheartened at hearing what the majority public opinion is. The majority want the Government to take radical action. They've had enough. This includes swathes of Labour voters or former Labour voters.
So the Labour Party had better get real, cos they're on very dodgy ground with their weak stance on illegal immigration. Their main stance is to talk about the mess and blame the Government. Whilst the Government's stance is to sort out the mess.
 
I don't have the answer but have a suggestion.
Why don't we get together with our European "friends" and agree a joint strategy to control and distribute these poor people.
Maybe set up some central processing centre and work it from there? Work together to find solutions etc
Oh, hang on, spotted a flaw....
 
Malced said:
Ok you've still not addressed any of the difficult questions.
But let's go with your Mo Farah example. Are you saying that we should have uncontrolled immigration because we might find a future Olympian?
One Olympian doesn't justify uncontrolled immigration, in the same way that if one immigrant murders someone, it doesn't make a case to stop all immigration.
So I suspect this Mo Farah example is just another smoke screen whilst you continue to avoid the difficult questions.

I've just been watching the evening news, and I'm heartened as much as Ollygon is disheartened at hearing what the majority public opinion is. The majority want the Government to take radical action. They've had enough. This includes swathes of Labour voters or former Labour voters.
So the Labour Party had better get real, cos they're on very dodgy ground with their weak stance on illegal immigration. Their main stance is to talk about the mess and blame the Government. Whilst the Government's stance is to sort out the mess.
Click to expand...
“The government’s stance is to sort out the mess” couldn’t be further from the truth as their numerous previous efforts have shown.
They have even admitted themselves that this latest wheeze is unlikely to come to fruition - it’s clearly a cynical stunt designed to regain some of its lost support in a desperate effort to cling on to power.
 
L’étranger said:
“The government’s stance is to sort out the mess” couldn’t be further from the truth as their numerous previous efforts have shown.
They have even admitted themselves that this latest wheeze is unlikely to come to fruition - it’s clearly a cynical stunt designed to regain some of its lost support in a desperate effort to cling on to power.
Click to expand...

It’s been impossible to sort out within the current constraints eg Albanians taking advantage and manipulating the protections provided under the modern slavery laws.

I’m sure there’s much politics being played too but you can’t separate the politics from issues as troublesome and complex as this. I’m just saying I think the next general election was looking like a shoe-in for labour given all that’s gone on. But Labour are on dodgy ground on this topic. It’s one which could lose them support.
 
BigHandsOliverKahn said:
Because we left the EU so no longer have any voice or power to put pressure on France to do anything about it. Previously we had 26 other allied countries who could put France under the spotlight. Now, it's an opportunity to disperse the problem outside of the EU. They were never going to look this particular gift horse in the mouth.

Voters were warned this would happen but just labelled it Project Fear.
Click to expand...
Countries who could put France under the spotlight?

France and Germany run the EU that’s one of the reasons we left.
 
Jaffa_The_Hut said:
Countries who could put France under the spotlight?

France and Germany run the EU that’s one of the reasons we left.
Click to expand...
Good God. No wonder people voted the way they did if that kind of thinking is still being peddled.

EU members are comprised of one minister from each EU country and the Presidency rotates every six months.
 
BigHandsOliverKahn said:
Good God. No wonder people voted the way they did if that kind of thinking is still being peddled.

EU members are comprised of one minister from each EU country and the Presidency rotates every six months.
Click to expand...
What about Hungary they on the EU naughty list I believe for standing up to EU bullshit laws over loads of things. Next country to vote leave lump on.👍😜
 
Need and ambulance? - wait an hour
Hospitalised ?- good luck
Food prices soaring? - eat a 30p meal
Mortgage gone up by 100%? - cut back
Want a decent level of funding for schools? -nah
Want a dentist? -no chance
Getting a train ?- don't bother
Been burgled? - we'll get back to you
Paying more tax than ever before?- too right you are
Fancy a swim in a river or the sea? - see hospitalised
Want a salad? - eat a turnip


STOP THE BOATS
I'm voting tory again
 
Kurtan said:
Need and ambulance? - wait an hour
Hospitalised ?- good luck
Food prices soaring? - eat a 30p meal
Mortgage gone up by 100%? - cut back
Want a decent level of funding for schools? -nah
Want a dentist? -no chance
Getting a train ?- don't bother
Been burgled? - we'll get back to you
Paying more tax than ever before?- too right you are
Fancy a swim in a river or the sea? - see hospitalised
Want a salad? - eat a turnip


STOP THE BOATS
I'm voting tory again
Click to expand...

Yep it’s this type of post that shows the labour supporters are getting worried. Starmer was battered in PMQs today. He was branded a lefty lawyer and he certainly comes over as one. He has no affinity with northern (former) labour voters. Labour were out of touch over Brexit. Now they’re out of touch on immigration.

Maybe they can blame Spanish weather patterns on the Tory’s. But fear not, at least Labour have a large wet lettuce in charge. When he gets up off his knee, and when he decides what the definition of a woman is, then maybe he’ll get off the fence on immigration. Labour are gonna blow their big chance if they don’t start getting real.

They misread the public on Brexit. Now they’re doing the same with immigration. They’ve gone from having a hard left socialist angry tramp in charge, to having a whining posh boy who is about as engaging as a punch drunk slug.
 
Malced said:
In the year up to June 2022, the UK Net Migration was a record high of over half a million. So you can't take one aspect of immigration, and compare it in isolation to emigration figures as it serves no logical purpose. It comparing apples with eggs.
Again, with respect, you're incredibly selective on what you wish to acknowledge.
We've still no clue on what your approach to this should be. Open doors, a limit, no-limit, or only when we have job vacancies, or only if the numbers coming in don't exceed the emigration figures.
I've been clear. The boat-crossings are inhumane, dangerous, criminal and see people being exploited. The numbers keep going up, so something has to be done. You're selective stat to put things in perspective doesn't at all mean anything or tell us what you would do when the numbers rise again and blow the emigration figure ....out of the water.
Click to expand...
And how many of them were returning overseas students?
As for boats. Who's been in power for 13 years? Who has overseen the collapse of the vetting and processing system? Why will this work when similar schemes haven't? Why do the people of this country seem to think that we're the only place that takes refugees? Miniscule compared to France, Turkey and Germany.
 
southshorepool said:
And how many of them were returning overseas students?
As for boats. Who's been in power for 13 years? Who has overseen the collapse of the vetting and processing system? Why will this work when similar schemes haven't? Why do the people of this country seem to think that we're the only place that takes refugees? Miniscule compared to France, Turkey and Germany.
Click to expand...

It’s not minuscule though. I think we took something like half a million refugees in over the last 12/18 months. Half a million. Is that minuscule? How many more do you want per year and where are they going to live?

The above figure is made up of mostly legal immigrants from Ukraine, Hong Kong, Afghanistan and from other countries. I’ve no problem with immigration. I’ve a problem with criminal gangs exploiting and encouraging economic migrants.
 
Interesting video, Kurtan

🙄

‘The tyranny of the majority’

Unfortunately, the likes of toot toot and Jaffa the hunt favour Hungarian policies so will have little interest in taking on board the reality of what we are witnessing here
 
Kurtan said:
Is the country we want to become now ?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1633497536831815680
Click to expand...
I think your earlier comments slagging the Government off on waiting times clearly makes this a political debate and not a humanitarian one which you are now trying to sell us with the above video/comments.

Plans are afoot to stop the boats coming and already you are criticising it but surely if the Government succeed in stopping the boats coming then none of that is not going to happen is it?

For the record I’m no Tory but I fully support the Government here as we just can’t sit back and do nothing at all as reports suggest twice the numbers are scheduled to come across this year than last that’s over 90,000 also how many of those people are going to die when boats capsize?

Without drawing up plans to stop it this issue will go on and on and on with no sight to it ever ending is that what we want?
 
I think I’m going into the boat business, the guys selling these things must be making a fortune.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top