The Ministry of Defence has assumed command and control responsibilities for Border Force vessels assigned to the English Channel to counter migrant crossings.
The information came to light in the following exchange.
Luke Pollard, MP for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport, asked:
“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether his Department has control and management of Border Force vessels as part of its operational control of the Royal Navy’s cross channel migration operation.”
James Heappey, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence, responded:
“Under Operation ISOTROPE, Defence will assume command and control responsibilities for Border Force vessels assigned to the operation and will have the ability to task them accordingly.”
The Borce Force fleet of 42m long patrol boats are known as ‘cutters’, the fleet consists of five cutters and and six smaller 20m long vessels.
On the 26th of January, the Defence Committee held an evidence session on the use of the military in countering migrant crossings in the Channel, known as ‘Operation Isotrope’.
You can watch the session by clicking here.
The Defence Committee explored the process that led to the decision to start Operation Isotrope, including involvement of the National Security Council.
The committee discussed which assets will be deployed, what the rules of engagement will be and how long the operation is expected to last. The Committee also asked how the Government intends to measure the success of the operation.
In addition, the committee looked to determine what capabilities the Armed Forces add to operations that are not available to the Border Force, and whether this represents a permanent move of Border Force policy from the Home Office to the Ministry of Defence.
This seems connected to the border force refusing Patel’s demands that they push back migrant boats and risk them sinking, which would be a breach of international law. I hope our armed forces aren’t forced to do it.
It’s against international law to stop people illegally entering your country? Who made up that law?
If the military aren’t turning them back, then what’s the point in putting them in charge? They’ll only stop coming if they know they can’t get in, and will be send straight back if they do.
You need to assess if they are illegal before doing anything which means going through the immigration / asylum process.
The miltiary taking over is partially PR and partially because the border force are sueing the government and requiring them to break the law.
And do you blame the border force, in theory the moment any of them go on holiday abroad they could be assessed under an international arrest warrant
I would call them up into the military.
Remember Nuremberg? “Obeying an order” is no defence to a crime under international law. The Government should not be asking anyone, civil or military, to break international law.
No one is doing more than returning them from where they came. That’s within the law. The fact is a country has a right to decide who lives there. Are you saying that isn’t the case?
As has already been said, pushing the boats back ..
What is the crime?
As has already been said, pushing the boats back… .
OK did that boat have approved people onboard or were they entering illegally, Do you tax your car or just ignore the law, try driving in France with no Road Tax
SPOT THE BORDER FARCE SPINLESS WONDER
no id = illegal
How do you check id if your pushing them illegally into France or worse capsizing the boat, resulting in them dying. Hence the need to process them legally.
This isn’t about not agreeing there is an issue, there is for sure, it’s about the issue being real human beings, and me not being completely morally void. Just because they are not british should not mean they are not worthy of respect and rule of law.
I agree with you we should up hold the moral high ground and send planes to pick them up in their origin country and bring them here for processing.
I know that is a sarcastic, but it might not be such a bad idea. If we process them at source we know where to send them back if they fail to meet the requirements. They are going to try and make it anyway. Once they are processed we have finger prints etc should they try and make it illegally and know where to send them.
Top tip if they arrive by Normal travel means they have completed the Immigration/Asylum process. arriving on a Rubber Boat with NO PAPERWORK, means its illegal, your part of the problem and assume you are sucking a living out of these people in some way.
How do you know they don’t have paperwork, until you process them. That’s how the law works in a free country, innocent until proven guilty.
As for not working, why won’t they work, they have come here for a better life and part of that means working. We would need some stats to be able to answer that either way, not just fear stories.
It’s the same as the anti immigration story of EU workers, the stats said they added more to the economy than local nationals, and therefore were not draining the national coffers in reality doing the reverse, but that didn’t fit the story and so was ignored by papers like the daily mail/express.
It’s why fact checking is so important.
I am sure if they had passports they would hold them up in the air so the ship could see them & pick them up also if the french can escort them into our waters Then we can do the same,
Once they are here and we try of send them ‘back’, where is ‘back’? I can’t see the French letting them in.
It doesn’t matter if their entering our country illegally, to push the boats back is still a blatant break of international laws and could lead anyone carrying it being charged for some very serious crimes. As we all know the moment we have a change of government it will be the officers and now sailors who carried out these orders that get the consequences of it. Its easy for Patel and yourself to tell people to break international law when your safe from any prosecution but we should not put are service personal in such a risky position.
Ah so we join the ranks of such great nations as North Korea, China, Iran and Syria. Also we cant withdraw/ignore international laws especially since we helped found them. If you want to solve an issue I suggest you think of a viable, legitimate and legal suggestion.
Australia did not have a problem
Australia didn’t break international law and its migrants where not coming via rubber dingys intended for use in a swimming pool. To be honest its the Australian model that I suggest this country copies, and not what is essentially murder.
i would like to see one of those dingy’s in a swimming pool 😂 there would not be much room even without the outboard motor,
Slight dramatic exaggeration on my side, but the point is their not fit for open water.
Experiece to date says that the strong currents are such that the bodies wash up mainly on the Dutch coast but sometimes Belgium and Denmark.
As to deterrence, our Apaches don’t seem to be doing much currently, call them up, especially on sighting a big dingy, so that it puts a warning burst into the water 100 yards ahead and then sits 20 feet up dead ahead of it playing chicken. Bear in mind that most of the people on the boat come from countries who’s military would have no compunction at putting that first burst into the boat, so they will be in favour of turning round. Worth a try.
Agree Harry lets send planes to pick them up from there origin country and save them the risky journey.
Jesus wept. Its against international law not to render aid at sea, not to mention against basic human decency.
UNCLOS
Day 1 Rule 1 of RN training – everyone is obliged to help anyone else in distress.
So I have no idea how this will help as they RN boys n girls will all be trained to comply with UNCLOS. Which is essential if you have ever been bobbing around in the drink for a bit.
Utilise an unofficial volunteer militia force. There are many who would jump at the chance. Simply turn a blind eye for a few months and let the body count dissuade future criminals from running the gauntlet.
I’m horrified at the inhumanity of what you are suggesting.
I’m all up for unpleasant the things happening to the criminals running the gangs but not the poor sods in the boats.
I don’t remember that on my first in new entry block
I was taught that as a cadet never mind later……
Well, I guess we just better let everyone in then.
In all seriousness, we’re not just going to let them drown. We can render them aid by putting them into the borderforce boats, like we have been, but then send the boats south, to France, to drop them off at the last in a long list of safe countries they’ve travelled through.
France won’t like it, but if we don’t do that, we’re going to see even higher numbers coming this year, and more deaths. Not to mention we have no idea who these people are as they throw away all their ID. I’m sure they’re all friendly, pro-western, genuine aslyum seekers though, right?
So by your logic we should just nuke the middle east cause who cares about innocent civilians, when there 1 or 2 terrorists among them.
Not even worth a reply.
Oh and why not. Is it any more ludicrous then suggesting that the uk ignore international laws and commits mass murder for the sake of a couple of thousand emigrants? And then accuse anyone who disagrees this as an unpatriotic snow flake because, they support international laws that we have spent so long creating and don’t want our service personnel charged for crimes against humanity like a bunch of nazi camp guards.
And so far all terrorists attacks in the uk have been carried out by home grown jihadis or those who where brought over by other means and where known to authorities. And not individuals who sneaked in across the borders.
No no no that won’t do. We should be send planes to pick them up from their countries waiver any paper work.
The same laws apply regardless if who is in charge. I think the issue was the home office didn’t have a clue what it was doing.
I don’t understand why when migrants are rescued they can’t be returned straight to the nearest french port.
Because when they’re picked up they are ask if they want asylum they will all say yes of course, we then have to process them in the UK.
Does you comment imply that you are happy to see another few 10,000s cross the Channel like last year? If not, how would you suggest stopping them?
Where does the 10k come from? It’s not a question of being happy or unhappy about it, it’s a question of following international law and doing it properly.
Sorry my mistake to low. There is no actual figure but an estimate of at least 28431 from the BBC. I wonder how much it is costing us, at least two local hotels in MK have been contracted as migrant hotels, this is £millions a week all over the country. These are not refugees, they are economic migrants for whom different rules apply. Genuine migrants are welcome through the front door, but this lot coming over the fence at the bottom of the garden, that’s different.
Yep, agree with this John, and love your description in last paragraph.
Economic migrants and illegals are not refugees and should not be accepted. Weakness on this will only encourage more.
That does not mean we shoot or drown them at sea like some posters suggest!!!!
I don’t know the answer beyond HMG changing the law and implementing it, or offshoring. Where? That itself creates issues.
The problem now is that there is a highly evolved and well funded stream of thousands of thede migrants that stretches all the way across the continent to either southern Spain and Italy or Greece. By funded I mean that the authorities are showing a blind eye (and back pocket) to it and the EU, as it regards itself as just a transit block, in one end and out the other, doesn’t care.
The EU and France will howl like hell if we find a way to stop it as these migrants suddenly become their problem.
We have already just pissed of the French/Germans/Italians with our Ukraine stance, if we stop the migrants I suspect that we can wave goodbye to good relations on other things NI, fishing, biometric ID stuff at Dover etc etc.
I am generally in favour of the idea of an offshore processing facility while their asylum claims are assessed. Ascension seems ideally located but it seems like it would be a bit unfair on the local population. Really, the ideal location would be somewhere uninhabited that is far from anywhere, really only leaving the BIOT or South Georgia. The BIOT would be unsuitable for obvious reasons so perhaps South Georgia or, better yet, one of the smaller South Sandwich islands would be ideal?
Hi Daniel.
Problem with Ascension is its security status. I believe only military or contractors are permitted there for any length of time and there is no indigenous population.
Otherwise would seem ideal.
I think sending people who are coming mainly from warmer regions like the Middle East and Africa to a freezing cold location like South Georgia is also a non starter! And also the distance!
I think this country doesn’t deserve to exist with a mentality like that. Part of the woke mentality of allowing people to break the law at will.
Which International Law imposed up the UK by which supranational levislative body elected by whom? If you mean SOLAS, that is a Convention not a Law. Please clarify. Thank you.
Not sure, I’m not a human rights lawyer. The border force wouldn’t be suing the government for forcing them to breach international law, if it didn’t exist.
Another way to look at it is this is an issue impacting almost every developed country, from Australia to Greece to Italy etc etc, if it was legally possible to achieve this, do you not think some crack pot government would have tried it. To me these are human beings and putting them at more risk is wrong.
I don’t like illegal immigration, and unless they need asylum they should be sent home, but equally I’m British and I know our history of populating at force most of the world, so we have no high ground here.
We as a nation badly need unskilled labour, best option would be to get these people into jobs as fast as possible and solve the various post brexit job crisis.
Steve, I don’t see what my our great grand fathers did has any baring on today. Your not locked up for your parents crimes and that was different times and different morals.
The labour market is a real problem because we’ve relied on migration when employers really needed to embrace high productivity, automation etc Keep wages low and those investments are not worth while and why we’ve not seen that growth. Were also on the cusp of a huge revolution in AI and machine learning that will make many jobs redundant and we will see a basic income introduced as jobs disappear. What we don’t want to be doing is adding to the population, put simply if you have a pot of money to hand out in basic income, the more people you have the less each will get. Any patching of the labour market should be done through short term visas only.
Give me one good reason why we shouldn’t protect our borders and return people who are breaching our borders to Europe and a nice life there?
Won’t be easy to get them to take them.We are a wonderful release valve for the EU and its a punishment for leaving. There may even be officials over there benefiting.
Stopping an illegal entry is not unlawful, Border Farce and the RNLI Uber service, are actually assisting illegal entry and should be prosecuted. RNLI recently couldn’t assist a UK fIshing boat, where a crew member drowned as they were out touting for Bussiness elsewhere. PUSH IT BACK BRITAIN
Whatever your thoughts and views on BREXIT, the current Government or the Home Office Department, it appears that there has been a total failure to both prevent people entering this country without a valid reason, or removing people who have been identified as such for so long that the whole process has become a bit of a joke.
I am uncertain as to how putting this under the command of the RN will change it.
It won’t change anything. Only way to fix it is at the source. Same with drug trafficking, taking out street dealers does nothing, you have to go after the cartels.
Best option would be to increase our international aid and help the source countries provide better quality of life for people and therefore reduce the desire to want to risk the trip. However that would be massively unpopular with the average tory voter, who is all about small government and low taxes.
I don’t think we should try and ‘fix’ other countries to stop people wanting to leave their country. Like you said, it wouldn’t be popular here, especially as the average person wants lower taxes.
It’s not fair on the taxpayer, and I would argue it’s not any of our business how another country runs itself.
People will always want to come here through legal or illegal routes. The best we can do is make sure the only viable option is to come here through a legal route.
That will mean that not everyone who wants to come here, gets to come here, but that’s fine by me as you’re not entitled to something just because you want it.
Very well said.
If your names not on the list your not coming in where’s the List oh back in your own country
Your ideas are more of the same failed policies of the last umpteen years. Have you never heard of danegeld and how that failed one thousand years ago? Ultimately you have to arrest people and send them packing. Back to wherever they came from.
More foreign aid! You think it doesn’t go into the pockets of the elites there, so they can shop at Harrods. Where have you been?
Better to spend the money on defending ourselves. No one else will. We haven’t even tried it yet.
Simply doing more of the same and expecting a different outcome, is insane. The average gutless Tory voter would support greater expenditure on the armed forces regardless of taxes. At the expense of the international aid budget. Completely abolish it except for Nepal. We need to help ourselves first and foremost. As for halting the drug cartels. We had the chance in Afghanistan to decimate the world supply of poppies, yet left wing whimps failed to permit mass spraying and salting of the fields. That is the problem.
Yes we certainly fixed it at the source. Sadly some of these are the backwash from our military actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria etc etc.Especially Libya.
This is the issue, we caused the problem in the first place and trying to avoid the consequences of our countries actions is morally wrong.
That doesn’t mean that the system isn’t broke, but make easier routes for people to travel, so they can be processed correctly and not have to cross dangerously.
The RN involved is all about appeasing the daily mail / daily express crowd and nothing about fixing the problem or even vaguely doing anything about it.
So your suggesting that people weren’t clambering to exit those countries prior to UK actions?
I seem to recall Saddam gassing Kurds and Russia occupying Afghanistan then a rather unpopular Taliban taking control of the country. I would think that available information on the UK via phones, means of travel \ more cargo etc are bigger catalysts to illegal immigration than conditions in country.
Also Its was much more difficult 25 years ago than today and people didn’t have as much information as they do today. Think about it 25 years ago pre smart phones your average citzen in Iraq would have had local state sponsored radio and the Bagdad Time as sources of information, neither would be pushing virtues of life in the west.
Your also down playing the fact that west has become more liberal, we accept things we didn’t decades ago. Sexuality is a prime example, years ago you wouldn’t leave for a country for another if your going to be treated no differently but now there real differences.
100ks head to the US from Central and South America yearly not sure that can be pinned on military action. Corruption, poor government and economic policies seem much more likely candidates.
Analyzing the problem a bit deeper throws up more than just UK military action. Suggesting UK can fix these issues in not sensible imo.
So Steve, many are from Iran, are you suggesting we subsidise the Iranian government. I’ve been to Iran and many who leave are not poor. Its conceptually a nice idea but these people by in large are not fleeing liberal but poor democracies, so its flawed in so many ways. Bit of a simplified Guardian right verses left solution to the whole problem.
Agreed, I always thought that having a moat would be a good thing but now there is a well established smuggling operation, which can only exist with the tacit, if not actual, approval of the EU, a secure fence would be more effective.
You have to wonder how some more authoritarian or strongly nationalistic countries would handle the problem.
“You have to wonder how some more authoritarian or strongly nationalistic countries would handle the problem.”
We are a liberal free democracy. So we will always be susceptible to such.
Russia and China? I think we all know the answer. They will shoot, beat with truncheons, deport, or kill those attempting illegal entry.
And there is no HR gravy train in the background.
There is a big difference and one reason why we, the UK, are such a great country.
And why should any economic migrant want to enter either nation illegally anyway? No benefits to be had, rights, jobs, school places, and on and on.
Having said that, I do want to see this reduced, and all immigration reduced, as I have always felt it to be unsustainable and too high.
That does not mean we should become like Russia and China to deal with it. It needs to be done at source.
What shoot them at source Daniele
You’ve heard of putting oil on troubled waters let’s do it too the Channel and set it alight
Seriously?! You cannot be serious Tommo?
Did you know the story of the several hundred Jews murdered by putting them in an anti tank ditch and then filling it with a quick lime type substance that burned them all slowly???
I support reduced, but sustainable migration. I support stopping them crossing the channel. I don’t support murder! We are no better than N Korean border guards and the Nazis if we behave like that.
Whoa don’t take it too heart Daniele in 1940 we had a set up were we would be able to ignite certain areas of the Channel too avert a possible invasion
As I understand it, there are a large number of UK agencies involved, and Border Force isn’t as capable of command and control across all the agencies than it’s hoped the RN will be.
I sincerely hope that RN ships and boats will not be tasked.
It will only change things if the necessary Rules of Engagement are issued. Permitting lethal force to be used if trafficking vessels to not immediately turn around when confronted. In addition, make rescuing illegals an option only if they can be returned to a French beach or within swimming distance. Otherwise they feed the fishes. People need to toughen up and do what is necessary to defend our borders. Otherwise just stand the armed forces down and dissolve Great Britain as a soverign nation. Game Over.
Quite right, George I Think Nick Lowe said it with his song :You’ve got too be Cruel to be Kind ” .I gave up being Kind a long time ago Sink or Swim my Motto
What, no CIWS??!
As for this change of command, it seems a pointless move, and purely political, as Border Force should already be privy to any intel from JMSC at Northwood
( also NMIC and JMOCC ) which co ordinates maritime intel between various agencies regards the RMP, ( Recognised Maritime Picture ) which is basically an ongoing picture/knowledge of what is what and where in our waters.
Acronyms, sorry! – NMIC “National Maritime Information Centre” and JMOCC
“Joint Maritime Operations Coordination Centre” both a part of JMSC “Joint Maritime Security Centre”
If any military action/assistance is required, the RN’s Northwood MOC then get involved, as does CT&UK Ops at MoD.
Away from ops, ensuring those who enter illegally are actually removed/deported would be the greater deterrent.
As it is, traffickers and I would guess most immigrants know they will not be removed from these shores, due to inaction from government and the HR lawyers challenging everything bringing any action to a halt.
So job done. Into a camp and await the amnesty which sets them all free.
Which then encourages more.
Completely unfair on the RN. What are they to do differently that the Border Force cannot legally do? This is a political move and an inappropriate use of our armed services that are already stretched.
Agree it is political, but it does not actually mention using our armed forces beyond transferring day to day operational tasking of Border Force assets to existing joint MoD/Civil structures already existing which I detailed above that exist for such already.
I would think any assets actually deployed would be the River Batch1 which is in home waters anyway, for fisheries or this sort of thing UAV, and airborne assets.
The P2000s would be better if cross-decking is to be involved. Border Force cutters, better still. Using a 1,700t OPV to rescue civilians, including children, from a small dinghy in a choppy Channel, one of the world’s busiest sea-lanes, is just as likely to put them in even more risk.
I wouldn’t want to see any RN boats used at all. Monitor the boats and if they aren’t about to sink meet them as the come to the shore. Process the immigrants, arrest the sailors, and confiscate the boats. All of which are functions of agencies other than the RN.
I suspect this is, at least in part, an attempt by the Home Office to shift the financial burden and the bad publicity onto the MoD.
Agree regards the River.
I would see that, like any aviation involved, as situational awareness assets seeing what is going on, not as actual hands, on, which agree is BF territory.
As I suggested earlier, this whole MoD involvement thing mostly concerns coordination, which was in place anyway.
Making the transfer official is just political to make headlines.
River batch 1 30mm with war cams removed no drill rds HEI or HEIT only engagement is ALARM not Deliberate
Bravo, run for election Daniele … Its also illegal to exit a country without processing through customs and immigration, oddly the French Police don’t appear to have an issue with that as they give the dinghies a helpful shove from the beach, or stand by and watch.
Would they have the same thoughts if I pootled over to France on a Yacht, landed on a beach, popped into town and pootled off again with my wine and cheese haul?
Oddly, the EU is all about freedom of movement within the group, but dead against unrestricted movement on its borders, I suppose I must have missed the caveat that said (except the French coast out bound to the UK).
The answer is extensive use of drones, sit the boarder force vessels on the edge of French territorial waters and turn them straight back, handing responsibility back to the French.
It is after all the obligation of Boarder Force to stop vessels illegally entering UK territorial waters and keeping the English Channel free for lawful navigation.
Or, contract this out to a civilian company to pick them up and return them directly back to the beach they launched from.
Honestly if the UK had been in Shengen you could’ve done just that…
Afternoon Dern, thanks, but no thanks, absolutely delighted to get my first stamp in a ‘proper’ blue passport again on the continent.
My only grumble is the passport isn’t oversized and beautifully inconvenient, like my old examples..
“Sit the boarder force vessels on the edge of French territorial waters…”
You have just created a new, easier target destination. The dinghies only have to be towed to the BF vessels and abandoned with no means of propulsion. The law requires the people are picked up as they are now are in danger and France won’t let them be returned, so back they’d come to Blighty. This would increase traffic.
I see Jon,
I get where you are coming from, perhaps we could turn this frightful situation to our advantage and set up a business selling the abandoned dinghies to the poor Guardian reading remoaning folk, to escape our backwards islands and head to France….😂
We just have to explain we’re recycling the dinghies and they’ll make it mandatory.
These cutters all need a 76mm minimum.
Possibly some sea captors and harpoon missiles, maybe a hangar.
Defo mate! I don’t know what the world is coming too having them so un armed…
While I jest about that, some of the comments sections on thus site have really gone downhill.
Drowning migrants in the channel? NATO forces having to “look over their shoulders” when working with the Bundwswehr?
Ots depressing and makes me glad i dont post here much anymore.
Yes. Well while I support reducing immigration they are human beings, so that is OTT to say the least!
As for Germany, while I agree with some posts like their strategic error is getting reliant on Russian gas I also feel so many forget how badly ww2 affected their national psyche, and their future desires to get involved in wars. Against Russia most of all for obvious reasons!
Agreed, qnd I think a lot of people forget how active a NATO member Germany is, or how much they actually spend. Plus many of the same people would cry 4th Reich if Germany actually did build up its armed forces….
Immigration is a problem across Europe sadly, and as global stability and climate change gets worse it too will get worse sadly. Although I do think hysteric media makes it sound worse than it is, for now.
“look over their shoulders” when working with the Bundwswehr?
Are folks suggesting the Hun are pickpockets Dern??
Last i checked the Huns where nomadic step people, related to Magyars. Don’t see what they’d have to do with the bundeswehr.
Historically correct apart from the Magyar link, but the term was applied to German army at the start of WW1 by the Kaiser himself encouraging his men to be ruthless & barbaric, hence the link. Look it up.
I dont condone bigoted language so I won’t acknowledge it.
I don’t know, you kids are ‘offended’ by everything these days…
Don’t take life so seriously.
Afternoon, if we are going all Wiki leaks….
‘Hun’ was a derogatory nickname used primarily by the British and Americans – officers rather than men – during the First World War to describe the German Army, e.g. “the Huns attacked at dawn”.
Or, if you prefer….
Kraut is a German word recorded in English from 1918 onwards as a derogatory term for a German, particularly a German soldier during World War I and World War II.[1] Its earlier meaning in English was as a synonym for sauerkraut, a traditional Central and Eastern European food.
I’m guessing you aren’t old enough to have enjoyed the rousing patriotic weekly’s of Battle Action and Warlord Dern? You missed out my friend….
Battle Action…..I recall War Picture Library and Commando?!
Still got hundreds of them in the attic!
Excellent mate, they were always a great read as child of the 70’s!
Hi D . Mate, I miss those endless hours of reading along with my weekly fix of Warlord comics.
Where did the years go?
HI K mate.
No idea! I’m still amazed my 50th is approaching! I suspect I’m a bit younger than many here.
I had a period a few years back re reading many of them. I’d never get rid of them.
Not far off-I’m 58 this month. My mum binned my warlords when I joined the Air Force- grrrr! had about 5 years of copies.
Totally agree.
RN need this tasking like an aperture in the cranial cavity.
Feel sorry for those put into this awful position and hope that those up the chain of command can protect them from silly political orders.
Mind you, on a bad day, Preety Patel might deport herself?
Whilst ex service personnel struggle with their demons end up on the streets have no money no shelter no food , but if your illegal a Hotel awaits ,takeaway meals a mobile phone oh and English readies where’s the fucking justice in that
I agree. That is wrong.
But that is the system that is at fault, and why I suggested above they should indeed make it illegal, and remove the incentive to come across.
The migrants and those fuelling it know anyone getting ashore is unlikely to be deported, due to the HR lobby blocking things, the Home Offices ineptitude, and the hope of a better life, benefits, and so on.
So remove that incentive. That does not mean killing people in the sea just because they want a better life.
And I was called “right wing” over on the Tonga thread!!!! Jesus.
Blasphemy Daniele taking the Lords name invain good job we’re Christian otherwise like these Illegals who if you had used their Ones Name you’d be stoned
Hopefully the Government’s take on a new HR bill will be passed Daniele
Russia not a popular destination. More hybrid warfare from Rasputin; aiding the migrant gangs to destabilise Europe. Like the RN needs this tasking at the mo. Keep your sense of humour, what?
Sorry Gavin sense of humour you can’t go round saying that , you might upset by leaving those wit no sense of humour out .Can’t have that we have to be inclusive PS I’m taking the piss
UK should withdraw from the UN Refugee Convention. It can then formulate its own refugee policy. For those coming thro 3rd party states refuse asylum but act as a facilitating state …and push them on to the ROI. They eanted an open border with the UK after all…..
At that point the EU might just start thinking about its own policy of open borders……then again we are talking about the EU……
Maybe we should first stop facilitating the mess that they are running away from.
We need cheap labour and that need is even more pressing post brexit with lack of access to eastern European labour. Maybe we should start considering the positives of immigration and not just the negative.
I’m sorry lack of access too Eastern European Labour come to Bognor there’s more Eastern European food shops than English we have them coming over still apparently their called seasonal like bollocks
I am British but my wife is South African of Irish extraction. If we need to return to the UK we need to pay out a lot of money and jump through hoops for her to be given residence..or we could get on a RIB and paddle across the Channel.
Put simply, this is an outrage!! Whilst Britain has always been a haven for migrants, with a population approaching 70 million, the UK you know now will be gone in a generation for better or worse. What if we loaded RIBS with the migrants and sent them back to France-what could be wrong with that-they arrived ILLEGALLY from there?
My feeling is-to hell with an International Law that allows such an outrage. We need to adopt a Law that makes sense-with compassion yes, but not one that penalises your own Citizens and allows anyone to simply arrive!!!!
If your wife has a grandparent born in Ireland she is entitled to an Irish passport. And Irish citizens are entitled to enter and live in the UK. Brexit has not changed that.
Thank you for kind advice David but no record available for her Grandparents on her Dad’s side
Outrageous, geoff. If you need someone UK based to “sponsor” you, look me up, you have my name.
Unsure how the process works but my wife and I have signed forms for others in the past who wanted to stay ( with regret now )
You are very kind Daniele.. We are well established here with property and a 60 year old family business and just hoping Ramaphosa can sort things out but there is a potential for things to go badly wrong very quickly so who knows-might see you in the Home Counties yet.
Cheers for now my friend
Ok my friend. I knew about your business and long, long ties in SA, I’ve been on this site too long, so its remote to zero chance you come “home”
But It is there if needed.
Many thanks Daniele.
The only way to fix this issue long-term is to 1. establish secure and official channels for refugees to apply for asylum, 2. follow the Australian example and have a safe off-shore holding centre in somewhere like the Channel Islands to prevent applicants disappearing at any point into wider British society, and 3. invest in, reform, streamline the application system so the backlogs are cleared and decisions are efficient/swift.
The current set of circumstances incentives people to take their chances crossing the channel since they know the system will take years to process them and they can always find ways to stay here by appealing or simply evading the authorities if they are turned down.
It’s a complete illogical and inefficient way of going things!
I agree with most of this, especially point 3, although I might go for somewhere more remote than the Channel Islands. Come to think of it, there’s a need for people on Pitcairn.
Or South Georgia no Sorry they’d eat the wildlife
Pitcairn is tiny Jon.
No sweat, Geoff. We can ask the Chinese to build artificial islands for us.
I wasn’t really being serious. Actually South Georgia was my first thought, Tommo (and I wasn’t serious about that either). At least S. Georgia gets visits from HMS Forth every now and again.
The Falkland Islands or Ascension would be a better location for that kind of camp. Any facility could double as an Internment and Interrogation Centre away from prying eyes. It would boost the economy down there too. Something worth the effort on it’s own merit.
Many of the illegal immigrants being trafficked have criminal records and have outstanding warrants issued in numerous countries. They dump their documents to try and evade justice. Your holding camp idea is a good one. With the proviso that simply being held there is very unpleasant and a deterrent almost worse than drowning in the English Channel.
Ascension would be ideal but would require some money to be spent on a holding facility but would not need to be high security as escape almost impossible due to its remoteness, limits on airport due to runway repairs, and lack of port facilities
You do get that Falklands has it’s own domestic Government, the UK can’t just land X amount of people there without there permission.
They should recover the migrants, Then return them to France. This would be covered under the Dublin 111 agreement.
The UK is out of the EU in case you hadn’t noticed, the Dublin Agreement no longer applies to the UK.
I’d see the RN more strongly refusing to do unlawful things than the Border Force.
This proposal will blow up in someone’s face imo.
I would be extremely surprised if the RN agreed to break international law……
It would blow up in someone’s face if using 30mmHEI or HEIT
This is all about politics. Nasti Patel’s desire to be seen to be doing something about an issue which, in reality, has no easy solution.
The last thing I want to see is vulnerable people drowning in the channel. That’s why we must be effective in tackling the traffickers & criminals rather than scapegoating the victims. We must do what we can to make nations stable, safe & secure rather than resorting to short sighted isolationism.
We deport lifelong residents who’ve made lives here just to get statistics that try to cover HMGs asses, often quite unjustifyingly.
What’s the F ing point cheaper than hailing an UBER ,I don’t know what the Government is thinking , these I Is are not Asylum seekers you can’t just choice which country if you’ve already transitted through umpteen Safe countries these people seem too be allowed too pick and choice most don’t even come from Countries of conflict, but are economic seekers who believe that this country of ours is Hand out central ,Hotel accomadation money a full belly a mobile phone Yet there are ex-service personnel on the streets evidently they don’t count Let’s get some more possible Suicide bombers too claim asylum
Aussie Rules are proven to work: no discussion. End of.
100% Terence
What that, if they can’t explain Aussie rules football they can’t stay 🙂
This is just wrong. Our armed forces defend the country against those with hostile intent.
Border Force has its own job to do in preventing unauthorised access to the country by those not in possession of the correct papers.
Horses for courses.
Border Force website: “Border Force is a law enforcement command within the Home Office. We secure the UK border by carrying out immigration and customs controls for people and goods entering the UK”.
What is the logic of putting Border Force under the MoD? Why has the Home Office abrogated responsibility for its own agency? Is the navy getting training in this new role? Is the Home Office paying for the MoD service?
The First Sea Lord better serve the Home Sec with the right type of biscuits or he will be expelled from the UK and have his citizenship removed. Cynical as I am I cannot wait to see if the BF vessels are listed as Littoral Comat Vessels/
Watch out, Boris will be claiming he has increased the size of the Royal Navy with it assuming command of the Uber force.
it just goes to show how short of cutters we have when you think the French have over 40 cutters PLUS and how much we run things on a shoe string and pay the french to do in many cases our problem