It must be pure hell for them….

IT Minion said:
www.fbu.org.uk

Firefighters’ union demands meeting with Braverman over Bibby Stockholm fire safety

The Fire Brigades Union has today written to Home Secretary Suella Braverman to raise concerns over fire safety in asylum seeker accomodation, including the Bibby Stockholm. The barge is currently moored in Portland, Dorset and is earmarked for asylum seeker accommodation.
www.fbu.org.uk www.fbu.org.uk

The occupancy has been boosted from the design number of 200 ish to 500 ish. Quotes about the concerns include 'floating Grenfell'.

You've got boating experience, you know how dangerous fire is on boats.
Click to expand...
How does the increase if occupancy increase? the fire risk that is. My guess is there is a fire risk because people don't want to be there.

Yes fire is very bad on boats. That is because:
1- they are made of very flammable materials
2- hold a lot of fuel
3- have limited means of escape if you are at see and sink quickly

Is this a boat in the same sense? I think from an insurance point of view is classed as a pontoon.
 
motorbiking said:
How does the increase if occupancy increase? the fire risk that is. My guess is there is a fire risk because people don't want to be there.

Yes fire is very bad on boats. That is because:
1- they are made of very flammable materials
2- hold a lot of fuel
3- have limited means of escape if you are at see and sink quickly

Is this a boat in the same sense? I think from an insurance point of view is classed as a pontoon.
Click to expand...
If you have to evacuate more than twice as many people the escape routes need to be safe for more than twice as long.

If you think that it's more dangerous because people dont want to be there that doesn't make it better. It makes it an even more stupid idea to put 500 people, of which some will be traumatized by their experience, in a hostile and isolated location.
 
Harry Bloomfield said:
They came here, convinced that the streets of London were 'paved with gold', and expected they would instantly be given a piece of it.
Click to expand...
Why don't we do something about it then? "They" will just keep coming.
 
IT Minion said:
If you have to evacuate more than twice as many people the escape routes need to be safe for more than twice as long.

If you think that it's more dangerous because people dont want to be there that doesn't make it better. It makes it an even more stupid idea to put 500 people, of which some will be traumatized by their experience, in a hostile and isolated location.
Click to expand...
Mainly traumatized by the channel crossing they chose to pay people trafficers to arrange.
 
IT Minion said:
If you have to evacuate more than twice as many people the escape routes need to be safe for more than twice as long.

If you think that it's more dangerous because people dont want to be there that doesn't make it better. It makes it an even more stupid idea to put 500 people, of which some will be traumatized by their experience, in a hostile and isolated location.
Click to expand...
the first argument makes sense - I can go along with that. Is there any evidence the fire escapes etc. aren't suitable?

On the second point, I would encourage you to take a look at it in person or via google earth. This is one of the most beautiful places on the south coast. They are no more isolated than anyone else living on the "island" of Portland.
 
remind us where they start their journey from again? Where the people trafficking gangs are based and what jurisdiction our police et al have?
 
It's going to get much worse. Get used to it.
100 million people displaced at the moment, and things are not looking good, what with increased extreme weather and more political instability.
 
motorbiking said:
remind us where they start their journey from again? Where the people trafficking gangs are based and what jurisdiction our police et al have?
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. Unless you are saying there is absolutely nothing we can do about it.
 
Lower said:
Mainly traumatized by the channel crossing they chose to pay people trafficers to arrange.
Click to expand...

denso13 said:
Why don't we stop it happening?
Click to expand...

Unless there is a 100%, guaranteed acceptance policy that is loudly and clearly publicised, the boats won't stop; anyone who has the slightest doubt that they'll get accepted will avoid any legal routes, and chance the traffickers instead.

An "open door" policy would be electoral suicide, so the trafficker boats - for those who would otherwise be rejected; crims, for instance - will remain.


Reduce the boats; that's possible.
Stop the boats; couldn't be done, even if there was a will to do so.
 
denso13 said:
The trouble is the situation is getting worse, not better.
Click to expand...
But I thought that since brexit the UK would be able to take control of it's borders as we were told would happen...

So what went wrong to make as you say the situation worse?

Could it be that the breakdown in cross channel consultation with the EU is a factor?

Richie rich sunak appears to be hoisted on his own petard...

And his other four 'pledges' don't appear to be going so well either...

More 'cooking of the books' to come!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top