To all those that welcome/encourage the small boat migrants.

Mottie said:
Any/all of them.
Click to expand...
I have no intention of revisiting all of my responses to your questions, especially the ones that you employ phishing techniques to elicit some personal information for potential weaponising.
 
Mrs Doubtfyre said:
I have no intention of revisiting all of my responses to your questions, especially the ones that you employ phishing techniques to elicit some personal information for potential weaponising.
Click to expand...
That’s the answer I was expecting. Himmy/Bloomer.
 
Mottie said:
What happens to the asylum seeker in France if his application is refused?
Click to expand...
Who knows, what options were on the table? I don't think any discussions were held at all, just a flat refusal.
 
Application Accepted, turn left and buy a P&O ticket with your authorisation to travel.
Application Denied, turn right and pay a people trafficker 1500 euro for your "ticket" to the UK.

Of course people will flock to the processing centre as there is a chance to save 1,470 euro and stay dry.

But they will try to come one way or the other, unless the processing centre is a long way away from where they want to get.
 
motorbiking said:
Of course people will flock to the processing centre as there is a chance to save 1,470 euro and stay dry.
Click to expand...
Of course people will flock to the processing centre as there is a chance they will be accepted, as most applicants are.

And if more are accepted legally then the criminals business model will become unviable.

Sorted.
 
denso13 said:
Of course people will flock to the processing centre as there is a chance they will be accepted, as most applicants are.

And if more are accepted legally then the criminals business model will become unviable.

Sorted.
Click to expand...
Precisely, there would be about 80% fewer people risking the dangerous crossing.
You would think that those who persistently express concern about the deaths, the dangers, the resources of rescues, etc. would be overjoyed at the possibility of a safe and legal method.
Unless their concern is faux.
 
denso13 said:
Who knows, what options were on the table? I don't think any discussions were held at all, just a flat refusal.
Click to expand...
Okaay. Lets assume they put you in charge and you get you centre set up and running. What do you think will happen to those who are refused asylum. It's something that must be considered and discussed with the French authorities when you are setting up such a system.
 
Mottie said:
It's something that must be considered and discussed with the French authorities when you are setting up such a system.
Click to expand...
Yes it is. You work through how it will work in practise, not refuse to even consider it.
 
Mottie said:
Okaay. Lets assume they put you in charge and you get you centre set up and running. What do you think will happen to those who are refused asylum. It's something that must be considered and discussed with the French authorities when you are setting up such a system.
Click to expand...
As denso pointed out, the number of people trying to cross the channel by small boat would be reduced by about 80%.
Additionally those vulnerable adults and children would not be required to risk the crossing. I would have thought you'd be in total favour of it, given your concerns with children drowning in the channel.

For sure, you might not eradicate the crossings totally, but you'd vastly reduce the number attempting it, and you'd put the vast majority of people smugglers out of business. What's not to like?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top