They've said they're open to it multiple times if I remember right.
More deaths in the channel.
- Thread starter Mottie
- Start date
Sponsored Links
They also said they’d stop the boats leaving French beaches in return for payment. How’s that going - we've paid up I believe - have we had any refunds yet?
They have stopped quite a few, if you crunch the numbers and compare it to the costs for Rwanda or the plague ships it's an absolute bargain.
If you compare it to processing people quickly and then taxing them once they get work it's awful of course.
But those that get through give hope to those yet to try. If and when they could be sent automatically to Rwanda while their claims are processed, that will have the same effect, deterrent wise. We won’t need to sent 27,000 to Rwanda because when it is known where they will end up, they won’t be so keen to pay thousands to traffickers to risk their lives. Too much money for the solicitors to keep stalling the process. They should make a start with those sharks.
Sponsored Links
There's a lot of hope and guesswork in there. It's possible you're right, and in theory there might be a way to do that legally. It's morally abhorrent, but it might make sense on a balance sheet.
But we know we can process people legally in France and save money doing it.
I think with 75 miles of open Beaches and Sand Dunes on the Fench Coastline ,
it is an impossible job for the French Police to patrol , Two French Policemen come across a Lorry and Trailer containing an RIB, these people have nothing to lose , and a coach load of migrants the Police are totally outnumbered
Can anyone suggest a better alternative to stopping the migrants
Go down to the coast and have a peek at all the places that you could sneak out of the UK. Bear in mind that the UK South coast is rugged. You would need to spend half a billion pounds per day, in order to make a dent. And you'd still be able to find a way out of the UK.
The half a billion quid we gave France was merely a gesture. It was a stick the Tories handed to the gullible RWR, so that they could beat the French authorities daily with it and keep them enraged. France probably haven't even cashed the cheque.
The cheque is still in the post.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 18,479
- Reaction score
- 2,791
- Country
First sentence is roughly on the right track. It's common in the justice system. e.g. you go for driving without due care, because dangerous driving might not stick.
While the law allows all adult illegal immigrants coming via boats to be prosecuted for illegal entry, the CPS has chosen, for now to only target a smaller percentage. This change in law was only clarified earlier this year. I posted the case law, which I think Desno now accepts is case law. @denso13 - do you agree?
It's not random and discriminatory, the objective of any prosecution is always twofold. Punish the offender and discourage others. Border force are using drones to photograph the illegals as they make their passage. The message they are trying to get back is - at least one of you is going to prison for illegal entry. If you pilot/skipper/helm the boat, it's going to be you. Boats don't tend to go anywhere without someone steering them. Illegal entry is s24, facilitation, is s25. The punishment for facilitation is much more severe and rightly the test is higher. s24, simply needs to prove that you are attempting to enter the UK illegally.
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 17,578
- Reaction score
- 2,414
- Country
The appeal court judgement yes, the initial Crown Court one you claimed (before the appeal), no.
So many to choose from. Oh you forgot to include those that would prefer or have relatives in the UK. Silly MBK.
The Saudis certainly don't muck about (allegedly)
Hundreds of migrants killed by Saudi border guards - report
Migrants tell the BBC they were shot on the Saudi border as a new report alleges "mass killings".
www.bbc.co.uk
That needs nipping in the bud because that excuse will go on forever. Open chequebook there.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 18,479
- Reaction score
- 2,791
- Country
Here is the approach I used:
1. How much do they spend on running the service each year? ~£180M
2. How many people did they save? 389
3 How many of these were illegals crossing the channel? 108
4 what is the average cost per life saved. (389 / £180m) £463k
5 Using the per life saved model we have a cost of £50m but that is way too simplistic.
6 Why don't we accept the per launch argument that it's just 3%? 9,312 launches £19,330 avg giving a figure of £5.6M? Not all launches cost the same. 56% of launches are for the lowest cost craft, B & D class and launches includes all training, patrols, sea trials etc. The B & D cost 1/10th and 1/20th of the cost of the all weather craft.
If we look at the all weather class boats stationed in the SE, we have a 146 saves of which 108 were illegals. Thats close to 74% and accounts for at least 20% off their costs even allowing a generous cost allocation to the B & Ds which are noise in the numbers.
7 Costs have increased £30M from 2021.
The 3% claim is therefore nonsense, designed to distract attention away from divisive activity, which is costing them donations.
you must be unaware that a successful claimant can extend the invite to his or her family lawfully.
Sponsored Links
