You can be pretty sure that this will somehow be our fault.
A baby is feared to have been among at least five people who died when a migrant boat capsized off Dunkirk during stormy weather as French coastguard called off the searches and said there was no hope of finding any further survivors.
Two children – aged five and eight – and two adults are confirmed to have perished in the tragedy yesterday, including a man who was found underneath the stricken vessel.
A woman also drowned and survivors from the sinking said they saw her baby going into the water.
Lives lost at sea are always a tragedy. However, why did this happen? Because these people paid smugglers (criminals) to ship them across the Channel to enter this country illegally. That’s why. So who is to blame? They are. Along with the criminal gangs who operate this enterprise. No one else is to blame, least of all us.
Let’s be clear here, these people are not refugees. If they were, they could and should have claimed refugee status in the first safe haven they reached. The UK is a signatory to the international convention on asylum. This does not mean that we are obliged to accept people whose first action on arrival is to break our laws. There are perfectly legal means to enter this country, to seek asylum or to look for work. These people chose instead to bypass the legal means of entry and pay criminals to smuggle them in. If their children paid a tragic price for that, then it must rest on their consciences and theirs alone.
My sentiments too. I really wonder why they don’t try to get asylum in France. Perfectly safe. Unless our free stuff in the UK is a greater magnet than the equivalent stuff in France. Surely they must know that autumn is storm time and winter is crappy weather in general time? This drowning was bound to happen sooner or later.
Agree, these drownings are not Britain’s fault although expect the usual suspects of ‘Safe Passage UK’ and Citizens UK to say otherwise. They are the fault of the individuals who decided to embark on this dangerous crossing. As you say France is a safe country when compared to the sort of warzones that these alleged ‘refugees’ claim to be coming from. I believe that you may well be correct in your assessment of the situation in that France is less willing to shower these ‘refugees’ with freebees than the British government are. If we turned off the welfare tap that encourages these invaders then their invasion would most probably be reduced.
Benefits in France are greater than those they gain from the UK.
Unfortunately our empire spread the English language to most of the civilised world, and therefore seeking the UK for refuge is common habit for people with English as a second language.
As for the ‘seek asylum in the firs country…’, that’s fallacy, and has never been a statute or regulation anywhere in the EU. It seems to get peddled out time and time again.
It comes from the Dublin regulation:
https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/europe/refugees-must-seek-asylum-in-first-eu-country-reached-court-1.614521
On the plus side with this happening and the weather getting rougher there will be less willing to risk it.
On the negative side Boris the buffoons bit of fluff will arrange it so our border patrol will park their big ships in Calias so that the risk is reduced.
What on earth was the French Navy Illegal Immigrant Escort Service up to,? The liaison between them and the people smugglers regarding the departure time must have broken down.
To be serious rather than facetious, the French authorities must know who is in these criminal gangs, yet do little to stop them. Personally, I’d round them up and leave them in a dinghy in the middle of the channel during a storm.
Sorry, your first article said that if they were refugees they should seek refuge in the first country…blah blah. That’s incorrect. Asylum seekers do that, not refugees.
Refugees would be covered under the UN Refugee Convention. All a moot point as were no longer members of the EU and therefore the Dublin regulation has diddly squat to do with us.
Makes you wonder why they’re still allowed across our borders…Boris?
Sorry, your first article said that if they were refugees they should seek refuge in the first country…blah blah. That’s incorrect. Asylum seekers do that, not refugees.
Refugees would be covered under the UN Refugee Convention. All a moot point as were no longer members of the EU and therefore the Dublin regulation has diddly squat to do with us.
Makes you wonder why they’re still allowed across our borders…Boris?