But, you know, I really don’t have any sympathy. None at all.
A number of migrants headed for the UK have drowned in the Channel near Calais after their boat sank, the French government has said.
French prime minister Jean Castex said the shipwreck was a “tragedy”, adding those who died were victims of “criminal smugglers”.
Police say 27 people have died, AFP news agency has reported.
The PM is to chair an emergency Cobra meeting this afternoon in response to the deaths, his spokesman said.
While it is being a successful enterprise, this will continue. All it takes is determination to stop it as the Australians did. Rescue people by all means, then send them packing. We have a legal process for migration and asylum. These people are paying criminal gangs in an attempt (largely successful) to undermine this.
So, our government needs to do two things. One, send them back to where they came from. Two, make it crystal clear that anyone choosing to enter the country illegally will be automatically refused the right to stay. No exceptions.
If you want to come here, go through the appropriate channels. Pun Intended.
How long before some human rights lawyers persuade their families to sue the British government, the French government, the people smugglers and presumably Lord Neptune as well for their ‘failure to prevent’ this tragedy.
Probably already drawing up the paperwork!
I will neither wish nor celebrate anyone’s death, but those choosing to cross The Channel illegally take their lives in their hands to do so and while mostly they may succeed, death by drowning is only a wave away.
The UK might rail against France for inaction against these economic migrants, but it is the weakness and generosity of UK welfare that is the magnet to which these people are attracted. If we actually implemented the rules that we are entitled to do and have threatened for decades (i.e. those coming by illegal means from existing safe havens will be rejected out of hand) then there would only be small numbers attempting such journeys, possibly not even enough to justify the people smugglers making them.
The second point is that those making such claims need to be contained until their claims are tested and, if rejected, subject to immediate deportation, either back to the country from which they originate or back to the safe haven country from which they arrived.
Allowing them to mingle within the settled community and weave such lies as the recent Liverpool Hospital bomber does is simply to weaken ourselves against these economic migrants masquerading as asylum seekers. That they are able to use public funds to which they have not contributed in their fight against deportation for illegal entry is an abomination to the taxpayers having to pay for their ingratitude.
I see that Boris is trying to blame the French but we’re not exactly doing anything to discourage them from attempting the crossing, are we? What happened needs to be spread around the migrant camps – maybe then they’ll decide that they might be better off staying in France.
I’m not callous, I’m just indifferent. The wannabe (illegal) migrants took a stupid risk in the English Channels notoriously changeable weather. One boatload of Darwin awards right there.
My sentiments are as yours LR. I do think we could look at the reintroduction of Bills of Attainder for people trafficking (with a view to extending it as well to other offences – am looking at XR/IB & BLM terrorism), so the perpetrator would have to consider his entire family could be imprisoned. Or reintroduction of the death penalty for people trafficking.
This to be accompanied as John Galt suggests, a three fold approach. Imposition of harsh limits on what welfare they could claim while they are here, accompanied by repeal of the ECHR and the HRA from British law, approaches to Belarus, Russia and Azerbaijan to leave ECHR jurisdiction and set up a parallel ‘Court of European Freedom’ to which we’d refer any Trans campaigners (for example) who wanted to chance their arm at claiming discrimination. That would also assist in addressing looming power shortages as both are massive fossil fuel exporters. It would be accompanied by a referendum on Net Zero and likely repeal of the Climate Change Act and severe sanctions on environmental campaigners in general. Maximum fines for any parents of children following Greta Thunberg on ‘environmental school strike’ ,for example.
Additionally divert the Entire DFID budget to the construction of offshore processing centres in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan and begin flying any arrivals out to Almaty and Tashkent on a daily basis, with army combat rations to tide them over on their way to the airport.
Compare and contrast the behaviour and rhetoric of the French and the EU over migrants coming over the channel versus the behaviour and rhetoric of the EU over migrants coming through Belarus. Belarus are accused of allowing migrants across their own territory and into the EU via Poland (they actually had flights coming in from the Middle East into Minsk). The EU are not happy and have been threatening Belarus with sanctions to get them to stop it (and also accusing the Russians of being involved).
European Council President Michel accused Belarus of orchestrating a “brutal, hybrid attack” on the EU by sending migrants to its border.
Thank Nige we are out.
Why does everyone persist in calling them ‘migrants’? This is playing the game that the politicians and media want. They are immigrants.
By definition.
To go somewhere with no intention to return, is to emigrate.
To go somewhere with an intention to return is to migrate.
To go somewhere with no intention to leave is to immigrate.
Newspeak has people using the polite version, ‘migrate’, because somehow using the correct term is not acceptable.
Those crossing the Channel in such a manner have no intention of returning, so they are immigrants, and entering illegally, they are literally ‘illegal immigrants’ which is somehow not to be spoken.
I wish people, including commenters on sites such as thus would stop using approved BBC speak..
Invaders would seem apposite for this lot.
These people are illegals and should be placed in concentration camps before being returned to France forcibly. We do not want them.
Not France or they’ll just come back
Back to Africa and the Middle East
Yes, of course.
Quite right.
Are they taking a risk? So far this year almost 26,000 are known to have landed in Britain, fewer than 50 have died trying.
That’s better than a 99.8% success rate – those odds beat any of the Covid vaccines, the National Lottery and Red Rum in the 3:30 at Aintree. Go figure.
Still a risk, though. That risk will increase in the winter months. As the sea gets colder, the risk of death from hypothermia will increase.