Suella! Braverman!

This whole thing is just noise to take up bandwidth in what laughably passes as political analysis in our press and get everyone arguing about an issue that could be resolved by processing applications in a timely fashion. It’s working.

Suella Braverman isn’t putting asylum seekers on the Bibby Stockholm, which is what we are currently discussing, because of brexit

When we were part of the EU the French were obliged to accept refugees from us under the Dublin agreement.

So you are saying that the increase asylum applications to the UK is due to brexit. Irrespective of that it doesn’t dictate how they should be housed.

I know that Suella Braverman claims that she has no choice but to use barges, and now Labour are making similar claims, but I don’t think that is actually true.

So you are saying that the increase asylum applications to the UK is due to brexit.

i didn’t say any such thing. you claimed the current situation wasn’t anything to do with brexit. we had the right to return immigrants to a ‘first place of safety’ under the agreements we were signatory to as part of our EU membership.

Further info and stats on the Dublin arrangements here, for those who may be interested. The actual number of transfers were quite low.

How did it affect asylum claims in the

UK?

For many years the number of people transferred out of the UK under

the Regulation was greater than the number of people sent to the UK.

Since 2016, the opposite has been the case: the UK received more

people than it successfully transferred to other participating states. Most

transfers to the UK were due to the family reunion articles.

Recent immigration statistics (July 2020) give figures for incoming and

outgoing transfer requests in 2019:

• The UK received 2,236 requests from EU member states to accept

transfers of individuals to the UK, and 714 transfers took place.

The majority of these (496) were from Greece.

• The UK made 3,259 transfer requests to EU member states, and

263 transfers took place. 40% (104) went to Germany and 20%

(53) went to France.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9031/#:~:text=The%20Dublin%20III%20Regulation%20enabled%20the%20UK%20to,the%20UK%20from%20the%20end%20of%20this%20year.

you claimed the current situation wasn’t anything to do with brexit.

I said that housing asylum seekers on barges instead of hotels has nothing to do with brexit.

Both Germany and the Netherlands housed asylum seekers on barges despite not leaving the EU.

I really dont see what is wrong with housing people on barges whilst their claims are processed. Those in genuine fear for their safety are safe, fed and accommodated. Those who are economic migrants are then in a place of safety and if their claims are unfounded at least we know where they are so they can be deported

Oh come on.  Its all a part of the hostile environment – the idea being to make people feel so unwelcome or to put them in fear so they do not go forward with their legitimate claims.  The vast majority are found to be legitimate

Its also a dog whistle to their hard right supporters.  500 people max out of many tens of thousands is insignificant.  its also more expensive than using hotels and much more expensive than actually processing claims

its using vulnerable people as political pawns

chrismac – IF that’s what you really believe, you are deluded.

I really dont see what is wrong with housing people on barges whilst their claims are processed.

I have lived on similar things for up to 6 weeks at a time.

However, I was getting paid and was busy and motivated to be there.

I also know how to keep my head straight in that environment, how to keep my own space and how to give others space.

A bunch of young men, who have never lived like that before, bored with nothing to do, nowhere to go, it will quickly turn into a pretty toxic environment.

I don’t think it’s inherently dangerous but it’s it will be grim and is costing more than luxury apartments.

I really dont see what is wrong with housing people on barges whilst their claims are processed. Those in genuine fear for their safety are safe, fed and accommodated. Those who are economic migrants are then in a place of safety and if their claims are unfounded at least we know where they are so they can be deported

I think, in very simple terms, the concept for temporary housing is not fundamentally flawed.  Its just almost every aspect of how they are doing it that is flawed:

– it is horrendously expensive.

– it actually accommodates hundreds of people at best but there are tens of thousands of applicants.

– the backlog of applications and inefficiency in the process means this isn’t some holding centre for a few weeks whilst the paperwork is done but likely to take many months or years.

– this is an adult male only facility, that will neither be good for building a community or diffusing tensions when they inevitably arise.

– effectively its not far off being a prison; institutionalizing genuine asylum seekers because our systems are crap is pretty evil.

– its intended to be uninviting to put people off coming, and send a message to voters that refugees don’t come here and get treated better than locals.

<p>I agree its no substitute for getting on an processing claims in a timely manner. That is almost certainly the best solution. However we aren’t in that position.</p><p>Fundamentally I dont see the problem with having claimants held in controlled places and provided for than left to fend for themselves somewhere in the community relying on the benefit system. What happens when claims are completed and rejected? Let’s face it those in that position are hardly likely to surrender to immigration for deportation and those with genuine claims are safe and protected from the persecution they are escaping from.</p><p> </p><p>Yes this should be temporary and the government should get its act together to process claims in a timely manner</p>

Following the recent media coverage criticising and attacking one of our partners, Jacqueline McKenzie, and many other immigration lawyers we wanted to publicly state our complete support and admiration for the work that Jacqueline, her team, and many other lawyers around the country do to ensure that the law is applied accurately to their clients’ cases.

We understand that a briefing criticising Jacqueline was sent from Conservative Campaign Headquarters (formerly known as Conservative Central Office). This four-page briefing had many inaccuracies and was plainly sent with an agenda for Jacqueline to be singled out and targeted by the press.

It is shocking and shameful that in a democratic society such a document could be sent from any political party, not least the party in government. It is both irresponsible and extremely dangerous for anyone to be targeted this way, as we sadly saw in September 2020 when an immigration lawyer was attacked at his office by a man brandishing a knife, which reportedly followed comments by the then Home Secretary Priti Patel.

The document centred on Jacqueline’s supposed links to the Labour party and her work on a multi sectoral group chaired by Baroness Doreen Lawrence to examine race disparities in the UK which she was invited to volunteer for. Omitted from the briefing was Jacqueline’s involvement on another group chaired by Priti Patel MP on the Windrush Scandal and the 90% of her work which is focused on legal support for victims of the Windrush Scandal.

Jacqueline is a well-respected expert with decades of experience in her field of asylum and immigration law and it should not be a surprise that political parties may seek her expertise when working on policies.

Lawyers should not be criticised for doing their jobs. People are entitled to have legal representation when faced with removal from the country, or indeed being moved to accommodation which may be unsuitable. Many of the clients represented by Jacqueline’s team have been through trauma, torture or incredible hardship. In a civilised society they should be treated with compassion and understanding as well as having the law applied accurately and fairly to the individual circumstances of their case.

While the work we do as a firm is not always popular we strive to provide access to justice to all whether that is bereaved families who need help finding answers through the inquest process, those who have been seriously injured on our roads, employees who have been discriminated against by their employers and international communities who bear the brunt of multinational corporations wreaking havoc on their local environments. This commitment to access to justice for all extends to those seeking asylum in this country or who need support with their immigration status.

We are proud of the work we do and will not be cowed by a government whose strategy appears to be to attack and demonise lawyers, and the judiciary, merely for working to ensure the laws of this country are upheld.

On behalf of all partners at law firm Leigh Day

And the Daily Telegraph is using the Tory dossier to vilify a lawyer working to help those seeking asylum:

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fpolitics%2F2023%2F08%2F06%2Flabour-race-adviser-boasted-of-stopping-rwanda-deportation%2F

It would appear from the Daily Telegraph that stopping the government from acting illegally is nothing to be proud of:

A key member of Labour’s race equality task force is a top asylum lawyer who boasted of blocking a client’s deportation to Rwanda.

I’m lovin’ this btw:

“While we are doing everything we can to stop the boats, Starmer and his activist friends are doing their best to sabotage our efforts so they can use it for cynical political gain.”

Yep that’s correct, Suella Braverman accused others of taking a stance for “cynical political gain”.

I wouldn’t have believed it if I hadn’t read it in the Daily Telegraph.

“While we are doing everything we can to stop the boats, Starmer and his activist friends are doing their best to sabotage our efforts so they can use it for cynical political gain.”

Yep that’s correct, Suella Braverman accused others of taking a stance for “cynical political gain”.

But but but…

Rishi said that stopping the boats is a major priority of the British People, he said it repeatedly.

If Labour sabotage that, then how can they make any political gain? Cynical or otherwise?

I said that housing asylum seekers on barges instead of hotels has nothing to do with brexit.

I missed this…

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/family-firm-profiteering-misery-providing-30584405

Family firm ‘profiteering from misery’ by providing migrant barges donated £70k to UKIP

The Langham family, owners of Langham Industries, is now set to profit from an 18-month contract with the Home Office to let the Bibby Stockholm berth at Portland, Dorset

If you see Brexit as something more positive than simply “sticking it to foreigners”, then obviously using asylum seekers as a distraction othering to try and win back voters has nothing to do with Brexit. For everyone else, it’s blindly obviously the same approach to winning/gaining/keeping power in order to make money from holding it.

Predictable twist no.1

https://news.sky.com/story/asylum-seekers-to-be-moved-off-bibby-stockholm-barge-after-legionella-bacteria-found-12937904

Predictable twist no.2

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/asylum-seeker-tb-told-move-30678182

Someone will be doing the full “Malcom Tucker” right now.

No doubt there will be a firm of specialists, with ties to a donor, about to go in and clean it for a hefty fee.

The level of incompetency on top of the level of inhumanity is amazing to comprehend!

How long before 30p lee says…fookin’ ‘ell, if they don’t want legionella they shouldn’t come here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-66476538

Am I just being an arse, but I really dislike the BEEBs use of the term migrant to describe the barge ‘guests’. Should it not be asylum sneakers? Migrants is just falling into the right wing of the tory parties/daily mail intentional demotion of status language.

I’m really struggling to work out if I loath the likes of Braverman and all the other cockwombles more or less than the middle aged and oap loathsome daily mail reading arsewipes who have lived the safest, smallest and most priveldged of lives for whom all this shite bollox talk and posturing is indented to ameliorate. i.e do I loathe my father in law or Braveman more – it’s a close call – both are so so very punchable.

How long before 30p lee says…fookin’ ‘ell, if they don’t want legionella they shouldn’t come here.

I think Lee would voice it in an even more ‘salty’ or ‘fruity’ manner

These 2 terms have been used by Tory Campaign HQ (as its now known) to refer to 30p Lees latest abusive, national front tribute act, football-hooligan-esque outburst

A former Tory speech writer was on the Radio this morning and his take was that Rishi will have basically told Anderson to go out and say precisely what he said. Then all the other senior Tories could row in behind it, starting with the opening gambit “well, of course, I wouldn’t have used that language myself, but Lee makes a valid point…”

And our politics is debased yet further by these cynical, rabble-rousing shysters

How long before 30p lee says…fookin’ ‘ell, if they don’t want legionella they shouldn’t come here.

Either that or he’ll claim that the risk from Legionella is non-existent and that it’s only because of leftover EU red tape that they have still had to test for it.  (It’s never been an EU thing, the UK legionella testing regime is tougher than most of the EU!).

FWIW – Legionella risk is not usually as bad as people make it out to be, but the factors that drive it are very well known (like plumbing systems that have been sitting unused for long times), and solutions for managing it before you bring people in and expose them quite readily available.  Its a spectacular **** up.  If it is bad enough that they really need to move people out, there’s something very very wrong with the risk management on site.  The fact they know about it at all sounds like last week someone went “oh we should maybe get the water tested (usually a 10-14 day process)”.  There are faster tests available that should probably have been used given the risk factors involved, if there’s been no mitigations in place for weeks.  The other things you don’t want to do is put immune compromised people near infected water – so Predictable twist no 2… is event worse than it would have been.

Predictable twist

Oh I suspect there are more to come.

And let us not forget that it is our taxpayers funds being thrown at this issue and real people (asylum seekers) who are being used as pawns in this charade.

convert – I hope you don’t mean ‘asylum sneakers’ as that would be much worse than BBC referring to migrants.

binners – if only an interviewer/presenter would say…anderson’s comments are foul mouthed, insulting and referring to them as salty/fruity effectively endorses racism, panders to bigots and represent a little englander mentality.

I would expect the barge crew to be performing those tests at regular intervals.

As far as I am aware, the engineers on the cruise ships I worked on, did the tests onboard. They may of also sent samples to confirm.

Sounds like they jumped the gun and went in before the sample results were returned as they take a couple of weeks to turn round.

convert – I hope you don’t mean ‘asylum sneakers’ as that would be much worse than BBC referring to migrants.

😀 – yes that’s a pretty good predictive text typo! Braverman would thoroughly approve.

made me laugh as I assumed it was tongue firmly in cheek!

I would say that the Legionella thing was supprising but alas it really isn’t.

Annecdotaly when looking into optimising my plumbing last year and lowering flow temps and things like that, the subject of Legionella came up, and cases in domestic applications in the UK are pretty much zero aside from the odd anomaly.

I can’t remember the figures but something like 99% of cases are outbreaks due to unmaintained air conditioning and plumbing in commercial/industrial buildings.

Quel supprise.

Thank god I’m back longer a taxpayer so aren’t having to fund this ongoing invasion.

<p>Usual gibberish from our fav forum right wing ****</p>

Thank god I’m back longer a taxpayer

Presumably you mean ‘no longer a tax payer’. But yet you are, indirectly, you still have to pay tax such as council tax and VAT to name the obvious ones.

Car insurance up 40-50% too, do you drive? Food more expensive etc. etc.

this ongoing invasion

I’ll fix that for you:

Ongoing lack/underfunding of border enforcement even when in the EU we failed as a country to use the tools available.

And ongoing lack of actually bothering to actually process asylum seekers. Those with genuine claims are lumped in with illegal immigrants as it suits the tory narrative.

(if they bothered turn applications around in weeks rather than years, it would litterally save billions in over-inflated accomodation contracts.)

And ongoing giving of said contracts to Tory shills/bent busnessmen.

I can see a pattern of operation here, and it has nothing to do with dealing with the asylum backlog.

Presumably you are retired, so also don’t get ill. The doctors are on strike again.

I’m trying to find and article to reference it, but I’m 100% Theresa may essentially opened our borders during her tenure as home sec. before she became PM.

She basically deemed it a waste of money to event attempt to police, and commanded border forces to pretty much wave them through with zero checks or process, rather than pay for better controls.

Now this same party is saying we have a crisis. well, maybe we do, but if we do, it’s a Tory crisis, created by tory government decisions. Voters have very short memories.

Watching channel 4 news, this whole think gets more shambolic and farcical by the minute.

So much for ‘Stop the Boats’ Week? What a bunch of ****ing clowns!

Christ only knows what all this nonsense and the rolling car crash of Rwanda is costing

Given that we’re talking about housing 750 people, tops, with both those schemes, we must be well into the billions by now. It’d be cheaper to put them all up in suites at the Ritz?

Given that we’re talking about housing 750 people, tops, with both those schemes, we must be well into the billions by now. It’d be cheaper to put them all up in suites at the Ritz?

Jobs for the boys, innit. Tories gotta get rich(er) somehow.

Nothing to do with tax payer value for money. Career politicos looking to do no work and retire comfortably.

I really dont see what is wrong with housing people on barges whilst their claims are processed

I wouldn’t have an issue with it either if there were absolutely no alternatives. Which there are, far cheaper, more humane alternatives

this is first and foremost about punishing these people for having the ‘audacity’ to try to come to this country. It makes me xxxxing sick..

Ignore D*veyl*d, he admitted to me in a PM the other day he’s just taking the piss. Not sure why he singled me out..but I just replied that he’s a boring **** and should really keep quiet.

Well, they’ve done it. They’ve stopped the boat.

this is first and foremost about punishing these people for having the ‘audacity’ to try to come to this country. It makes me xxxxing sick..

It’s not about punishing anyone, it’s about appealing to the likes of @daveylad with an ‘invasion ‘ narrative to shore up voters from the extreme right wing.

Never mind that the perceived ‘invasion’ is entirely of conservative manufacture, and any actual invasion, if there is such a thing, is, and has been, entirely preventable.

Let us not forget we have had a conservative government for the last 12 years, and with a sizable majority for most of that time, too.

That’s enough space for any party to at least begin to enact thier vision, and who knows? it’s kind of all going to plan from an extreme right wing conservative perspective…

Well, they’ve done it. They’ve stopped the boat.

That deserves a standing ovation! Bravo!!!!!!!!! 😀

martinhutch
Full Member

Predictable twist no.1

https://news.sky.com/story/asylum-seekers-to-be-moved-off-bibby-stockholm-barge-after-legionella-bacteria-found-12937904

It almost passed me by but **** me that government response is proper banality of evil stuff.

“The government department added the bacteria samples relate “only to the water system on the vessel itself” and not fresh water entering the barge. It stressed there is no health risk to the wider community of Portland and that the disease “does not spread from person to person”

Yep, everything is fine because they’ve only endangered people on the barge, and you can’t catch it off them. No real people are at risk

Also, is it just me or does legionella sound vaguely delicious? Like a desert you might get in a south asian fusion restaurant, or a spirit that comes in a really skinny square bottle that you drink on the last night of your alps holiday?