Sending migrants back

[Naturalcynic 678]

With increasing movement of economic migrants (some people still insist on calling them asylum seekers) from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland, if Ireland can bring in emergency legislation to return them to the North, why on earth can’t we pass similar emergency legislation to return them to France?

[cambridgeshire canary 6,833]

But but they're all really 15 years old, and they just converted to Christianity and have uncovered that they are in fact gay and the wars going on in France means they will be killed if they get sent there!

[Naturalcynic 678]

8 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

But but they're all really 15 years old, and they just converted to Christianity and have uncovered that they are in fact gay and the wars going on in France means they will be killed if they get sent there!

All very true, and of course while Ireland’s intent is clearly to do the best they can for these poor unfortunate individuals, we’re just horrible far-right racist xenophobes.

[A Load of Squit 5,224]

41 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

All very true, and of course while Ireland’s intent is clearly to do the best they can for these poor unfortunate individuals, we’re just horrible far-right racist xenophobes.

Look up the Common Travel Area, we have an agreement with the RO Ireland, we don't have the same thing with France.

[Naturalcynic 678]

1 minute ago, A Load of Squit said:

Look up the Common Travel Area, we have an agreement with the RO Ireland, we don't have the same thing with France.

OK, let’s take them all to Northern Ireland and give them the bus fare to Dublin.

[A Load of Squit 5,224]

5 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

OK, let’s take them all to Northern Ireland and give them the bus fare to Dublin.

Looks like we can add 'stupid' to 'far-right racist xenophobe'.

 

[Naturalcynic 678]

12 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Looks like we can add 'stupid' to 'far-right racist xenophobe'.

 

Play the ball, not the man.

[BroadstairsR 2,215]

58 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Play the ball, not the man.

He's got two left feet (along with a very limited vocabulary.)

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

What Ireland's doing is breaking international law isn't it? The UK isn't part of the Dublin agreement, so they can't legally return them to the UK if they've gone from the UK to the RoI.

Besides, seeing as they came from another EU country in the first place they should sort it out for themselves if they enter Ireland under their own steam.

Very surprised that Ireland isn't coming in for more criticism from the usual suspects on here.

Very interesting that this migration to Ireland is being attributed to the possibility of going to Rwanda. That bodes well.

Edited April 28 by littleyellowbirdie

[Barbe bleu 833]

3 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

Look up the Common Travel Area, we have an agreement with the RO Ireland, we don't have the same thing with France.

Doesn't that only apply to citizens though? I looked up the CPA as advised but it doesn't seem to give any rights to non-itizens of the two nations.   I'm not sure why Ireland would be treated differently to France.

32 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

What Ireland's doing is breaking international law isn't it? 

No idea, can you look it up and tell us?  From what I have read though the Irish government is going to legislate to change their domestic law to allow the government to ignore their courts which ruled the UK an 'unsafe' place.   I guess this will make them a 'far right' administration too.

 

Edited April 28 by Barbe bleu

[Barbe bleu 833]

3 hours ago, Naturalcynic said:

OK, let’s take them all to Northern Ireland and give them the bus fare to Dublin.

Or let Ireland go halves on charter aircraft to Central Africa?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

27 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

No idea, can you look it up and tell us? 

In principle, but I don't really care enough and I have no legal qualifications to give an opinion weight anyway; they're Ireland's problem. Tell them they're welcome to pay into the Rwanda scheme if they like.

But I would have thought that if they try to claim asylum in Ireland then Ireland is obligated under international law to process the claims in which case sending back to the UK would be illegal.

It's bizarre isn't it? We can't send them back to France, but apparently Ireland can send them back to us.

Edited April 28 by littleyellowbirdie

[Barbe bleu 833]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 

It's bizarre isn't it? We can't send them back to France, but apparently Ireland can send them back to us.

I've not read anything to suggest that Ireland has any more or any less right to send back to the UK than the UK has to do the same with France.

 

[Herman 9,838]

The UK. Being a ****ing nuisance since 2016.

[Fen Canary 874]

40 minutes ago, Herman said:

The UK. Being a ****ing nuisance since 2016.

So it’s the UKs fault Ireland doesn’t want asylum seekers that have entered the country from Britain? 

Does that mean you blame the French for the UK issues with asylum seekers since the bulk of them come via France? 

[Well b back 3,284]

7 hours ago, Naturalcynic said:

With increasing movement of economic migrants (some people still insist on calling them asylum seekers) from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland, if Ireland can bring in emergency legislation to return them to the North, why on earth can’t we pass similar emergency legislation to return them to France?

It has been explained by Ireland tonight that the U.K. are sending people to Rwanda, that only the U.K. and Rwanda consider a safe country. The loophole currently therefore is they can’t be returned to the U.K. as the U.K. who send people to Rwanda ( an unsafe country ) means throughout the world we are no longer a safe country.

I think I have that right.

[Barbe bleu 833]

8 minutes ago, Well b back said:

It has been explained by Ireland tonight that the U.K. are sending people to Rwanda, that only the U.K. and Rwanda consider a safe country. The loophole currently therefore is they can’t be returned to the U.K. as the U.K. who send people to Rwanda ( an unsafe country ) means throughout the world we are no longer a safe country.

I think I have that right.

That's half of my understanding.  An Irish court ruled uk as unsafe due to possibility of being  sent to Rwanda (UK Supreme Court found similar, Rwanda itaelf not unsafe but risk of being sent onwards was too high)

Irish government looking to do exactly same as UK government in the same position, legislate to ignore the ruling.

Difference seems to be that whereas the UK has a willing partner to receive the people back the Irish Republic does not. Unless that changes or there is some treaty obligation no one is talking about it seems to be an idea that goes nowhere (other than playing to Irish domestic audiences)

[Well b back 3,284]

Quite a serious question, I have heard of no boats going from France or the U.K. to NI. How therefore are the migrants getting to travel to NI ? I don’t suppose they are just being allowed to travel there unchallenged are they, I don’t understand.

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

8 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Quite a serious question, I have heard of no boats going from France or the U.K. to NI. How therefore are the migrants getting to travel to NI ? I don’t suppose they are just being allowed to travel there unchallenged are they, I don’t understand.

 

They'll just catch a ferry. The freedom of movement conditions over NI means private individuals don't get checked crossing from the mainland to NI.

Which begs the question how on Earth Ireland can enforce its ruling.

Edited April 28 by littleyellowbirdie

[Well b back 3,284]

1 minute ago, Barbe bleu said:

That's half of my understanding.  An Irish court ruled uk as unsafe due to possibility of being  sent to Rwanda (UK Supreme Court found similar, Rwanda itaelf not unsafe but risk of being sent onwards was too high)

Irish government looking to do exactly same as UK government in the same position, legislate to ignore the ruling.

Difference seems to be that whereas the UK has a willing partner to receive the people back the Irish Republic does not. Unless that changes or there is some treaty obligation no one is talking about it seems to be an idea that goes nowhere (other than playing to Irish domestic audiences)

Yep that’s how I see it with the addition that before Brexit there were treaties allowing returns ( including to France ) but as soon as we exited, we cancelled that treaty and Johnson then confirmed our new status, presumably not even understanding what he was signing away.

I think Ireland ( I could possibly be wrong ) are accusing us of transporting migrants to NI, because of the loophole that we are now classed as an unsafe country and they can’t even turn them back because of that, before they even cross their border.

[Fen Canary 874]

7 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Quite a serious question, I have heard of no boats going from France or the U.K. to NI. How therefore are the migrants getting to travel to NI ? I don’t suppose they are just being allowed to travel there unchallenged are they, I don’t understand.

 

You can get a ferry from mainland Britain to Northern Ireland, I wouldn’t imagine you’d need a passport to do so as it’s the same country 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

3 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Yep that’s how I see it with the addition that before Brexit there were treaties allowing returns ( including to France ) but as soon as we exited, we cancelled that treaty and Johnson then confirmed our new status, presumably not even understanding what he was signing away.

I think Ireland ( I could possibly be wrong ) are accusing us of transporting migrants to NI, because of the loophole that we are now classed as an unsafe country and they can’t even turn them back because of that, before they even cross their border.

The UK was actually keen to keep cooperation. This was punishment for leaving.

[Well b back 3,284]

Just now, littleyellowbirdie said:

They'll just catch a ferry. The freedom of movement conditions over NI means private individuals don't get checked crossing from the mainland to NI.

So Ireland are right then, we are exploiting a loophole, wow

[Fen Canary 874]

2 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Yep that’s how I see it with the addition that before Brexit there were treaties allowing returns ( including to France ) but as soon as we exited, we cancelled that treaty and Johnson then confirmed our new status, presumably not even understanding what he was signing away.

I think Ireland ( I could possibly be wrong ) are accusing us of transporting migrants to NI, because of the loophole that we are now classed as an unsafe country and they can’t even turn them back because of that, before they even cross their border.

So France’s belligerence in refusing any cooperation on the migrant problem after Brexit as punishment may come back to hurt Ireland and lead to them becoming a dumping ground for those who would instead have tried to enter Britain?

Bootiful! 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

1 minute ago, Well b back said:

So Ireland are right then, we are exploiting a loophole, wow

We're not exploiting anything. We're not making the migrants go. They're doing it of their own accord, just like they crossed from France to the UK in the first place.

You could as easily argue that the EU has been exploiting the UK by failing to stop the traffickers moving them over the channel.

Edited April 28 by littleyellowbirdie

[Well b back 3,284]

Just now, littleyellowbirdie said:

The UK was actually keen to keep cooperation. This was punishment for leaving.

Indeed but when I voted leave I should have been told this will happen, not it won’t happen, because Europe need us more than we need them, simply wasn’t true.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

5 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Indeed but when I voted leave I should have been told this will happen, not it won’t happen, because Europe need us more than we need them, simply wasn’t true.

If you'd asked the right person, I'm sure someone would have.

But to be honest, it's looking like the Rwanda policy is already an epic success as a deterrent before a plane has even taken off.

That leads to the next question; what will Labour do with the policy if it's proving effective once they're in power?

Edited April 28 by littleyellowbirdie

[Well b back 3,284]

2 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

So France’s belligerence in refusing any cooperation on the migrant problem after Brexit as punishment may come back to hurt Ireland and lead to them becoming a dumping ground for those who would instead have tried to enter Britain?

Bootiful! 

I have no idea, I am trying to get to what’s actually happening. I had no idea until tonight that the U.K. because of the Rwanda policy was no longer classed as a safe country throughout the world.

We have many places for migrants in and around Birmingham and the security around them is like a prison, I understood they couldn’t go far, certainly not able to catch planes and ferries over to Ireland. 
I am trying to get my head around it, would it be the same as France picking up migrants from all around their borders putting them on trains and taking them to Calais ?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

3 minutes ago, Well b back said:

I have no idea, I am trying to get to what’s actually happening. I had no idea until tonight that the U.K. because of the Rwanda policy was no longer classed as a safe country throughout the world.

We have many places for migrants in and around Birmingham and the security around them is like a prison, I understood they couldn’t go far, certainly not able to catch planes and ferries over to Ireland. 
I am trying to get my head around it, would it be the same as France picking up migrants from all around their borders putting them on trains and taking them to Calais ?

And therein lies one of the absurdities of the classification of countries as safe. But overall, if the end effect is that legitimate documented migrants, people on business and holidays are going to and from the UK okay, while undocumented migrants avoid us like the plague, what does it matter if some court says we're an unsafe country?

Edited April 28 by littleyellowbirdie

[Well b back 3,284]

6 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

If you'd asked the right person, I'm sure someone would have.

But to be honest, it's looking like the Rwanda policy is already an epic success as a deterrent before a plane has even taken off.

That leads to the next question; what will Labour do with the policy if it's proving effective once they're in power?

I asked my elected MP I really thought they were stating facts.

And indeed looking a major success as only 547 crossed the channel over the weekend, with an estimated 2000 thwarted by the French.