Well whatever they’re doing is not working and this is not going to deter anyone considering people have been making plenty of trips no matter how many times they fail in getting to dover.
The Tories are just experimenting now, they have no clue how to deal with this and it looks like they don’t want to upset the EU because it means to tell France to do something about their border – which they won’t because they want to human trafficking victims to be our problem.
Anything positive? Perhaps, from the article it states that “new legal routes for people fleeing warzones and persecuted minorities such as Coptic Christians under threat in Egypt and Iraq” are being planned by the home secretary.
Full article from the DeTimes paper below…
Asylum seekers could be sent abroad for processing under government plans to discourage people from making dangerous journeys to Britain.
Priti Patel, the home secretary, will publish details next week of plans for the biggest overhaul of the asylum and immigration system for a generation. It will include a consultation on changing the law so that migrants seeking asylum can be sent to processing centres in third countries.
The Times understands that Gibraltar, a British overseas territory, and the Isle of Man, a Crown dependency, have been discussed by officials. Other islands off the British coast, possibly in Scotland, are said to be under consideration. Off-shore British territories have been described as “in the mix”.
Third countries will also be considered but have not been named. The government believes that sending migrants to third countries for processing would be compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights.
More than 800 people have crossed the Channel this year, three times as many as over the same period in 2020. A record 8,420 migrants crossed in small boats last year. Ministers argue that many make the dangerous journey after rejecting the opportunity to claim asylum in European Union countries.
The new legislation will include life sentences for people smugglers and the establishment of migrant reception centres on government land. At present thousands are being housed in hotels.
Last year Downing Street instructed Foreign Office officials to look into building detention centres to process asylum seekers in countries including Moldova, Morocco or Papua New Guinea. Those locations have been rejected as unrealistic. Other options considered included converting disused ferries into processing centres
Ministers dismissed as unrealistic proposals last year to open distant processing centres such as Ascension Island and St Helena in the south Atlantic.
Patel is expected to unveil the plans in a government policy paper to be published next week but specific sites will not be disclosed.
Countries in north Africa, such as Morocco have also been considered as sites to relocate asylum seekers but sources said that the government had not opened any discussions yet.
The offshore centres will come alongside plans to build “reception centres” that will house illegal asylum seekers, such as those who cross the Channel in small boats.
The reforms are intended to act as deterrents to the increasing number asylum seekers coming to the UK. More than 800 migrants have crossed the Channel so far this year — almost three times the number that arrived in the same period last year, when a record high of 8,420 was reached.
Government sources said that the option of striking partnerships with other European countries, such as Denmark, which has a hardline policy towards asylum seekers, had been discussed. The home secretary is also expected to announce new legal routes for people fleeing warzones and persecuted minorities such as Coptic Christians under threat in Egypt and Iraq.
Patel proposes to order stricter age checks on asylum seekers to stop adults posing as children. A government source said that the plans to process asylum seekers would be implemented in legislation later this year.
She has been warned, however, that the proposals could be delayed for years in the face of legal challenges under human rights laws and the UN Refugee Convention.
An immigration expert told The Times that the success of challenges under the Human Rights Act would depend on the record of any third country selected.
“There is no law that explicitly prevents people from being removed to a third country,” the expert said. “But it is arguable and there’s bound to be a court case about it — there’ll be arguments both ways. A refugee is going to not want to be removed to a third country and will no doubt instruct lawyers to try to prevent that. So they will bring a case to try to stop it happening.”
Charities described the proposal last night as an “inhumane and morally reprehensible policy”.
Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council charity, said: “We know from the Australian model that offshore detention leads to appalling outcomes including high levels of self-harm and mental illness.
“It is an inhumane policy that undermines our nation’s proud tradition of providing protection to people fleeing persecution and terror many of whom have gone on to work as doctors and nurses in the NHS. As we mark the 70th anniversary of the UN convention on refugees later this year we should be welcoming refugees, treating them with compassion.”