UK Politics: Cost of Living Crisis

[A Horse Named Stranger]

2 hours ago, Week said:

Ignorance is strength.

Yep, and his posts are going from stregth to stength.

[DMC]

47 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

That last sentence would suggest a lot of people entering illegally would maybe not pass that test.

LOL, they would if they applied for asylum - making them asylum seekers - which is literally what we're talking about.  Were you hoping nobody clicked on your link and read the next three paragraphs?

Quote

A lot depends here on how to interpret which country people are “coming directly from”. It could be argued, for instance, that as the people crossing the channel are coming directly from France—which is not the country they initially fled—they don’t have the right to claim asylum in the UK.

However, in 1999 a UK judge ruled that “some element of choice is indeed open to refugees as to where they may properly claim asylum.” The judge specified that “any merely short term stopover en route” to another country should not forfeit the individual’s right to claim refugee status elsewhere.

This means people who enter the UK by illegal means can legitimately make a claim for asylum, even after passing through other “safe” countries, provided they do so directly after arriving.

Emphasis mine.

[Werthead]

As usual, it's interesting to look at test cases:

 

[Heartofice]

7 minutes ago, DMC said:

LOL, they would if they applied for asylum - making them asylum seekers - which is literally what we're talking about.  Were you hoping nobody clicked on your link and read the next three paragraphs?

Emphasis mine.

Huh? How does that apply to what I said?

My point being that to pass such a test they would need to present them selves promptly to authorities and have a good reason for why they have entered illegally rather than through proper entry. 
I don’t think either of those things are clear. 

The link that Raja just posted suggested that ‘many if not most’ illegal immigrants crossing the channel apply for asylum. Thats quite a slippery statement that suggests that they really have no idea how many are coming in and that there are still a large number who don’t apply for asylum at all, but just disappear into the system.  

[DMC]

7 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Huh? How does that apply to what I said?

My point being that to pass such a test they would need to present them selves promptly to authorities and have a good reason for why they have entered illegally rather than through proper entry. 
I don’t think either of those things are clear. 

The link that Raja just posted suggested that ‘many if not most’ illegal immigrants crossing the channel apply for asylum. 

Your point makes no sense.  If they are applying for asylum, then they inherently have passed this test.  And the people we are talking about have applied for asylum.  (BTW, so are all the people mentioned in the link Raja just posted - the link's point was that three quarters of those that apply are granted refugee status.)  From your Times link a few pages back:

Quote

In total, 28,526 people crossed the Channel in 1,034 small boats, according to confirmed numbers that were published by the Home Office, slightly higher than previous estimates had shown.

They accounted for the vast majority of the 36,792 people who entered the UK illegally last year and drove the total number of asylum seekers to its highest level in almost two decades.

There were 48,540 asylum applications in 2021, a third higher than at the peak of Europe’s migration crisis in 2016.

Again, since you still seem confused, the people we're talking about literally are asylum seekers.

18 minutes ago, Werthead said:

As usual, it's interesting to look at test cases:

Yeah the Australia/Papua New Guinea example is equally terrible - and costly.

[Heartofice]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Again, since you still seem confused, the people we're talking about literally are asylum seekers

I know we are talking past each other quite heavily here, you have totally misunderstood what I’m saying.. but it’s still not true that people are not entering the country illegally just because they claimed asylum afterwards.
 

They are. It just doesn’t count against they asylum application.

[DMC]

Just now, Heartofice said:

but it’s still not true that people are not entering the country illegally just because they claimed asylum afterwards.

I never said they weren't, I said asylum seekers are by definition not illegal immigrants.  Because they aren't, even if racist governments and politicians want to claim they are.  And we're not "talking past each other," you're just unable to understand - for whatever reason - that the people the UK government plans on sending to Rwanda are asylum seekers.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

like I said, his posts go from strength to strength. 

[Raja]

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Spockydog said:

 

 

Proof positive that the teachings of Raptor Jesus can soften even the most menacing of beasts. 

[BigFatCoward]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-61112219

'I might have dressed as a nazi, I can't remember'

they aren't even trying anymore are they? 

[Spockydog]

23 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-61112219

'I might have dressed as a nazi, I can't remember'

they aren't even trying anymore are they? 

I have crossed paths with this man. He is every bit as weird as he looks. 

[Which Tyler]

Hypothetical question...

Do Sealions have electric, or gas lighting?

[Week]

15 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

Hypothetical question...

Do Sealions have electric, or gas lighting?

Gas -- which explains all the hot air.

[Derfel Cadarn]

1 hour ago, Spockydog said:

I have crossed paths with this man. He is every bit as weird as he looks. 

Given he doesn’t recall dressing in full Nazi regalia, just how strong were the drugs you gave him?

And can I have some?

[HexMachina]

2 hours ago, Which Tyler said:

Hypothetical question...

Do Sealions have electric, or gas lighting?

Coal powered electric generators for maximum awful impact 

[Spockydog]

Boris Johnson asked for Evgeny Lebedev to skip City Hall security in 2015

Quote

Boris Johnson made a special request for Evgeny Lebedev and a Kremlin-linked Russian dignitary to bypass security checks when he met them as London mayor in 2015, the Guardian has learned.

Johnson’s friendship with Lebedev has come under scrutiny in recent weeks, including the prime minister’s decision to award the Russian-born media owner a peerage in spite of concerns raised by the intelligence and security services.

Official documents show Johnson had a meeting in his office at City Hall in 2015 with Lebedev and Mikhail Piotrovsky, the director of Russia’s State Hermitage Museum, who has links to Vladimir Putin.

According to an email released under freedom of information laws, Johnson’s office describes the two men as “VIPs” and adds: “The mayor has asked specifically that they are not asked to go through the airport-style security.”

No meetings or written notes of the meeting were retained but a report to City Hall subsequently said they were “discussing cultural prospects in London”.

Pretty sure no bugs were planted that day. Yup. 

[Spockydog]

Lordy! That Imran Khan sounds like a proper shagger.

Man accuses Imran Ahmad Khan of propositioning him when he was 16

Andrew claims Khan then asked him if he had ever done “DP” (double penetration). He said no. He alleges Khan then said something like “why don’t we hang out and have some fun?” before offering to book them a hotel in Henley, “buy lots of cocaine and a prostitute and ‘fuck all weekend’”.

At the time, Andrew said he felt “really uncomfortable. I didn’t know how to take it. I was only 16.”

[Spockydog]

More Brexit winning!

 

[Spockydog]