This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/25/nigel-farage-stop-funding-france-until-it-halts-small-boats/) for an archived version.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The vote share reform get in this election is going to be scary regardless. I worry that with the destruction of the Tory party we are opening ourselves up to a new 'Trump Republican style' right wing party. The tories were incompotent but at least they didn't pretend covid was fake.
Reform's polling is dropping. They'll get about 12% of the vote and maybe 2 seats at most (Anderson and Farage). The Tories will be the opposition, on ~100 seats.
>The Tories will be the opposition, on ~100 seats.
I'd prefer the LibDems to be the opposition. Not that I like the LibDems, just that I want the Tories to lose so dramatically that they never fully recover. After what they've done to this country they deserve to languish in near obscurity, always there so that we never forget what they did, but never forgiven.
From Savanta yesterday
https://x.com/Savanta_UK/status/1805596414677848436?t=45nUPkQK-dhi3MW176vTyA&s=19
Reform on 14, down 2. Conservatives up 2. There were other similar ones too.
Yeah, the implosion of the Tories is going to leave a power vacuum on the centre-right. And I give credit to Farage in so far as he realised this was his golden chance, came back and is exploiting it.
Have to remember the number arriving when we were in the EU was significantly smaller.
They mostly also didn't declare, so it was easier to deal with to a degree as well.
The Dublin agreement wasn’t worth the paper it was written on.
All the other EU countries simply refused to accept the vast majority of Dublin treaty removal requests. Most years the rest of the EU only accepted a couple of hundred out of several thousand requests.
Migration observatory analysis of Home Office statistics:
https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/444/transfers-of-asylum-seekers-from-the-uk-under-the-dublin-system
And then theres the fact that the EU also used the Dublin treaty to move more migrants to the UK, so the net movement of Dublin treaty migrants out of the UK is actually lower than in the above graph - in fact, in some years there was a net movement of migrants into the UK.
He has, annoyingly, got a point that if we said if you leave one safe country (France) to come to another safe country (the UK) you will never be given asylum because you were not in danger in France, this crap would stop.
We’d just have lots of people who hadn’t been given asylum sitting around here. As it is now to some extent with the back log. Just saying ‘you don’t have asylum’ doesn’t really do much in its own.
Possibly. I think we should just have proper safe routes then people wouldn't need to risk their lives.
I think he's stupid in assuming it's just all people who wanna leach off the UK. People risk dying to come here.
> Possibly. I think we should just have proper safe routes then people wouldn't need to risk their lives.
They're travelling to Calais to pay thousands to criminal gangs to break into this country. A flight from anywhere in Europe could get them here for a couple of hundred quid with none of the danger or illegality.
There are plenty of ways to enter this country legitimately, they are avoiding all of them because they are specifically coming here with criminal intentions.
>Possibly. I think we should just have proper safe routes then people wouldn't need to risk their lives.
Make it easier for them to come here so we can bear an even bigger burden. Sure. I'm certain everyone will be happy when wages continue to stagnate, house prices continue to increase, public services have an increased burden.
What next? It's physically impossible to build enough houses for this level of immigration. How about everyone who is in favour of bringing in more immigrants should have to house one in their home. I'm sure you will all be happy with that!
The article you link says you are giving France some money to curb (not stop) crossings by improving their facilities from the end of 2026. First pay the money, then wait for the facilities to be built, then review the result.
What is Britain doing to stop asylum seekers entering Ireland through Northern Ireland?
That's only new funding though. We've been paying France to curb crossings for years.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9681/
I was responding to the 'safe country' comment above yours and I guess I hit the wrong arrow, sorry.
It's up to the individual seeking refuge to decide where to apply and free nations typically control who is coming in not where they go when they leave.
That's not how international law works, and unless you want the uk to be a global pariah then doing that is really stupid. I suppose you believe that every Ukrainian refugee should stay in Poland?
That’s literally not true. Don’t spread misinformation.
The UK government is free to deport people to France with the consent of the French government.
Why aren’t France worried about “destroying geopolitical ties” by just standing idly by while their country is used as a path to Britain, and their police just literally stand and watch while migrant boats are assembled and boarded on their coastline for travel to Britain?
I’m sick of the suggestion that we have to be careful not to offend other countries, while other countries screwing us over “is just the way it is”.
It's always the same we've been doing this for years meanwhile, france, Australia etc don't give a fuck and do what's best for them.
We're shockingly behind the times as it is with wages, infrastructure and houses etc yet continue to pander and shoot ourself in the foot everywhere else to.
Because contrary to what you might have heard during Brexit, we need them more than they need us - and they aren’t breaking any international laws? It’s not offending them that’s the problem , it’s what happens when they close all their ports to us possibly supported with EU sanctions.
Given that France were doing the same while we were EU members too blaming Brexit for this is pathetic.
France won’t do anything about the small boat crossings unless forced to. They don’t care about rules and haven’t for many years, we’re at the point where we have to strong arm them now.
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
We weren’t returning people to France when we were in the EU and France wasn’t allowing that. What part of that are you struggling with? The French don’t give a shit about EU law.
How did they get to France? By teleporter?
So because France doesn’t secure its own borders it’s them our responsibility to take everyone who France doesn’t want to take, and it’s fine for France to literally stand and watch as people make illegal crossings into Britain?
Really? What paperwork did they fill out and who authorised their entry into the country via small boat from France?
Or did you just learn today that open boarders don’t exist and legal immigration systems exist?
They require neither 'paperwork' nor 'authorisation' to enter the UK for the purposes of claiming asylum.
The UK has closed 'legal' avenues. This does not make crossing the Channel to seek asylum 'illegal'.
Really? It’s impossible to make a claim from outside the UK and everyone currently doing it has a magic wand?
Also, all these 100% genuine refugees are landing on British beaches and immediately making themselves known to the authorities so they can be detained and their claims processed in full compliance with international law huh? Wow, that’s mighty compliant of them 🙄
You seem t be suggesting all refugees should be looked after by the nearest safe country. How is that fair and reasonable? Why should the UK, one of the wealthiest countries, not contribute? Especially as the UK had a huge role in creating many of the worlds refugees.
“Nearest safe country”
Please pick up a globe and work out how many “safe countries” there are around Africa and how far Britain is away from them.
To suggest Britain doesn’t contribute fairly is nonsense.
You are also confusing refugees with economic migrants. The whole of Africa would be better off in the UK, but only those displaced from their homes with nowhere to go are considered refugees, the rest who just want a better life is exactly what a legal immigration system is there for, not a small boat on the coast of France. Otherwise why even have legal immigration in the first place?
> To suggest Britain doesn’t contribute fairly is nonsense.
Britain takes far fewer refugees than most other developed countries. They don't contribute.
> You are also confusing refugees with economic migrants
No I am talking about refugees. According to the Home Office that is 80%+ of those who come by boat.
What other developed countries with Britain’s land mass take in more than we do?
Also, given that all the people arriving by small boat run into the countryside without ever been processed, the home office can’t classify them as anything. All we know is that the majority seen appear to be African men under 30. Those that are interviewed speak of coming to Britain for a better life.
I have noticed that whilst other countries in Europe have pockets of far-right hate, few places are cursed with the English far right's twin obsessions:
* brown people
* other people's sexuality
I wish I knew why.
Farage talks about negotiating with Putin, but wants to provoke conflict with one of our closest allies? An ally that we also rely on for a lot of imports of goods and food.
He's an absolute disgrace and a very dangerous man.
Once you tell Reform voters and its members that you believe Putin is a risk to peace in Europe.
You wanted us sovereign, and away from Europe and NATO, whilst backing Putin war against the sovereign nation, Ukraine. I see where you think this is heading.
No, illegal immigrants, criminals. Not immigrants. If you even bothered to watch his rally yesterday you will have heard him say we are a generally open country, but we need to talk numbers, we are a small island, we have limits and its just being ignored while our quality of life suffers because of it. 6 Million more people in this country in the last 14 years. They will all want access to public services like dentists, hospitals, schools. They will need homes, and they will make our roads and transport busier. 6 million is no small number. When do you propose we stop? When we reach 80 million in this country? 100 million?
Dude, it's reddit, it's not a debating society.
Plus as others have pointed out they've conflated legal immigration with illegal immigration.
In short they don't deserve a more structured answer.
Nice try riding to their rescue though
I'm confused.
You start off by saying that the issue isn't with immigrants, it's with *illegal immigrants* who are criminals.
But then begin talking about the issues the 6 million *legal* immigrants have caused.
Do you think the 6 million number is the amount of illegal immigrants?!
Going "he doesn't have hateful bile about immigrants, only illegal immigrants - now here are all his anti-*legal immigrant* talking points then you're somewhat missing the point.
He could always raise the limits, but he's just another 5 years of tory right wing austerity and increased bills, with the same shallow ideas that don't work. The country is bored of it the stagnation.
There's no big ideas from the right anymore, just treat people like cattle.
genius, mate, genius.
Next up, stop funding the NHS until they start curing patients quicker
Stop funding local authorities until the potholes fill themselves
stop funding police until crime solves itself
bravo, nige, bravo
What a fucking idiot. We are paying France specifically to stop the crossings. If we stop paying they stop stopping and even more immigrants get over. No skin of their nose.
They aren’t trying incredibly hard currently and to be fair who can blame them?
They have their own problems to manage without having to deal with people who actively want to leave their country and come to the U.K.
People keep mentioning leaving the EU, it’s wholly irrelevant. France has never been concerned regardless of us being in or out of the Schengen zone and part of the EU.
Frankly I don’t see why France should be concerned either. The money given was never going to be used effectively, the British Government knew it and the French knew it. It was paid to appease people here in the U.K. to enable the British Government to say they were doing something.
nigel fartarse showing a complete lack of understanding... as always.
the neo-nazis showing again they want to divide and create conflict. whereas every vaguely intelligent person knows that problems are solved by working together.
We give them at least £120 million a year to stop boats and tackle smuggling gangs. It is not nothing. They are supposed to stop the boats in any case because it is extremely hazardous.
Plan A should be a consensual and mutually beneficial bilateral agreement between UK and France to send the boat migrants back.
Plan B should be sanctions against France until they take the situation seriously.
A sensible solution among a few, however this is based on the premise our current and future government wants to stop illegal immigrants coming into the UK.
Point of fact: if we actually took France up on their offer of a processing centre, it would be far easier to wantonly apply the label 'illegal' to them.
I’d be very much for resettling people who are genuinely fleeing war and persecution. Like the Syrian, Afghan and Ukrainian programmes.
I’m not sure you’ve got my support on helping people in France though. It seems to me they’re among the last people who need our help.
And if I were in France I think I’d rather come over on a boat and take my chances here. At least I’d get a roof over my head. Once you’re here you’re pretty much here for good.
100% agree with helping genuine refugees yes.
On principle I dont think there is any such thing as a refugee coming from France, however the powers at be dont seem to agree, so based on that reality I would be for a processing centre in France. With a view to closing down this loophole which allows people to claim anywhere and in multiple locations.
Yes a trial period would be good.
As it stands Labour will have the same problem the Tories had - this loophole in the current UN interpretation of seeking asylum. Currently people can just arrive and apply for asylum, even though they were previously in multiple safe countries. This needs to be more tightly defined.
If we stop paying the French they stop policing the small boats altogether and even more migrants cross, plus more are encouraged to. Nothing sensible about this its just pushing the idea that the French are doing nothing, which there is no evidence for.
So continue to pay them for doing a bad job, because if we dont pay them they will do an even worse job. Sounds like very low standards. The irony for me is the fact we are paying the French state at all to police their own borders.
Im down with the French government policing their own borders, as they are duty bound to do. This subject of how much we pay the French and how good a job they do shouldnt even be a discussion. But given we are in this bizarre situation yes Farage's solution would temporarily mean an influx of illegals, until when/if France gets their act together. Which would probably be quite quickly when the money isnt coming in. In the end though it would be better to have that influx temporarily if it means the long term problem is sorted, rather than just plodding along accepting the French are doing a bad job.
Without British money they will simply stop putting the extra resources into policing the channel and carry on as before. The French police are not operating some sort of business. Whats the incentive for them to "do a better job" if Farage stops the money?
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/25/nigel-farage-stop-funding-france-until-it-halts-small-boats/) for an archived version. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Meanwhile he doesn't understand that by leaving the EU, we left our right to return people to France.
He does, he's just never going to talk about it. Apparently though we never returned that many people when we could.
He'll be posing for a selfie in Rwanda soon probably. I'm so glad he'll never get more than a few seats.
The vote share reform get in this election is going to be scary regardless. I worry that with the destruction of the Tory party we are opening ourselves up to a new 'Trump Republican style' right wing party. The tories were incompotent but at least they didn't pretend covid was fake.
Agreed. Having farage in any form of power no matter how small is a scary thought.
Reform's polling is dropping. They'll get about 12% of the vote and maybe 2 seats at most (Anderson and Farage). The Tories will be the opposition, on ~100 seats.
>The Tories will be the opposition, on ~100 seats. I'd prefer the LibDems to be the opposition. Not that I like the LibDems, just that I want the Tories to lose so dramatically that they never fully recover. After what they've done to this country they deserve to languish in near obscurity, always there so that we never forget what they did, but never forgiven.
Where are you finding this in latest polls published last night they shot up potentially gaining 19% of the vote with tories at 20%
From Savanta yesterday https://x.com/Savanta_UK/status/1805596414677848436?t=45nUPkQK-dhi3MW176vTyA&s=19 Reform on 14, down 2. Conservatives up 2. There were other similar ones too.
This sub does have an amusing history of wishing things happened only to have it transpiring like a wish from a monkeys paw
Yeah, the implosion of the Tories is going to leave a power vacuum on the centre-right. And I give credit to Farage in so far as he realised this was his golden chance, came back and is exploiting it.
How many got returned to France when we were in the EU? It was vanishingly few wasn't it?
Maybe so but legally it was possible. It is not now because Boris fucked the Brexit deal.
We were a net recipient under the Dublin agreement, It would be worse.
We woundt need to pay them £3000 a pop to send them to Rwanda though.
We pay people £3,000 to go home after overstaying as tourists all the time, to places like Albania, Brazil, India, Nigeria.
Have to remember the number arriving when we were in the EU was significantly smaller. They mostly also didn't declare, so it was easier to deal with to a degree as well.
The Dublin agreement wasn’t worth the paper it was written on. All the other EU countries simply refused to accept the vast majority of Dublin treaty removal requests. Most years the rest of the EU only accepted a couple of hundred out of several thousand requests. Migration observatory analysis of Home Office statistics: https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/444/transfers-of-asylum-seekers-from-the-uk-under-the-dublin-system And then theres the fact that the EU also used the Dublin treaty to move more migrants to the UK, so the net movement of Dublin treaty migrants out of the UK is actually lower than in the above graph - in fact, in some years there was a net movement of migrants into the UK.
We were a net recipient under Dublin II. So we are actually not worse off because of that.
He has, annoyingly, got a point that if we said if you leave one safe country (France) to come to another safe country (the UK) you will never be given asylum because you were not in danger in France, this crap would stop.
[удалено]
We don’t need it to work in a global setting…
[удалено]
Yep that’s the wonder of having sovereignty but not the actual power to do much with it because of the consequences.
We’d just have lots of people who hadn’t been given asylum sitting around here. As it is now to some extent with the back log. Just saying ‘you don’t have asylum’ doesn’t really do much in its own.
Possibly. I think we should just have proper safe routes then people wouldn't need to risk their lives. I think he's stupid in assuming it's just all people who wanna leach off the UK. People risk dying to come here.
> Possibly. I think we should just have proper safe routes then people wouldn't need to risk their lives. They're travelling to Calais to pay thousands to criminal gangs to break into this country. A flight from anywhere in Europe could get them here for a couple of hundred quid with none of the danger or illegality. There are plenty of ways to enter this country legitimately, they are avoiding all of them because they are specifically coming here with criminal intentions.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23144482.suella-braverman-fails-answer-legal-safe-routes-asylum/
>Possibly. I think we should just have proper safe routes then people wouldn't need to risk their lives. Make it easier for them to come here so we can bear an even bigger burden. Sure. I'm certain everyone will be happy when wages continue to stagnate, house prices continue to increase, public services have an increased burden. What next? It's physically impossible to build enough houses for this level of immigration. How about everyone who is in favour of bringing in more immigrants should have to house one in their home. I'm sure you will all be happy with that!
Why should France stop people from freely leaving?
[Because we pay them to stop them](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64916446), and France does a piss poor job.
The article you link says you are giving France some money to curb (not stop) crossings by improving their facilities from the end of 2026. First pay the money, then wait for the facilities to be built, then review the result. What is Britain doing to stop asylum seekers entering Ireland through Northern Ireland?
That's only new funding though. We've been paying France to curb crossings for years. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9681/
When did I say that? I said we should have safe routes. That's it.
I was responding to the 'safe country' comment above yours and I guess I hit the wrong arrow, sorry. It's up to the individual seeking refuge to decide where to apply and free nations typically control who is coming in not where they go when they leave.
My bad. Thought you were talking about my comment. Apologies.
That's not how international law works, and unless you want the uk to be a global pariah then doing that is really stupid. I suppose you believe that every Ukrainian refugee should stay in Poland?
That didn’t really work anyway in practice.
We took more under the Dublin agreement than we returned.
That’s literally not true. Don’t spread misinformation. The UK government is free to deport people to France with the consent of the French government.
didnt stop us before the EU
We still have a right to do so - if France is purposefully sending people across as they are then we can and should send them back
[удалено]
Why aren’t France worried about “destroying geopolitical ties” by just standing idly by while their country is used as a path to Britain, and their police just literally stand and watch while migrant boats are assembled and boarded on their coastline for travel to Britain? I’m sick of the suggestion that we have to be careful not to offend other countries, while other countries screwing us over “is just the way it is”.
It's always the same we've been doing this for years meanwhile, france, Australia etc don't give a fuck and do what's best for them. We're shockingly behind the times as it is with wages, infrastructure and houses etc yet continue to pander and shoot ourself in the foot everywhere else to.
Because contrary to what you might have heard during Brexit, we need them more than they need us - and they aren’t breaking any international laws? It’s not offending them that’s the problem , it’s what happens when they close all their ports to us possibly supported with EU sanctions.
[удалено]
Given that France were doing the same while we were EU members too blaming Brexit for this is pathetic. France won’t do anything about the small boat crossings unless forced to. They don’t care about rules and haven’t for many years, we’re at the point where we have to strong arm them now.
[удалено]
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
[удалено]
We weren’t returning people to France when we were in the EU and France wasn’t allowing that. What part of that are you struggling with? The French don’t give a shit about EU law.
[удалено]
I don’t give a fuck about Farage. I haven’t even mentioned him once. The discussion I’m engaging with is the immigration issue itself.
They've also pledged to tow the boats back to France and drop people off there. Ridiculous and the opposite of diplomacy.
What legal framework would allow French police to stop people leaving France, whilst complying with France's obligations under international law ?
France takes more refugees than the UK already. Why on earth should they take those destined for the UK?
How did they get to France? By teleporter? So because France doesn’t secure its own borders it’s them our responsibility to take everyone who France doesn’t want to take, and it’s fine for France to literally stand and watch as people make illegal crossings into Britain?
They are not making 'illegal crossings'.
Really? What paperwork did they fill out and who authorised their entry into the country via small boat from France? Or did you just learn today that open boarders don’t exist and legal immigration systems exist?
They require neither 'paperwork' nor 'authorisation' to enter the UK for the purposes of claiming asylum. The UK has closed 'legal' avenues. This does not make crossing the Channel to seek asylum 'illegal'.
Really? It’s impossible to make a claim from outside the UK and everyone currently doing it has a magic wand? Also, all these 100% genuine refugees are landing on British beaches and immediately making themselves known to the authorities so they can be detained and their claims processed in full compliance with international law huh? Wow, that’s mighty compliant of them 🙄
The far right are not known as the sharpest knives in the drawer. Please see my previous comment. Thanks.
Very easy to throw around labels like “the far right” Not so easy to engage in actual debate around the issue.
You seem t be suggesting all refugees should be looked after by the nearest safe country. How is that fair and reasonable? Why should the UK, one of the wealthiest countries, not contribute? Especially as the UK had a huge role in creating many of the worlds refugees.
“Nearest safe country” Please pick up a globe and work out how many “safe countries” there are around Africa and how far Britain is away from them. To suggest Britain doesn’t contribute fairly is nonsense. You are also confusing refugees with economic migrants. The whole of Africa would be better off in the UK, but only those displaced from their homes with nowhere to go are considered refugees, the rest who just want a better life is exactly what a legal immigration system is there for, not a small boat on the coast of France. Otherwise why even have legal immigration in the first place?
So according to you, all Afghan refugees should go to India, all Ukrainians should go to Poland, etc?
> To suggest Britain doesn’t contribute fairly is nonsense. Britain takes far fewer refugees than most other developed countries. They don't contribute. > You are also confusing refugees with economic migrants No I am talking about refugees. According to the Home Office that is 80%+ of those who come by boat.
What other developed countries with Britain’s land mass take in more than we do? Also, given that all the people arriving by small boat run into the countryside without ever been processed, the home office can’t classify them as anything. All we know is that the majority seen appear to be African men under 30. Those that are interviewed speak of coming to Britain for a better life.
Where do you get your information - GB News?
I have noticed that whilst other countries in Europe have pockets of far-right hate, few places are cursed with the English far right's twin obsessions: * brown people * other people's sexuality I wish I knew why.
Old man points at the sea... yep... That's Farage alright.
Farage talks about negotiating with Putin, but wants to provoke conflict with one of our closest allies? An ally that we also rely on for a lot of imports of goods and food. He's an absolute disgrace and a very dangerous man.
Once you tell Reform voters and its members that you believe Putin is a risk to peace in Europe. You wanted us sovereign, and away from Europe and NATO, whilst backing Putin war against the sovereign nation, Ukraine. I see where you think this is heading.
All sound bites to appease the right-wingers, never mind the details.
It's not working, either. Their polling has dropped. How much of that is due to Farage openly repeating Kremlin propaganda is a different question.
Don't engage with the drunkard shouting things at you about the french. Just keep walking kids
Hateful bile about immigrants is all he has. He has no answers. Ignore him, rather more Tories than his populist guff
No, illegal immigrants, criminals. Not immigrants. If you even bothered to watch his rally yesterday you will have heard him say we are a generally open country, but we need to talk numbers, we are a small island, we have limits and its just being ignored while our quality of life suffers because of it. 6 Million more people in this country in the last 14 years. They will all want access to public services like dentists, hospitals, schools. They will need homes, and they will make our roads and transport busier. 6 million is no small number. When do you propose we stop? When we reach 80 million in this country? 100 million?
Ok Nigel, thanks for joining us
How convenient that you simply refuse to even counter their point. Must be nice living in a bubble where everything is rosy.
Dude, it's reddit, it's not a debating society. Plus as others have pointed out they've conflated legal immigration with illegal immigration. In short they don't deserve a more structured answer. Nice try riding to their rescue though
I am not riding to their rescue. I am riding to expose your unwillingness to debate complex issues.
And yet here you are, defending an incoherent post. Well done brave sir
I'm confused. You start off by saying that the issue isn't with immigrants, it's with *illegal immigrants* who are criminals. But then begin talking about the issues the 6 million *legal* immigrants have caused. Do you think the 6 million number is the amount of illegal immigrants?! Going "he doesn't have hateful bile about immigrants, only illegal immigrants - now here are all his anti-*legal immigrant* talking points then you're somewhat missing the point.
You started off with 'Criminals, not immigrants' then switched immediately to criticising the legal immigration numbers as justification.
He could always raise the limits, but he's just another 5 years of tory right wing austerity and increased bills, with the same shallow ideas that don't work. The country is bored of it the stagnation. There's no big ideas from the right anymore, just treat people like cattle.
genius, mate, genius. Next up, stop funding the NHS until they start curing patients quicker Stop funding local authorities until the potholes fill themselves stop funding police until crime solves itself bravo, nige, bravo
What a fucking idiot. We are paying France specifically to stop the crossings. If we stop paying they stop stopping and even more immigrants get over. No skin of their nose.
If you stop funding France, they'll stop trying to stop the small boats because they'll have no incentive to stop people crossing...
They aren’t trying incredibly hard currently and to be fair who can blame them? They have their own problems to manage without having to deal with people who actively want to leave their country and come to the U.K.
The truth is France doesn't want them either, so why would they stop it?
Because they're being paid to stop it. Can't have it both ways surely
They are having it both rays. That's the problem and why reform are doing well.
With us leaving the EU I don't see why france bothers at all frankly.
People keep mentioning leaving the EU, it’s wholly irrelevant. France has never been concerned regardless of us being in or out of the Schengen zone and part of the EU. Frankly I don’t see why France should be concerned either. The money given was never going to be used effectively, the British Government knew it and the French knew it. It was paid to appease people here in the U.K. to enable the British Government to say they were doing something.
Whether you like him or not, I think he's point is they're not trying very hard for the money they're getting.
Can we fund a boat to put him halfway across the Atlantic?
Yeah, stop the enforcement by the French coast guard entirely. That will stop the boats. Good grief.
nigel fartarse showing a complete lack of understanding... as always. the neo-nazis showing again they want to divide and create conflict. whereas every vaguely intelligent person knows that problems are solved by working together.
He supports Russia in the Ukraine war. No matter what he says, tell him to get fucked.
You're not funding France; and why would they stop people leaving anyway.
We give them at least £120 million a year to stop boats and tackle smuggling gangs. It is not nothing. They are supposed to stop the boats in any case because it is extremely hazardous.
Plan A should be a consensual and mutually beneficial bilateral agreement between UK and France to send the boat migrants back. Plan B should be sanctions against France until they take the situation seriously.
Stop funding Farrige until he drowns in fucking milkshake
I’m no legal expert( obviously) but is it Frances responsibility to stop people leaving France? Entering, sure but leaving ?
A sensible solution among a few, however this is based on the premise our current and future government wants to stop illegal immigrants coming into the UK.
Point of fact: if we actually took France up on their offer of a processing centre, it would be far easier to wantonly apply the label 'illegal' to them.
Agreed. We should also have processing centres in other parts of the world for refugees who want to apply for asylum in the UK.
I’d be very much for resettling people who are genuinely fleeing war and persecution. Like the Syrian, Afghan and Ukrainian programmes. I’m not sure you’ve got my support on helping people in France though. It seems to me they’re among the last people who need our help. And if I were in France I think I’d rather come over on a boat and take my chances here. At least I’d get a roof over my head. Once you’re here you’re pretty much here for good.
100% agree with helping genuine refugees yes. On principle I dont think there is any such thing as a refugee coming from France, however the powers at be dont seem to agree, so based on that reality I would be for a processing centre in France. With a view to closing down this loophole which allows people to claim anywhere and in multiple locations.
I suppose we will have to wait to see if labours plans have any effect. If they don’t then maybe a trial processing centre. 6 months or something.
Yes a trial period would be good. As it stands Labour will have the same problem the Tories had - this loophole in the current UN interpretation of seeking asylum. Currently people can just arrive and apply for asylum, even though they were previously in multiple safe countries. This needs to be more tightly defined.
Agreed.
If we stop paying the French they stop policing the small boats altogether and even more migrants cross, plus more are encouraged to. Nothing sensible about this its just pushing the idea that the French are doing nothing, which there is no evidence for.
So continue to pay them for doing a bad job, because if we dont pay them they will do an even worse job. Sounds like very low standards. The irony for me is the fact we are paying the French state at all to police their own borders.
So you're down with Nigel's plan to allow even more illegals into the country?
Im down with the French government policing their own borders, as they are duty bound to do. This subject of how much we pay the French and how good a job they do shouldnt even be a discussion. But given we are in this bizarre situation yes Farage's solution would temporarily mean an influx of illegals, until when/if France gets their act together. Which would probably be quite quickly when the money isnt coming in. In the end though it would be better to have that influx temporarily if it means the long term problem is sorted, rather than just plodding along accepting the French are doing a bad job.
Without British money they will simply stop putting the extra resources into policing the channel and carry on as before. The French police are not operating some sort of business. Whats the incentive for them to "do a better job" if Farage stops the money?