English channel migrant crossing crisis #6

[monga]

Three 'likes' and one 'heart' for a post that seems to meet the @NeverEnough standard for 'far right' and (IMO of course) racism

Mine was for the comments around the care sector…I’m sure not everyone hates white people and vice versa.
---
Btw EURODAC is not a criminal database so how can DBS checks be made against it ( if that’s the fingerprint check you meant) How can companies check background information if the authorities can’t confirm who people are?

 

[Merpedy]

Wasn't care work added into the shortage occupation list around COVID time? What's with these random stories?

Seems to be a somewhat frequent occurrence at the moment where you suddenly get a bunch of stories about old policies or some random incident that doesn't seem to have much factual backing behind it (that one story about the religious tension on the Bibby comes to mind)
---
Oh look, and here is an article about it:

Asylum seekers’ right to work: Telegraph clickbait?

Why would the Telegraph publish an ‘outrage’ piece about asylum seekers being allowed to seek work when this has been the case since 2022?

yorkshirebylines.co.uk

According to the Telegraph, 19,231 asylum seekers sought permission to work in 2022 and 15,706 were granted permission. It implies that those given permission are likely to be working and does not tell us how many are. It is likely to be very few, possibly no more than a handful. Only the senior care vacancies will offer work at more than £24,000 per annum, and the other requirements are prohibitive. Being constantly moved by the Home Office makes it very difficult to gain and keep employment. The requirements on employers and all the ‘right to work’ checks are also onerous and dissuade many from taking on single foreign applicants (most foreign recruitment is undertaken by specialist agencies).

 

[monga]

You can apply for a sponsorship visa if you want to work in care, you don’t need to come by illegal means.
---

Wasn't care work added into the shortage occupation list around COVID time? What's with these random stories?

Seems to be a somewhat frequent occurrence at the moment where you suddenly get a bunch of stories about old policies or some random incident that doesn't seem to have much factual backing behind it (that one story about the religious tension on the Bibby comes to mind)
---
Oh look, and here is an article about it:

Asylum seekers’ right to work: Telegraph clickbait?

Why would the Telegraph publish an ‘outrage’ piece about asylum seekers being allowed to seek work when this has been the case since 2022?

yorkshirebylines.co.uk

Modern slavery in social care surging since visa rules eased | Social care | The Guardian

Exclusive: exploitation in sector has soared with more than 10 times as many potential victims as in 2021

amp.theguardian.com

I’d doubt those unscrupulous employers will care about backround checks leaving our most vulnerable in a very dangerous position.

 

[Moth]

I'm not in the UK but naively wondered why boats that turn up on UK shores are not immediately sent back to their country of origin?
Is there some EU legislation or something that prohibits this, or is there not enough policing to enforce sending boats back.......don't come at me for asking, it looks different from another country and I feel for the people of the UK for having to endure the fallout.

@Kiwigirl - despite what you were told upthread, this has nothing to do with the EU (its forerunner, the EEC didn't come into existence until 1957!).

The core principles of how refugees / asylum seekers should be treated were determined by the UNHCR (that's the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) Convention that was created in 1951 and the UNHCR Protocol of 1967 which reaffirmed and and widened the scope of the Convention). The UK is a signatory to both and has incorporated it into its own laws. Incidentally New Zealand (which I assume is your home country) is also a signatory to both the UNHCR Convention and Protocol.

There is also a wide range of international law that prevents any country from simply pushing boats back into the sea. The people that arrive on the boats could be returned to the country from which they embarked or their home country but that would require the UK have an agreement with those countries and on the whole they don't exist.

 

[monga]

@Kiwigirl - despite what you were told upthread, this has nothing to do with the EU (its forerunner, the EEC didn't come into existence until 1957!).

The core principles of how refugees / asylum seekers should be treated were determined by the UNHCR (that's the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) Convention that was created in 1951 and the UNHCR Protocol of 1967 which reaffirmed and and widened the scope of the Convention). The UK is a signatory to both and has incorporated it into its own laws. Incidentally New Zealand (which I assume is your home country) is also a signatory to both the UNHCR Convention and Protocol.

There is also a wide range of international law that prevents any country from simply pushing boats back into the sea. The people that arrive on the boats could be returned to the country from which they embarked or their home country but that would require the UK have an agreement with those countries and on the whole they don't exist.

She asked specifically about EU countries !

 

[Moth]

Wasn't care work added into the shortage occupation list around COVID time? What's with these random stories?

Seems to be a somewhat frequent occurrence at the moment where you suddenly get a bunch of stories about old policies or some random incident that doesn't seem to have much factual backing behind it (that one story about the religious tension on the Bibby comes to mind)
---
Oh look, and here is an article about it:

Asylum seekers’ right to work: Telegraph clickbait?

Why would the Telegraph publish an ‘outrage’ piece about asylum seekers being allowed to seek work when this has been the case since 2022?

yorkshirebylines.co.uk

Care work was added to the 'Shortage Occupation List' in February 2022 for a 'temporary' 12 month period - it's still on there. One can almost feel sorry for this government constantly being faced with the consequences of their own ill-judged and short-sighted policies. Calling for a 'points based' immigration system, finally introducing it following Brexit, creating a 'shortage occupation list' and then being told that too many people are using it.

There is definitely something going on at The Telegraph. I think part of it is a plan to get rid of Sunak in favour of fighting the election with a more right-wing successor. In this case it may also be a pre-emptive strike because I believe a Private Members Bill proposing that the period before asylum seekers are allowed to work is reduced from 12 to 6 months is due a second reading in March.

 

[monga]

Shambolic as ever on deportation are we still paying him benefits??

 

[Piff paff puff]

Shambolic as ever on deportation are we still paying him benefits??

Disgusting peeedo. Shame on the UK coveting these sex crime gangs. Maggie Oliver, the whistleblower has been very busy giving interviews about it all. Many cities, many sex gangs, children abused. Get the cunts gone.

 

[monga]

Disgusting peeedo. Shame on the UK coveting these sex crime gangs. Maggie Oliver, the whistleblower has been very busy giving interviews about it all. Many cities, many sex gangs, children abused. Get the cunts gone.

How were they allowed in to begin with?

 

[Moth]

She asked specifically about EU countries !

She asked specifically about the UK which of course isn't in the EU.

I'm not in the UK but naively wondered why boats that turn up on UK shores are not immediately sent back to their country of origin?
Is there some EU legislation or something that prohibits this, or is there not enough policing to enforce sending boats back.......don't come at me for asking, it looks different from another country and I feel for the people of the UK for having to endure the fallout.

But in any case tell us more about the EU legislation that countries signed up to after WWII. You obviously attached the link to the United Nations Convention (that of course has nothing to do with the EU) by mistake.

Yes there’s EU legislation that countries signed up to after WWII

https://www.unhcr.org/uk/about-unhcr/who-we-are/1951-refugee-convention

 

[monga]

She asked specifically about the UK which of course isn't in the EU.



But in any case tell us more about the EU legislation that countries signed up to after WWII. You obviously attached the link to the United Nations Convention (that of course has nothing to do with the EU) by mistake.

Where is the UK situated then ? I thought it was in Europe…no ? …She asked why European countries were forced to take these people when other countries do not…She said she felt sorry for UK citizens…I posted this as background if she wants to check them out, I’m sure she’s well able to use Google as much as you or I.

 

[Merpedy]

Interesting:

The human cost of blocking injunctions on Rwanda | Letters

Letters: Dr Alice Donald and Prof Philip Leach on cases where ‘pyjama injunctions’ have ensured British prisoners of war were not executed. Plus letters from Michael Meadowcroft, Jol Miskin and John Weightman

www.theguardian.com

In the same month (June 2022) that the court issued an injunction against the UK, preventing a person from being removed to Rwanda until UK courts had finally decided their case, two others were issued against Russia – to ensure that British prisoners of war who had fought with the Ukrainian army were not executed in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine. The men were later released.

Interim measures against the UK are rare: on average about two per year.

 

[Moth]

Where is the UK situated then ? I thought it was in Europe…no ? …She asked why European countries were forced to take these people when other countries do not…She said she felt sorry for UK citizens…I posted this as background if she wants to check them out, I’m sure she’s well able to use Google as much as you or I.

You're wrong. You know you are but as usual can never simply admit it or even keep a dignified silence but just have to try to gaslight even though we can all read for ourselves what was posted.

She did not ask "why European countries were forced to take these people". She did not mentioned "European countries". She specifically asked about the UK, "Why are boats that turn up on UK shores not immediately sent back their country of origin". UK shores. She asked if there is EU legislation that prevents the UK doing this. Here's her post again. Would you like to point out where she mentions European Countries rather than specifically the UK?

I'm not in the UK but naively wondered why boats that turn up on UK shores are not immediately sent back to their country of origin?
Is there some EU legislation or something that prohibits this, or is there not enough policing to enforce sending boats back.......don't come at me for asking, it looks different from another country and I feel for the people of the UK for having to endure the fallout.

You told her that it is due to EU legislation that countries "signed up to after WWII". Care to tell us what that legislation was and how it still binds the UK which is no longer part of the EU?

You posted the UNHCR link for 'background"

If @Kiwigirl wanted to Google for the answers she would not have asked the question would she?

 

[monga]

You're wrong. You know you are but as usual can never simply admit it or even keep a dignified silence but just have to try to gaslight even though we can all read for ourselves what was posted.

She did not ask "why European countries were forced to take these people". She did not mentioned "European countries". She specifically asked about the UK, "Why are boats that turn up on UK shores not immediately sent back their country of origin". UK shores. She asked if there is EU legislation that prevents the UK doing this. Here's her post again. Would you like to point out where she mentions European Countries rather than specifically the UK?



You told her that it is due to EU legislation that countries "signed up to after WWII". Care to tell us what that legislation was and how it still binds the UK which is no longer part of the EU?

You posted the UNHCR link for 'background"

If @Kiwigirl wanted to Google for the answers she would not have asked the question would she?

It’s you making an ass of yourself as usual…She asked if EU countries were bound by legislation! It’s you that mentioned UK !…Why on earth would she ask on a gossip site if it’s factual information?? We’re no experts!…No mention of UK in my reply !

 

[Merpedy]

Yes there’s EU legislation that countries signed up to after WWII

https://www.unhcr.org/uk/about-unhcr/who-we-are/1951-refugee-convention

TIL: UNHCR is EU legislation

 

[Onetwofour]

I mean it's like people who are convinced that the European court for human rights is a EU institution. Seen this on this thread as well.

 

[monga]

TIL: UNHCR is EU legislation

Legislation is only a law, you’re the very one shouts about them breaking it …Why all the court cases if there’s no law being broken?

 

[Merpedy]

Legislation is only a law, you’re the very one shouts about them breaking it …Why all the court cases if there’s no law being broken?

TIL: the Human Rights Convention is the Refugee Convention

 

[monga]

TIL: the Human Rights Convention is the Refugee Convention

It was the refugee convention I linked.

 

[Merpedy]

It was the refugee convention I linked.

Yeah but because the Refugee Convention is EU legislation then surely it means that the European Court on Human Rights decides its decisions based on the Refugee Convention??

Or am I getting a bit confused here?