Kilkis wrote:There are so many anchored up in the English Channel that someone was suggesting that Border Force ought to use one or more to process the illegal migrants crossing the channel.
I am not sure what you don't understand, Mouche. It is not complicated. They are migrants
because they are moving from one country to another. They are attempting to move from France to the UK by an illegal
means, i.e. avoiding immigration control. That makes them illegal migrants
. It says nothing about their status as asylum seekers. In fact at the point of interception nobody knows if they intend to seek asylum or not. Even if they are seeking asylum from a country that they are fleeing they are supposed to seek asylum in the first country of safety that they reach. I would be surprised if they sailed a small rubber dinghy from Syria through the Mediterranean, across the Bay of Biscay and up the English channel to near Dover.
Personally, speaking as a migrant, I am in favour of migration. I think the present government's position on migration is idiotic. There are many people in detention centres who are young, extremely bright, well educated and could be making a valuable contribution to the UK economy. The government prefers to keep them in detention as a burden on the state because they are frightened what the racist press will say if they release them. It won't be that long before European governments face a stark choice: either allow more immigration or make it a criminal offence for any woman of child bearing age to have less than three children. If they cannot increase GDP they face economic collapse under the weight of debt. GDP = working population x productivity. It is highly unlikely that the developed countries, like the UK, will increase productivity significantly so increasing the working population is the only solution. Unfortunately the birth rate amongst the endemic population is falling to such an extent that it will not even sustain the same level of population.