Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

No, I didn’t mean that, as I’m sure you well know. Instead of giving them life jackets, they should be preventing them from leaving. That’s what we pay the French to do.

Have you grasped that now?

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Well I read it as he did, you worded it very badly. ;)

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

As I well knew, how was anyone supposed to extrapolate that from what you posted? If you don't want to be mistaken for one of those thick right wing nut jobs whose favourite saying is push 'em back out to sea then don't post like one, have you grasped that.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

My last sentence made clear what I meant. We are paying the French to stop the crossings. Clearly, they are not doing that, are they?

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

No it never as Paul thought the same thing, anyone would've.

Yeah if only we hadn't surrendered our ability to send them back we wouldn't have to pay France anything

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Lifejackets, escort boats, etc.)

---------- Post added at 18:36 ---------- Previous post was at 18:26 ----------

We should be turning the small boats back. This may well cause on international incident, but so long as we are resolute, and we've stuck it to the French cheats (Macron in particular), the migrants will stop coming.

Fat chance of something as sensible as that happening.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Why the hell do people think we can simply “send the boats back”? The French (or any other country) have no requirement to accept them and could theoretically send them straight back to us.

As previously mentioned, the result of a certain referendum from circa 2016 (which I won’t name in case it triggers anyone) took away our legal right to return these people.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Being pedantic there is a difference between "send the boats back" and "turning them around".

The first suggest they have arrived, they second suggests they have not yet done so. Therefore they could be "turned around" in the Channel.

I could be wrong but thought I'd throw it in there.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

It would be a start. Really going to start something with this thought. Don't offer them any support what so ever. Hope that is clear :erm: any charity that stepped in, has there status removed. Any council offering help loses any government monies .

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Either way, the same principle applies.

No EU country would be obliged to accept them.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Ah - there you (nearly) have it. The international incident that would arise if we continually turned the boats round is what's needed to bring this to a head and get it resolved.

It's a matter of national security and we can't be having these fit young men of terrorist age or indented to a gangmaster, invading the UK.

Starmer told us how he'd try to resolve it but now knows his plan is doomed for obvious reasons.


---------- Post added at 21:04 ---------- Previous post was at 21:02 ----------

We know that. But they wouldn't be landing in the UK if we turned them round. Someone would land them. We just have to be hard-nosed and resolute.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

And risk our standing on the international stage by breaking several international laws by refusing them entry (clue: it’s not just about the ECHR)?

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Yes it’s about Starmer, and why he can’t just “turn them around”.

It’s not about having “the guts”, Starmer doesn’t have “the power” - again, removed from us after the result of 2016.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

So the nationalities of criminals will now be released under Labour.

According to Reinhard Jenner reckons the “British people deserves to know the truth about migrant crime”.

Well true but couldn’t his party have released those figures oh, in 14 years? Why didn’t they publish migrant crime?