Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ
You're putting words in my mouth and I won't waste any more of my time if you keep doing that.
To prevent you doing so I'll summarise: if someone wants to come here, they will follow correct immigration laws and procedures for doing so.
If they are desperate to come here as they have no other option for survival or safety then yes we (as per other EU members) should accept them, providing there is no clear evidence that they're a danger to the UK.
This is why I have sympathy yet little or no support for those in Calais. So far nobody has been able to demonstrate to me why anyone's life or safety is more at risk there than in the UK. As for our geographic location, that's irrelevant. I support the notion of each EU country agreeing to a number of refugees based on a number of factors such as wealth, resources, space etc.
When a refugee arrives in a safe country the authorities then decide where they go. I have no problem with the people requesting certain countries (due to family or qualifications which would benefit that country etc) and this could be taken in to account but given how they must be desperate for safety their choice should not be the final say - it's up to the EU to allocate.
|
We'll have to agree to disagree on me putting words in your mouth, from my perspective I asked two reasonable questions. Theres also no need to patronise
I'll ask you another question, in your opinion are the people in the camps in Calais all there purely for economic reasons?
Our geographic location is important as i think you (apologies if not the case) and a lot of others have implied that why are they trying to get the UK when there are a myriad of safe countries between the UK and the multitude of transit routes.
Lets face it, the numbers in Calais are insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
Are you seriously expecting the countries that are currently processing these refugees to be able to maintain and keep up??