Great, well the good news is we have less asylum seekers than any other large country in Europe and and are miles under comparable countries by head of population.

Again unfortunately you seem to believe the Mail/Express/Sun/Tory lies that we are "overrun". Take a step back and try and dismiss these unreliable sources with their transparent agendas. Instead you'd be better off questioning why they want to sell you that false narrative.

We have obligations under decades-old international treaties about how to treat people coming to this country. This government are pushing us close to the edge of what is legal and humane in their attempts to rile you up. Don't fall for it.

As far as genuine asylum seekers fearing death and torture in their own country then yes, we should take our fair share. But it seems to me that the parameters for being an asylum seeker are being stretched to the limit.
It now seems that anyone who is pee'd off with living in a hole and wants to come here and is seeking "asylum".
IMHO anyone who arrives in a dinghy should be classed as an illegal immigrant who is funding a criminal gang and should be treated as such.

Because just saying we are full is also not an answer. They want to stop the boats but to do that you need a system to allow people to apply legally but unfortunately they don’t exist except from Hong Kong and Ukraine. The Home Secretary cannot even provide an answer to this conundrum of their own making.

I wonder where no earth you are getting these ideas from. Have you spoken to any asylum seekers? It's a pretty desperate thing to do and it's a pretty desperate existence once here.

For people claiming asylum there is literally no such thing as an "illegal", it's by definition impossible to use the term.

Your proposal meanwhile would break international agreements this country has been signed up to for decades, all to play up a political agenda that helps the Tory party by making people angry about something they are utterly ignorant about or, as we have seen, badly misinformed about.

To Distract anyone from looking at the Hundreds of Real Problems they've created and the Trough of money they have syphoned off to the Rich through various Guises which are the real issues

Just wanted to ass the above to the end of your sentence

Yeah, because anyone who is a bit pee'd off with where they live usually finds that paying their life savings to a criminal for a dinghy ride across one of the world's busiest shipping lanes, only to be holed up in a complex processing centre, is usually the best bet.

A bit like many of the less affluent areas of the major cities in this country especially in London/Manchester/Liverpool/Glasgow but we don't see a significant outflow of these people to other countries. We have a non-existent policing presence in these areas and deaths are weekly sometimes daily? Calling an Albanian man an Albanian man is not a racial slur its a statement of fact.

If you just compared UK policing, judicial rights and gang deaths to Albanian equivalents then I don't think you're really paying attention to facts.

I think you underestimate the state of the social infrastructure in certain areas of the UK - these areas are jungles that do not conform to your idea of cosy UK. These areas are as violent as anywhere in the world - life is worthless.

The other points you failed to address - if its all about getting out of where they are into a safe country - surely the first safe place should be appropriate not risking travelling thousands of miles to get to another safe country?

Why are these people running - how do you effect change if you have simply done a runner?

Have you been watching Fox News



Ah the classic Daily Mail trope. People aren't legally required to claim asylum in the first country they arrive in, that's fundamental to the entire international asylum system. Although countries like Italy already take in many tens of thousands more than the few who make it to our shores.

There are lots of reasons people may want to continue on to the UK or other countries and family ties are the dominant reason.
I thought we'd established that, for many it is because they are afraid of being killed.

We could of course previously return an asylum seeker to France for example, but oh wait that was before we decided to take back control and leave thereby ending this agreement.

Do you have the figures for how many we were able to return to France before Brexit. I would suspect the numbers were miniscule but am happy to be proved wrong.