SIGN UP

Why Is Javid Under Fire?

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 19:14 Wed 02nd Jan 2019 | News
19 Answers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46738126
first sensible thing a politician has ever said on this subject.

Answers

1 to 19 of 19rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
If they were genuine refugees they would only need to go to the nearest safe country.
I don't know why this backlash against him on this, his comments are what most people think.

He isn't advocating blowing them out of the water is he?
Maybe his comments threaten the income of otherwise unemployable advocates of a come one, come all immigration policy.
Oh for a tough leader to kick them all back across the channel.
Question Author
It's TROB pebble dashing their screens with African peace porridge at the thought of poor "refugees" not getting in so easily. They are economic migrants who have paid thousands to get here from, a safe country, end of. Congrats to Javid for having the orchestras to say what we are all thinking. Well done.
> Why Is Javid Under Fire?

I have no idea.

> He suggested those seeking asylum in the UK should have done so in France or elsewhere on the continent.

That seems sensible to me.

> While the UK would consider asylum applications from those seeking sanctuary in the UK, he suggested a tough line would be taken on economic migrants, so as to send a message to the people smugglers and criminal gangs which were exploiting them.

That's not going to work though, is it? They need a different sort of message.

People try to make the journey here because they are lied to by the people smugglers. The people smugglers tell lies to create a business opportunity for themselves. That's not going to stop until they are tracked down and put out of business. So if I have any issue with what Javid is saying it's that he is attacking the problem from the wrong end.
//While the UK would process asylum applications in the normal way,//

which means whoever they are, they are given a train ticket to East Croydon and instructions to report to Lunar House. so indeed why the flak? the phrase "normal way" practically says all incomers are treated the same.
Ironically when the UK leaves the EU it will actually be harder to send refugees back as we will no longer be party to the Dublin arrangement. So even if the govt wanted to exercise this facility, which it rarely does now, it couldn’t
Stuck with them then!
"Ironically when the UK leaves the EU it will actually be harder to send refugees back as we will no longer be party to the Dublin arrangement."

Quite so. A couple of flaws, though:

1. Unsuccessful migrants who are repatriated are rarely, if ever, sent to the first safe country they arrived in (which is almost never the UK and rarely France) to apply for asylum there. This is what the Dublin Agreement suggests should happen. More than that they are not returned to France, the last safe country they are known to have resided in. So quite frankly the Dublin Agreement is not worth the paper it is written on and will not be missed by the UK as it rarely takes advantage of its provisions.

2. The Dublin Agreement does not trump or replace the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Article 31 of which says that refugees can be considered unlawfully at large if they fail to declare themselves to the authorities in the first safe country they arrive in. The UN Convention will still apply to the UK and the EU after Brexit.
"Sajid Javid has faced criticism after questioning whether people risking their lives crossing the English Channel are "genuine" refugees."

That doesn't help, querying the obvious. Even if he goes on to state they aren't it still sows seeds of doubt.

Yes NJ but the Dublin arrangement provides a clear procedural path which is a lot more practical
Dropping 'em off on the beach probably works as well.
Because clearly, he is an Uncle Tom.
This is why it must be stamped out...it is an industry that will only get bigger if it isn't.

https://news.sky.com/story/briton-and-iranian-arrested-in-manchester-over-migrant-channel-crossings-11597398

Long jail terms for both (yes if guilty) and then the Iranian sent home.
He's a self-serving opportunist, never missing a chance to promote his hopes to get into number 10. He didn't 'cut short his vacation', anymore than any other cabinet minister, he like all the rest, was called back by the PM.

The 'pertinent' question he asks, we have all been saying since Merkel allowed this immigration onslaught, its called the Dublin agreement.

He swore himself into his post in the British House of Parliament on the Koran though downplays his religion. These guys washed up in Dover are from Iran, so they will be Shia and will have little sympathy from a Sunni, so he tries to virtue-signal while carrying out his own agenda.
yeah when Javid went up to no 10 to report
the policeman at the door looked at his tanned nature and asked
"what are you doing here?"
distracted he was
and Javid said: I have just arrived by dinghy

ter-daaah ! [joke]
and he swore his office oath on the Koran?
shows he is an obvious terrorist

I am surprised he hasnt been machine gunned by well either side ....
//...and he swore his office oath on the Koran//

Is this the same thing as the oath of allegiance required of all MPs? I do see this on the protocol involved:

"A Table Clerk at the despatch box offers a choice of affirmation or oath cards to read. There is no set list of sacred texts which MPs may use when swearing in. All Members are asked before arriving at the House of Commons which text they would prefer to use and then every effort is made to ensure that it is provided.

Those books which may not be handled by non-believers are kept in slip-cases on the Table."

I did see Javid pick up his "sacred text" rather than having it handed to him by a kufar.

Personally I have high hopes for Javid: unlike Sadiq Khan he's not obviously a stealth jihadist, is he? But, even if he were, he couldn't advance the cause of Sharia-compliance in the ministry he's inherited from May and Rudd without formalising the de facto rules which deny visa entries to the UK by any critic of Islam, and restrict asylum applications only to Muslims.

1 to 19 of 19rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Why Is Javid Under Fire?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.