Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Now you are shifting the grounds of the argument. First you said that the US does better at keeping people out of the country and at deporting them if they do get in illegally. With that being demonstrated as incorrect, you now shift to "well there are better systems to keep them from using public services". However, by law public schools are required to take all children, undocumented or not and hospitals are required to treat all patients that come in requiring care (paying for it is another matter).


The NHS' problem is that it isn't properly funded.

Simply stating that the problem lies with not preventing undocumented immigrants from using it does not make it so.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Now we get on to the playing on words.

Illegal and unlawful have slightly different meanings, although they are often used interchangeably. Something that is illegal is against the law, whereas an unlawful act merely contravenes the rules that apply in a particular context. Thus handball in soccer is unlawful, but it is not illegal. A third word with a similar meaning is illicit: this tends to encompass things that are forbidden or disapproved of by custom or society, as in an illicit love affair

Taken from the Oxford dictionary
illegal
ADJECTIVE

Contrary to or forbidden by law, especially criminal law:
‘illegal drugs’
NOUN

North American
derogatory
A person living in a country without official authorization.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/illegal

immigrant
NOUN

A person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country:

Many years ago somebody decided to put those 2 words together and it is now used rightly or wrongly to describe a person who is in a country and entered illegally or entered legally but has remained without authorization.

I have no idea what terminology the UK uses when a report is written on someone who makes a refugee claim or seeks asylum.
In the case of Canada the report is written as follows;

Is not a Canadian citizen, a permanent resident of Canada or a registered Indian under the Indian Act of Canada.
Entered Canada on or about the X date with the intention of permanently residing in Canada. Did not apply or obtain the document required to permanently reside in Canada prior to entering Canada.

This is contrary to the following sections and regulations of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act

41 A person is inadmissible for failing to comply with this Act

(a) in the case of a foreign national, through an act or omission which contravenes, directly or indirectly, a provision of this Act;

20 (1) Every foreign national, other than a foreign national referred to in section 19, who seeks to enter or remain in Canada must establish,

(a) to become a permanent resident, that they hold the visa or other document required under the regulations and have come to Canada in order to establish permanent residence

6 A foreign national may not enter Canada to remain on a permanent basis without first obtaining a permanent resident visa.

Nowhere in that report does it mention anything about being an illegal immigrant or making a claim for asylum or refugee protection.

Make of this what you will.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

To be fair, I'm not sure that has actually happened.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Not always. Only if their identity cannot be established or they pose a risk to Canada.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

That doesn't always happen in the UK either, especially when cases involve minors or people pretending to be minors.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

So far I have dealt with over 300 refugees since April and all were adult and none were detained.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

But that's a very Tesco way of looking at it, which is why Tesco bullied their suppliers to the point of putting them out of business. The UK exports 44% to the EU but it also imports 53% from the EU so the EU would be a net 9% worse off if the UK were to trade entirely elsewhere. But even this is a specious argument because the UK does not trade equally with the whole of the EU and some EU members are just not going to accept an EU position on this matter if they end up suffering pain for no gain.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Perhaps, but all the EU needs to do is say "no", and suffer a little pain. Britain, on the other hand, is burdened with the need to play top-shelf, superman poker (without facecards) to avoid some very serious pain. And pain isn't something the electorate is prepared to tolerate.

Oh, and lest we not forget that the UK is highly dependent on European imports.. Food, building materials, machines,... Cars... Trucks... The UK is highly unlikely to block or impose massive tariffs on EU imports. It would be cutting its largest supply chain. I don't think the EU will be losing much sleep.

I'd be the first to say labour is unelectable. But voters vote in protest. Even when it makes things worse.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

How many asylum seekers? Because I specifically mentioned asylum seekers, and I don't think many asylum seekers actually go to North American countries from the Middle East.

I would have thought refugees would be issued with some kind of paperwork proving they're allowed entry to Canada, otherwise how do they get issued boarding passes?

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Of the 300 plus I have dealt with here are their nationalities
Somalia, Eritrea, Ghana, Djibouti, and Pakistan.
Apart from the Djiboutians the vast majority flew to Brazil or other South American country on false passports. They then make their way up to the USA.
They are smuggled across the US border from Mexico. Those who are caught are then detained by the US and placed in ICE detention centres. They all make refugee claims. The US deny their claim or tell them them it will be a couple of years before their claim is heard. If paroled they cannot work in most cases. The US order them to leave the US but then RELEASE them.
So they all now make their way to Canada and cross over illegally and then make another refugee claim in Canada.

The people from Djibouti have passports. They apply for a US visa. They fly into the US legally. They then make their way to the Canadian border and cross illegally and make a refugee claim.
No refugee claim was made to the US authorities.
This has occurred over 1300 times at just 2 land border crossings.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

I've actually met people in Canada who did exactly that, albeit 15 or so years ago. By the time I met them, they were already naturalised Canadians.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Is that one because America considers Djibouti to be a safe country but Canada doesn't? Or just because they think their chances of acceptance will be higher in the Great White North?

IIRC, Djibouti is one of the countries that the State Department advise against all travel to though.

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Now there will be some reading this thread and perhaps claiming
Hes full of shit he's telling lies this isn't happening.

Well read these articles then
Number of asylum-seekers crossing illegally into Quebec from U.S. spikes - Montreal - CBC News

http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/dramatic-...rder-1.3166709

Frostbitten refugee will lose fingers, toe after 7-hour trek to cross U.S.-Canada border - Manitoba - CBC News

Asylum seeker found in Manitoba could lose hands to frostbite | CTV News

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

You might like to read this which confirms what I posted and has a whole lot more information https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/ like Germany exports £27 billion more to the UK than the UK does to Germany

or you could google this stuff yourself like I do when EMR posts his nonsense :rofl: