Small boat crossings

[c_cubed51]

1 minute ago, ian_nylon21 said:

Do you really think those countries would take them back, they're glad to be rid of them. 

So ignorant.

Were the UK a member of the EU, those countries would be compelled to take them back. At the moment they can afford to be glad to be rid of them, as they are no longer required to take them back. This is the nub of the issue. This is but one reason Brexit was a mistake, for which the UK is paying a hefty price.

[ian_nylon21]

1 minute ago, c_cubed51 said:

Sigh .. you and ruby are so alike ... what you said was 

You post total nonsense, as Blair was not in power when the UK joined the EEC (EU). Then, when confronted, you change tack.

When we joined the EEC it was all about trade not a European government, it began work in 1958 after the treaty of Rome was confirmed, we joined in 1973 for trade & customs not so that we could be governed by Brussels

[Alteredbhoy]

35 minutes ago, ian_nylon21 said:

Are you seriously comparing the French police to our armed forces, what fucking planet do you live on?

Come on, chop chop. Are you seriously comparing the two??????

In terms of deterrence, I think several hundred armed Gendarmes in their face on a beach will deter migrants much more than a naval ship twelve or more miles away.

And the fact that you had to resort to obscenities to emphasise your point does rather undermine your argument.

[rowlf]

22 minutes ago, c_cubed51 said:

You are quite wrong, rowlf. I am a happy person, blessed to have found a peaceful home with a good woman in a civilized country with a values system which resonates with mine. Oh, and which has strict gun control regulations. That means that I don't live in fear, as your gun on that nightstand constantly reminds us that you do. 

You seem to have a reborn affection for your country after leaving NZ. Could you 'splain why your country du jour is much more 'civilized' than the former? Is it due to the unfettered mass illegal immigration that drew you back home?

Guns, guns, and more guns! It's not my fault your country doesn't think you can handle responsibility. That you don't want a gun is a moot point, id'nt? As you're unfortunately finding out, removing your weapons was just another step toward authoritarianism. This happened in Venezuela. But maybe it's just a coincidence? Hate speech is one of the more subtle, yet most insidious forms of control. Or the loss of your waning national sovereignty. Of course we disagree about this.

You just want to hold on to yesterday. The stars and the moon and the Sun evolve, revolve in real time. As should mankind.

You seem to be so sensitive about climate change. You want to save the planet. I do, as well. But not for the Chicoms. And I love this world as much or more than you do. However, many of the ways you confront these things are ignorant and hurtful in many ways. And you listen to a different higher power than I do.

Speaking of mankind and the quality of life, we know for a fact that Socialism and Communism and Authoritarianism will/should never succeed. We were put on this Earth to live life in the fullest. I speak of our personal freedoms. Let my people go!

The soul of mankind.

I Don't really know that using combustible weapons is a God-like thing. It wasn't invented then. But they did have their slingshots.

So, I'm going to take that, and run with it!

[Alteredbhoy]

38 minutes ago, ruby said:

No, looking at all the difficulties the EU has at the moment we are well out of it. The EU struggles with illegals just like us. Ireland are in the EU and the issues they have with illegals are worse than ours.

Hahaha ruby.

If you are going to lie, at least makes your lie sound realistic.

In 2025, Ireland identified about five thousand illegal migrants over the whole year. That is fewer than were entering the UK via small boat crossings in a single month. And that's before you consider the number entering by other means or overstaying on their visas.

Another ridiculous and obvious ruby lie.

[Paulnylon121]

Well this is a topic that we're never all going to agree on isn't it? From what I can see those on the left of the political spectrum seem to be in favour or more tolerant of mass immigration and those on the right aren't. Personally, I believe we need immigration so long as it's controlled and the people we admit are properly vetted and have skills this country is lacking, although we never seemed to lack skilled people in the past so why should we now? Probably lack of investment from numerous governments but I'm no expert. 

I think the main thing is nobody has the right to illegally enter any country and from what I can gather those who have no documentation are doing just that, nothing is going to stop it until we have a government in place who are willing to deter these people, but what measures do they take? The Tories let in unknown numbers, Starmer was going to smash the gangs when he couldn't smash an egg so god knows what Burnham will do. 

@Alteredbhoy I don't agree with profanities on this site in anyway but I think @ian_nylon21 does have a point, you cannot compare the french bobbies (armed or not) with our armed forces, they are completely different animals and I know who I'd want on my side!

 

[Alteredbhoy]

7 minutes ago, Newnyloncd said:

Well this is a topic that we're never all going to agree on isn't it? From what I can see those on the left of the political spectrum seem to be in favour or more tolerant of mass immigration and those on the right aren't. Personally, I believe we need immigration so long as it's controlled and the people we admit are properly vetted and have skills this country is lacking, although we never seemed to lack skilled people in the past so why should we now? Probably lack of investment from numerous governments but I'm no expert. 

I think the main thing is nobody has the right to illegally enter any country and from what I can gather those who have no documentation are doing just that, nothing is going to stop it until we have a government in place who are willing to deter these people, but what measures do they take? The Tories let in unknown numbers, Starmer was going to smash the gangs when he couldn't smash an egg so god knows what Burnham will do. 

@Alteredbhoy I don't agree with profanities on this site in anyway but I think @ian_nylon21 does have a point, you cannot compare the french bobbies (armed or not) with our armed forces, they are completely different animals and I know who I'd want on my side!

 

I don't think that anyone on this Forum is in favour or tolerant of illegal migration. The fact that you say those on the left are in favour of it, suggests that you are of the right and are simply making false accusations.

Perhaps you would show a single post when anyone you consider to be of the left has indicated that they in favour or tolerant of illegal migration? No, I thought not.

As to comparing the Royal Navy with French Gendarmes, I wasn't. I was comparing the deterrent  effect to migrants of French Gendarmes in their presence with that of a naval ship several miles distant.

In terms of deterrence, my grandmother threatening me with a wooden spoon was of far greater deterrence to me than military forces out of sight. But I wouldn't state that my grandmother was militarily superior to any armed forces.  It isn't difficult to understand.

[Paulnylon121]

4 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

I don't think that anyone on this Forum is in favour or tolerant of illegal migration. The fact that you say those on the left are in favour of it, suggests that you are of the right and are simply making false accusations.

Perhaps you would show a single post when anyone you consider to be of the left has indicated that they in favour or tolerant of illegal migration? No, I thought not.

As to comparing the Royal Navy with French Gendarmes, I wasn't. I was comparing the deterrent  effect to migrants of French Gendarmes in their presence with that of a naval ship several miles distant.

In terms of deterrence, my grandmother threatening me with a wooden spoon was of far greater deterrence to me than military forces out of sight. But I wouldn't state that my grandmother was militarily superior to any armed forces.  It isn't difficult to understand.

When I mentioned the left or right I was talking about the population in general, just look at the protests that have taken place in this country over the past few years, it's easy to see what side wants what. As for me I don't follow either persuasion as I think politicians on both sides seem far more interested in serving their own ideals and couldn't really give a hoot about what the general population of the country wants. 

I think you're missing the point about the comparison with our armed forces & the French bobbies, if our amazing boys and girls were given the authority to deter they would be far more effective than the French police, we've all seen the footage of them on the beaches doing nothing. 

[c_cubed51]

12 minutes ago, Newnyloncd said:

I think you're missing the point about the comparison with our armed forces & the French bobbies, if our amazing boys and girls were given the authority to deter they would be far more effective than the French police, we've all seen the footage of them on the beaches doing nothing. 

And so we come full circle, back to a question which was posed several hours ago ...

Suppose 'our amazing boys and girls' were given the authority to deter (the illegals crossing in boats).

Please explain exactly how they would do so.

[c_cubed51]

1 hour ago, rowlf said:

You seem to have a reborn affection for your country after leaving NZ. Could you 'splain why your country du jour is much more 'civilized' than the former? Is it due to the unfettered mass illegal immigration that drew you back home?

Oh dear. Another instance of your inability to properly understand the written English word. Both the UK and NZ are civilized, when compared with the USA.

Gun control is one reason for saying this.

Another is your present government, which casually disregards your constitution and is led by a would-be dictator who is clearly unfit for the position. Your craven lawmakers consistently do nothing to correct this matter, or to address an issue which kills 40,000 Americans every single year.

A third is your country's attitude to problem solving - shoot first and ask questions later.

[Alteredbhoy]

1 hour ago, Newnyloncd said:

When I mentioned the left or right I was talking about the population in general, just look at the protests that have taken place in this country over the past few years, it's easy to see what side wants what. As for me I don't follow either persuasion as I think politicians on both sides seem far more interested in serving their own ideals and couldn't really give a hoot about what the general population of the country wants. 

I think you're missing the point about the comparison with our armed forces & the French bobbies, if our amazing boys and girls were given the authority to deter they would be far more effective than the French police, we've all seen the footage of them on the beaches doing nothing. 

I don't think you will find anyone in the general population who will say they are in favour of illegal migration either, whether on the left or right.

And as for "authority to deter", the French have already stated in response to Reform's plans that the Royal Navy has no authority to act in French territorial water. So the "easy solution" just turns into a fantasy of threatened violence.

As for the French authorities "doing nothing", the reduction of nearly 50% in crossings this year is predominantly a consequence of their actions. Your dismissal of it as "nothing" fully highlights your partisan viewpoint.

It's interesting. In your initial post you portrayed yourself as an impartial observer. But under questioning your partisanship became very apparent.

Edited August 22 by Alteredbhoy

[rowlf]

39 minutes ago, c_cubed51 said:

Oh dear. Another instance of your inability to properly understand the written English word. Both the UK and NZ are civilized, when compared with the USA.

Hmm... your former NZ PM Adern can't afford to live there. Is that why you left? And the UK........... who's your daddy?

The UK economy is in a state of sluggish growth rather than a catastrophic collapse, characterized by modest GDP expansion, persistent living-standard pressures, and a cooling labor market. While the International Monetary Fund projects positive growth around 1%, structural bottlenecks and high cumulative inflation continue to weigh heavily on public perception

Gun control is one reason for saying this.

It's not the gov's fault it can't stop black on black killing in the Dem run cities. My country includes ethnic groups in their data base.

Another is your present government, which casually disregards your constitution and is led by a would-be dictator who is clearly unfit for the position. Your craven lawmakers consistently do nothing to correct this matter, or to address an issue which kills 40,000 Americans every single year.

Our leader was duly elected. Who elected your leader? And what has he done other than go on holiday?

A third is your country's attitude to problem solving - shoot first and ask questions later.

And your country relies on the kindness of the Chicoms.

 

[c_cubed51]

16 minutes ago, rowlf said:

 

1. Jacinda Ardern presided over the Covid epidemic in NZ and it was the only country in the world whose overall death rate actually declined. This was due to the lockdowns preventing many deaths by diseases such as the flu. Your POTUS, on the other hand, presided over an epidemic which unnecessarily killed hundreds of thousands of Americans, mainly in red states. A clever leader who saved lives vs an idiot who is responsible for many deaths.

2. The UK economy is, indeed, in a state of sluggish growth, despite the stupid tariffs imposed by said idiot leader. 

3. Your obsession with black on black violence in Dem cities is not borne out by the statistics. And we wait in vain for you to express an iota of sympathy for the victims of gun and knife violence in your country. Shame on you!

4. Starmer was easily removed, when it became apparent he was not doing a great job as the PM. Your POTUS, on the other hand, is still there causing havoc at home and abroad because your leaders steadfastly refuse to use the powers offered by the Constitution to remove him. 

5. Your obsession with the chiccoms influence in Europe, whilst saying nothing about your leader cosying up to Putin, Kim Jong Un and Xi Jinping is a clear indication of your support for treasonous policies, hypocrisy and ignorance.

You are contributing nothing of any value to this thread. Go away.

[rowlf]

54 minutes ago, c_cubed51 said:

1. Jacinda Ardern presided over the Covid epidemic in NZ and it was the only country in the world whose overall death rate actually declined. This was due to the lockdowns preventing many deaths by diseases such as the flu. Your POTUS, on the other hand, presided over an epidemic which unnecessarily killed hundreds of thousands of Americans, mainly in red states. A clever leader who saved lives vs an idiot who is responsible for many deaths.

2. The UK economy is, indeed, in a state of sluggish growth, despite the stupid tariffs imposed by said idiot leader. 

3. Your obsession with black on black violence in Dem cities is not borne out by the statistics. And we wait in vain for you to express an iota of sympathy for the victims of gun and knife violence in your country. Shame on you!

4. Starmer was easily removed, when it became apparent he was not doing a great job as the PM. Your POTUS, on the other hand, is still there causing havoc at home and abroad because your leaders steadfastly refuse to use the powers offered by the Constitution to remove him. 

5. Your obsession with the chiccoms influence in Europe, whilst saying nothing about your leader cosying up to Putin, Kim Jong Un and Xi Jinping is a clear indication of your support for treasonous policies, hypocrisy and ignorance.

You are contributing nothing of any value to this thread. Go away.

There's nothing of value anyone can tribute to this thread, including you. Why did ab start it? Do ya think it is to glorify military aged men that have no problem with feeding from the innocents of a society? Of course it is! I wouldn't be surprised if he receives a stipend for performing as he does. Stranger things have happened. 

If your beloved, or someone else that you loved, had been a victim of an illegal alien, you wouldn't be saying the things you do. But I'm only supposing. No matter, many people have been victimized by people that shouldn't be in the UK. But you're unable to feel the pain. What does that make you?

You say that I can't contribute to this thread. You're wrong. I would never tell you to go away. But maybe some other entity told you this, and this is why you're back north of the equator.

[nylon10]

Shetland has a crossing every night 😉 

[Sparkler]

5 hours ago, rowlf said:

Guns, guns, and more guns! It's not my fault your country doesn't think you can handle responsibility. That you don't want a gun is a moot point, id'nt? As you're unfortunately finding out, removing your weapons was just another step toward authoritarianism. This happened in Venezuela. But maybe it's just a coincidence? Hate speech is one of the more subtle, yet most insidious forms of control. Or the loss of your waning national sovereignty. Of course we disagree about this.

More completely wrong bollox as expected.

It seems your country doesn’t give a shit about “responsibility” cos anyone can just go buy a gun and start killing people. Any comment you make about “responsibility” is stupid.

Nobody “removed” our weapons. We never had any, we never needed any, we don’t want any..  we’d rather have alive citizens than dead ones. What don’t you ever get about this? It’s very simple.

The UK is not taking any steps towards authoritarian government. Who tells you this shit?
 

That, unfortunately, is what you have in your land of the free, only you are either too thick or too blind to see. Trump loyalty rewarded, trump dissent gets you indicted. Trump supporters protest and get pardoned for assaulting cops, other protesters get shot dead. Trump interfering in elections, trump wins = fine and dandy, trump loses = rigged. 

5 hours ago, rowlf said:

You seem to be so sensitive about climate change. You want to save the planet. I do, as well. But not for the Chicoms.

You would rather burn it to the ground than anyone else have it. Typical me me me Rowlf!

Clown 

[Sparkler]

1 hour ago, rowlf said:

There's nothing of value anyone can tribute to this thread, including you. Why did ab start it? Do ya think it is to glorify military aged men that have no problem with feeding from the innocents of a society? Of course it is! I wouldn't be surprised if he receives a stipend for performing as he does. Stranger things have happened. 

Welfare obsession on full display 

 

1 hour ago, rowlf said:

If your beloved, or someone else that you loved, had been a victim of an illegal alien, you wouldn't be saying the things you do. But I'm only supposing. No matter, many people have been victimized by people that shouldn't be in the UK. But you're unable to feel the pain. What does that make you?

And what would you feel if one of your family was needlessly shot dead?

No matter? 40,000 people per year are not only victimised in the USA, their lives are shortened, permanently.

Nobody, repeat (for the hard of thinking) nobody, is in favour of illegal immigration. What about this don’t you understand?

 

 

[c_cubed51]

10 hours ago, Sparkler said:

And what would you feel if one of your family was needlessly shot dead?

Sadly, Sparkler, I fear it may take the loss of a grandchild, in a school shooting, to finally make rowlf realize that American gun culture is anathema to a civilised society. Only then might it dawn on him that the legacy he plans to leave his offspring is not the one that is in their or indeed their offsprings' best long-term interests.

This does not mean I wish harm to his family! Far from it. My fervent wish is that he may come to his senses without having to suffer the pain of senseless loss of a loved one to gun violence.

It would be nice if he were to express some sympathy for other victims of school and mass shootings. 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

To bring us back on topic, let me reiterate that I have great sympathy for the victims of crimes in the UK perpetrated by illegals. And ditto for the victims of crimes in the UK perpetrated by those legally residing here. 

[ruby]

12 hours ago, rowlf said:

There's nothing of value anyone can tribute to this thread, including you. Why did ab start it? Do ya think it is to glorify military aged men that have no problem with feeding from the innocents of a society? Of course it is! I wouldn't be surprised if he receives a stipend for performing as he does. Stranger things have happened. 

If your beloved, or someone else that you loved, had been a victim of an illegal alien, you wouldn't be saying the things you do. But I'm only supposing. No matter, many people have been victimized by people that shouldn't be in the UK. But you're unable to feel the pain. What does that make you?

You say that I can't contribute to this thread. You're wrong. I would never tell you to go away. But maybe some other entity told you this, and this is why you're back north of the equator.

AB started this thread to catch out people like you and me. I decided not to play ball initially, my sentiments on the boats is well known so no need to get into a pointless argument with a bunch of naïve leftys. It is like talking to my Socialist mate, it is OK as long as it doesn't affect him, so am immigrant can murder rape anyone, it is just an occupational risk for other people, it is a small percentage so why worry. Watch the news, how often do we hear that from so called Socialists. 

It seems to be a symptom of the left that they have to go on about Trump all the time, without looking into why he got elected. I am not a great fan of him but reading a ton of information I understand why, the alternative was much worse. It wasn't as if he just got in, by all accounts he romped home. Last week my mate off he goes off about steam catapults and how Trump is retrofitting them to US aircraft carriers. When I asked why Trump would make that decision he didn't know, it was Trump so it doesn't matter. It appears when the US Navy moved away from steam catapults they had no end of issues with the new system. It supposedly works now but only after a lot of post delivery development.

[Alteredbhoy]

5 minutes ago, ruby said:

AB started this thread to catch out people like you and me. I decided not to play ball initially, my sentiments on the boats is well known so no need to get into a pointless argument with a bunch of naïve leftys. It is like talking to my Socialist mate, it is OK as long as it doesn't affect him, so am immigrant can murder rape anyone, it is just an occupational risk for other people, it is a small percentage so why worry. Watch the news, how often do we hear that from so called Socialists. 

Well that is just dishonest claptrap. At now point has anyone from either side of the debate stated that it is okay for a migrant to rape anyone.

Your claiming that those with whom you disagree support rape is a clear lie. But your standard of debate is always just to make up ridiculous allegations against those with whom you disagree because you are unable to find genuine intelligent arguments, so resort to stupidity and abuse.

[Sparkler]

24 minutes ago, ruby said:

It seems to be a symptom of the left that they have to go on about Trump all the time, without looking into why he got elected. I am not a great fan of him but reading a ton of information I understand why, the alternative was much worse. It wasn't as if he just got in, by all accounts he romped home.

LBJ knew why trump got elected. Why don’t you do some research and find out? 🙄

He didn’t “romp home”, he got less than 50% of the vote in essentially a two horse race. The “rigged” electoral college got him home. Maybe you should research that too?

[Alteredbhoy]

52 minutes ago, c_cubed51 said:

To bring us back on topic, let me reiterate that I have great sympathy for the victims of crimes in the UK perpetrated by illegals. And ditto for the victims of crimes in the UK perpetrated by those legally residing here. 

I think this paragraph just shows how low the discussion in the UK has sunk.

People cannot in law be "illegal". And a person's immigration or lack of immigration status does not make them illegal. People without a migration status have no right to be in the UK and the absence of a migration status renders them at risk of deportation.  Not having a migration status is not a criminal offence. Someone without a migration status is able to claim asylum, or apply for a migration status that gives them rights to remain. They then have a legal migration status.

A person's actions can be criminal and illegal. That does not make the person illegal. Otherwise any of us who have ever driven a car above the speed limit could also be described as "illegal".

Describing asylum seekers or those no migration status with as illegal as not just demeaning, but it is the kind of "othering"

Even the act of coming to the UK by unauthorised means (often referred to as illegal migration, and I took have referred to it as such) is strictly irregular rather than illegal. The criminal act is in travelling to the UK by irregular means and not seeking a valid immigration (i.e. claiming asylum) at the first opportunity.

It's interesting that the proponents of far right activist Jordan Petersen argue that we should be very specific in the language we use. In this instance I can understand why.

[heelsandstockingsadmirer]

On 22/08/2026 at 11:31, Alteredbhoy said:

That does appear to have become the issue. The French authorities seem to have stopped most of the smaller boats.

I was talking about the super yachts. 

[rowlf]

3 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

I think this paragraph just shows how low the discussion in the UK has sunk.

People cannot in law be "illegal". And a person's immigration or lack of immigration status does not make them illegal. People without a migration status have no right to be in the UK and the absence of a migration status renders them at risk of deportation.  Not having a migration status is not a criminal offence. Someone without a migration status is able to claim asylum, or apply for a migration status that gives them rights to remain. They then have a legal migration status.

Gibberish...........

A person's actions can be criminal and illegal. That does not make the person illegal. Otherwise any of us who have ever driven a car above the speed limit could also be described as "illegal".

More gibberish......

Describing asylum seekers or those no migration status with as illegal as not just demeaning, but it is the kind of "othering"

"Othering"? Is this another substitute for the 'r' word? I believe it would be difficult to 'demean' military aged males that seek to plunder the spoils of a society in turmoil. The very same entity that is causing the turmoil.

Even the act of coming to the UK by unauthorised means (often referred to as illegal migration, and I took have referred to it as such) is strictly irregular rather than illegal. The criminal act is in travelling to the UK by irregular means and not seeking a valid immigration (i.e. claiming asylum) at the first opportunity.

That you want these people invading your country is 'irregular'.

It's interesting that the proponents of far right activist Jordan Petersen argue that we should be very specific in the language we use. In this instance I can understand why.

May God bless Jordan Peterson. He's going through a living hell at this time. And to call him a 'far right activist only makes you a putz.

 

 

[c_cubed51]

You think Jordan Peterson is wonderful. I have watched some of his videos and have been struck by his bigotry. Definitely has far right views. Like you.

[rowlf]

22 minutes ago, c_cubed51 said:

You think Jordan Peterson is wonderful. I have watched some of his videos and have been struck by his bigotry. Definitely has far right views. Like you.

And I always considered him a compassionate scholar.

I don't know if you are familiar with his story or have googled him recently. But he has gone through many phases in his life. The most shocking ones in the last few years. Here is a man that had been teaching for the individual to stand up, dust off his clothes, and face up to life's challenges. And then everything turned against him... literally.

And the best you can do is call him a bigot. You justify life's entanglements using 2 syllable words. There's so much to be learned in this life if one is able to open his mind.

And you're the educated one.

[Sparkler]

1 hour ago, rowlf said:

And I always considered him a compassionate scholar.

I don't know if you are familiar with his story or have googled him recently. But he has gone through many phases in his life. The most shocking ones in the last few years. Here is a man that had been teaching for the individual to stand up, dust off his clothes, and face up to life's challenges. And then everything turned against him... literally.

And the best you can do is call him a bigot. You justify life's entanglements using 2 syllable words. There's so much to be learned in this life if one is able to open his mind.

And you're the educated one.

😂😂😂😂😂

As if being unlucky, unfortunate or whatever, is an excuse or reason for bigotry!

tut tut.

[Alteredbhoy]

It's interesting that the Government figures announced yesterday that number of migrants housed in hotels has fallen by 50% over the last year and 70% since the last election has not elicited comment from those on the Ontario Topic Forum who complain bitterly and frequently about the cost of these hotels.

It's almost as if they were not interested in the cost and simply were looking for an excuse to complain about the migrants and the Government.

[Alteredbhoy]

Well we are nearing the end of August and the number of crossings has continued to decrease. 

At the end of July we were told by the migrants obsessives that the numbers of small boat crossings were increasing and likely to be at record numbers. That was despite them falling by 15% when compared to the previous month and being at a five year low for July.

In early August the numbers increased briefly and there was discussion about record numbers in individual boats. But with only a few days to go, the numbers are down on last August by over 50% and again likely to be the lowest August figure for 5 years.

In fact, when I first mentioned that the numbers who crossed last winter were significantly down on those who crossed the winter before, I was told it was just a lull caused by bad weather and the numbers would be much higher in the summer. It is looking likely that the number crossing in August 2026 will be lower than crossed in December 2025 (when we were told by our resident Anti-Migrant Correspondent that the weather was too tough for migrants crossings, but too still to generate wind powered electricity).

So in the height of summer, it appears that we are now seeing lower figures than "the very low numbers" (not my words) we saw in winter.

But those who want the numbers to be higher have gone very quiet on the issue because it doesn't support their whining.

Edited August 28 by Alteredbhoy

[Sparkler]

28 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

It's interesting that the Government figures announced yesterday that number of migrants housed in hotels has fallen by 50% over the last year and 70% since the last election has not elicited comment from those on the Ontario Topic Forum who complain bitterly and frequently about the cost of these hotels.

It's almost as if they were not interested in the cost and simply were looking for an excuse to complain about the migrants and the Government.

Yes, whatever will we do with all those five star hotels that Rowlf insists have been built “for illegals”?

😂😂😂😂😂

[Alteredbhoy]

11 minutes ago, Sparkler said:

Yes, whatever will we do with all those five star hotels that Rowlf insists have been built “for illegals”?

😂😂😂😂😂

What the Government could do is requisition them as prisons and then house all the perpetrators of offences we have seen at the Anti-Migrant riots in them. The locals could hardly complain, about not knowing who was being housed in them. It would be people from their own communities.

[c_cubed51]

The figures appear even more scary, if you post the whole week's arrivals!

Small boats data

This page shows figures for the last 7 days for migrants attempting to cross the English Channel in small boats without permission to enter the UK.

Date	Migrants arrived	Boats arrived	Boats involved in uncontrolled landings	Notes
22 August 2026	0	0	0
23 August 2026	0	0	0
24 August 2026	0	0	0
25 August 2026	0	0	0
26 August 2026	0	0	0
27 August 2026	494	7	0
28 August 2026	122	3	0

[Alteredbhoy]

1 hour ago, Lynn and John said:

Date	Migrants arrived	Boats arrived	Boats involved in uncontrolled landings	Notes

27 August 2026	494	7	0

As I said, some people are desperate for there to be migrant crossings to justify their rhetoric.

[c_cubed51]

Ha, ha! I thought you started a thread about small boats in order to spread false propaganda that the incidence was far greater than it actually is. Hardly an invasion. Fearmongering on your part.

[Alteredbhoy]

Well the figures for August are now in and the Anti-Migrant posters will be disappointed to know that not only were the figures substantially down on the equivalent figure for last year, but the numbers have been lower monthly on month for the last three months.

In fact 10 of the last 11 months have been lower than last years.

Through the peak crossing period since March the numbers have been more than 50% lower this year than last year.

The crunch will come next month, which was the first month last year in which Government action started to make an effect.

Edited September 3 by Alteredbhoy

[Alteredbhoy]

3 hours ago, Lynn and John said:

The not so small boat invasion has now hit Portsmouth. Enough is enough. There is little wonder protests have taken place in both Dover and Portsmouth.  Only 1% of asylum applications are genuine. 

There have only been a handful of days in the last four weeks that crossings have been made. The actions of the British and French authorities has reduced the frequency of crossings in the height of summer to the levels previously only seen in the winter. The smuggling gangs are being forced further and further away from the main crossing points. The fact that Portsmouth is now involved is indicative of the success the authorities are having, not the prevalence of crossings.

And as for your totally made up figure of only 1% of asylum claims to be genuine, I would have more likelihood of believing it, if it came from someone who had not previously pretended to be dead.

[ruby]

It shows how out of touch the BBC are. On their lunchtime news they said that the protesters are protesting as they don't believe the figures. They are completely wrong, most of the protestors thing that just one is too many. So sure it has dropped by 45% it doesn't matter it is still too many. Every one of them will be be a drain on our sparse public services even if if we do eventually get rid of them. It appears we don't anyway.

[Alteredbhoy]

1 hour ago, ruby said:

It shows how out of touch the BBC are. On their lunchtime news they said that the protesters are protesting as they don't believe the figures. They are completely wrong, most of the protestors thing that just one is too many. So sure it has dropped by 45% it doesn't matter it is still too many. Every one of them will be be a drain on our sparse public services even if if we do eventually get rid of them. It appears we don't anyway.

And you know exactly what "most of the protestors thing"?

Only 5 weeks you were arguing that the numbers were going up. A couple of months ago you were still arguing that there were more arrivals this year than last. Now you've accepted you were wrong you've changed you position from "it's getting worse" to "one is too many". 

But strangely you don't believe that one woman getting assaulted by a crowd of Reform supporters at their Conference is "one too many". I don't hear you complaining about children being killed by motorists is "one too many".

And on the many days when there are none, you simply ignore that none have arrived and pray there will be more the following day to justify your self-righteous anger.

Edited September 7 by Alteredbhoy

[Alteredbhoy]

1 hour ago, ruby said:

It shows how out of touch the BBC are. On their lunchtime news they said that the protesters are protesting as they don't believe the figures. They are completely wrong, most of the protestors thing that just one is too many. So sure it has dropped by 45% it doesn't matter it is still too many. Every one of them will be be a drain on our sparse public services even if if we do eventually get rid of them. It appears we don't anyway.

Personally, I think one police windscreen being smashed by someone claiming "one is too many" is one too many.

[ruby]

21 minutes ago, Alteredbhoy said:

And you know exactly what "most of the protestors thing"?

Only 5 weeks you were arguing that the numbers were going up. A couple of months ago you were still arguing that there were more arrivals this year than last. Now you've accepted you were wrong you've changed you position from "it's getting worse" to "one is too many". 

But strangely you don't believe that one woman getting assaulted by a crowd of Reform supporters at their Conference is "one too many". I don't hear you complaining about children being killed by motorists is "one too many".

And on the many days when there are none, you don't simply ignore that none have arrived and pray there will be more the following day to justify your self-righteous anger.

We really have been scraping the barrel. Sadly children getting killed by motorists happens, as do children drowning in lakes etc. Last I heard our roads are one of the safest in the world. Now one thing that does concern me is children getting hit by EVs. Nobody reports on it because well we don't want to stop people buying EVs. If you look at the most common SUV the front is not designed to push the pedestrian onto the bonnet, plus they weigh a ton. I don't have any data and I doubt I would get it but given their weigh I suspect being hit by an EV at 20 MPH is far more lethal than being hit by a Fiesta or similar small car at 30 MPH. As to the protestor at the Conference she went in there to disrupt, she deserved what she got, perhaps like the guy that stood on the top of a tube train in Ilford and got pulled off unceremoniously. What do you think they would have done to her in Russia? They know what they are getting into.