The British people are being subjected to the worst bit of brainwashing for weeks. The UK has agreed that it can receive two migrants and send one back. This is being sold as ‘one in one out’. All of the Internationalist media are trumpeting this as a huge success. Almost no media outlets are noticing that the deal is just a new scheme for legal migration without a work visa.
This ‘breakthrough deal’ allows the French to send the migrant of their choice to the UK. The deal should have been called the French migrant dumping scheme. The French must be falling off their chairs with laughter at the stupid ‘Rosbif’.
An interesting feature of the deal is that the first return of migrants to France involved appeals. The judges now agreed with the Home Office that the migrant could be deported to France because “his rights are protected there”. However, outside of the scheme, judges are still regarding asylum claims from people who have come from France to be valid.
The two in, one out deal is a clumsy attempt to return to the EU Dublin Regulation. All that the Dublin Regulation achieved was the theoretical ability of the UK to ship the asylum seekers back to the EU. The Dublin Regulation was introduced in 1997 and, as can be seen below, it had little effect. It was only after security was improved at Channel ports that the numbers fell from over 100,000 pa to around 30,000.
Graph: Number of People Claiming Asylum in UK (Source UK Gov):
Notice that the rise in asylum claims over the past 5 years is directly related to the use of small boats. These circumvent Channel port security.
The UK is no longer a part of the useless Dublin Regulation since leaving the EU. Asylum matters are now governed by the 1951 UN Refugee Convention (as amended in 1967). Most signatories to this convention simply ignore it, knowing that it is no longer fit for purpose (cf: USA, Australia, Russia, China, Greece, Hungary etc etc.).
The UN Refugee Convention uses the language of ‘Rights’, these are extra territorial laws that govern legal practice in each signatory country. These international laws override the laws of countries and are made by government representatives at the time of signing. The Refugee Convention contains many such laws and these can only be changed with the agreement of the UN to amend the Convention. In effect the people of the UK have been deprived of the ability to make their own laws in the area of asylum. The UK is being ruled by the almost irreversible decisions of people from 75 years ago. No wonder the majority of countries simply ignore the Convention.
Everyone is using the term ‘asylum seeker’ for all illegal migrants. This is because the 1951 UN Refugee Convention defines a refugee as someone who:
The keen reader will notice that the Refugee Convention only applied to persons affected by the Second World War and by the Far Left Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe.
In 1966 there was a sly three line resolution of the UN General Assembly (Resolution 2198 (XXI)) that added three lines to the Refugee Convention:
This short addendum inflicted a post WWII Convention on the laws of all of the original signatories forever unless they withdraw from the whole Convention.
This process is an excellent example of how Internationalists can severely damage democratic countries. Democracies spend months of campaigning to convince the people about individual laws and hold votes in their legislative assemblies to pass laws that reflect the will of the People. These laws can be amended by the next government. International bodies such as the UN can impose laws that are only considered by a few Foreign Office apparatchiks. The laws that they pass are called ‘Rights’ and bind the people of the UK for generations.
According to the UN Refugee Convention, a Refugee (Asylum Seeker) is someone who for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a social group or political opinion fears persecution. The UN Refugee Convention defines an Asylum Seeker as someone who says they are afraid to go home. Anyone can say this. Anyone can say they are afraid to go home. This is why the term ‘Asylum Seeker’ is being used interchangeably with ‘migrant’.
The casual introduction of a post WWII Convention about Second World War refugees as the guiding legislation on cross border migration is astonishing. Fortunately Article IX of the Convention lets us off the hook:
The current legislation is absurd, the entire population of China or Russia could move to the UK as Asylum Seekers and the UK is legally bound to accept them if they say they are afraid to go home. Some countries such as China regard the mere act of applying for asylum in the UK to be treason so any of their citizens who get here must be allowed to stay. All women in Islamic countries should be given asylum under the Convention. All LGBT+ people from most of the world should be given asylum.
The UK should introduce its own legislation on Asylum Seekers. This legislation should take particular notice of the potential numbers of people who might be able to say they are seeking asylum. There should be an annual cap of 10,000 applicants. It should also make clear that migrants coming from a safe country such as France will never be considered as Asylum Seekers.