OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[Andy_Faber]

I said ‘relative indifference’, Andy. My point being that, so long as we were committed members of the EU the French were much more ‘supportive’ in relation to our channel border.

Now we’re determined to turn our backs and go it alone we’re being met with ‘relative indifference’. Who can be surprised?

I also really hate the dismissive term ‘illegals’. I know that, technically, that’s what they are, but can we not be collectively kinder?
I understand that cultural conflict exists and can present difficulties which none of us wish to be on the wrong end of...but to make such journeys in such conditions people have to be truly desperate.
A little joined up thought from the world’s leaders and what used to be called - perhaps inappropriately - ‘Christian charity’ would not go amiss.

I'm afraid I can't rA. I have one friend (I've mentioned this one in some detail before, a German speaking, wholly integrated Englishman with a German wife and German child) who's life in Germany was ruined by his experience (or more precisely his wife's) at the hands of elements of the great German influx and another (likewise native speaker, in fact he is an English teacher in an Italian school) who is 'hanging on' in a coastal town which has descended into lawlessness and again is more fearful for his female partner than himself - meanwhile, I'm in Spain trying to make the best of my 2nd home in an area where my pal Jose is one of few doing good business, and he installs security fencing.

[ramAnag]

Do you mean indifference, as in failing in their duty of care to these people, RA, as backed up by court cases against the French authorities?

I agree that we tend to tar all these people with the same brush. Personally I feel that, any family who has put themselves through such an ordeal to get here, should be given every assistance. But, there are too many young criminals, who are without morals, who see the UK as a soft touch. Those people aren't welcome here.

Wouldn’t disagree with that second paragraph, Andy...although I just don’t know how many ‘young criminals’ arrive in the way we are speaking of or to what extent abject poverty becomes synonymous with what you and I might describe as a lack of ‘morality’.

As regards ‘indifference’...I meant the French authorities are more likely to show concern for the well being of neighbours who behave like allies rather than those who themselves appear hell bent on showing arrogant indifference to the well being of the rest of the continent we share.

[swaledale]

The silence is deafening? After a whole 22 minutes?

Come on Mista, some of us do have a life that doesn't revolve around this board.

In short, I do believe that as a seperate country, we will be able to return these people back to the EU. The EU is failing in their responsibilities to protect and offer shelter to these people, which is against international law. When we are no longer part of the EU, then we will be entitled to return the refugees. As it is, we have shared obligations, as we are part of one body.

Border officials throughout the world return people to where they've come from, if they don't have the correct paperwork.

I still believe that the greater fluidity of decision making, will benefit us, over the long drawn out decision making that the EU is famous for, during the hoped for recovery.

Sorry, I wasn't on the ball Mista. lol.

Regrettably you are very wide of the remark, other EU countries do take in more migrants than the UK, Germany and France being just two examples. The Eu has shelled out millions to help countries including Greece cope with migrants and to Turkey to prevent them from leaving that country in the first place, something which the Turkish president is using as a bargaining tool with the EU. In addition the EU has a multi million pound fund for aid in those countries where migrants are coming from, which has to an extent stemmed the flow.

Under International law, NOT EU law we won't be able to simply ship them back to the EU, it all depends upon their situation which does have to be determined before they are deported.

Yes other countries do return people at borders, but we are dealing with Refugees here and thats a whole different international legal matter as agreed between countries.

The irony is of course that those self same people who seem to favour Brexit and reducing overseas aid, are being very simplistic, to truly tackle the migrant crisis, there needs to be concerted effort by richer countries to remove the incentive for migrants to leave their countries and udnertake the dangerous and often expensive journey to get to europe!

That means leveling up the economic inequalities, largely created by western companies ripping off and exploiting poorer countries, helping to tackle corruption and support good governance, providing aid which supports economic and social development and perhaps not being so keen to send our troops to bomb the **** out of some countries in the first place!

[Geoff Parkstone]

I can honestly say I've never read more pie in the sky fantasy than that last paragraph. Corruption is endemic in most if not all "third world economies". Every penny of aid results in more than a penny of it endind up where it shouldn't. Its just like pouring it into an open sewer.

I'm not saying "the west" is innocent, we probably taught them how to do it, but the more you pour in the worse it gets. There is no viable solution where humans remain greedy and self centred, wherever they live.

[AdiSalisbury]

Yeah, we just bomb the **** out of countries, that's it. Surprised our little island is capable really. All these mercenaries running around, lust for blood and that. I love a friendly Taliban fighter me. Good blokes, trust them with my daughter.

[Trickytreesreds]

I can honestly say I've never read more pie in the sky fantasy than that last paragraph. Corruption is endemic in most if not all "third world economies". Every penny of aid results in more than a penny of it endind up where it shouldn't. Its just like pouring it into an open sewer.

I'm not saying "the west" is innocent, we probably taught them how to do it, but the more you pour in the worse it gets. There is no viable solution where humans remain greedy and self centred, wherever they live.

Sorry I think this line was more telling- Yes other countries do return people at borders, but we are dealing with Refugees here

Most of those coming over, would not qualify for what is classed as refugees.
The very fact of lack of women and children only enforces that fact, never mind that they haven't been in danger since landing on any European soil.
To borrow an EU term, " you can't cherry pick"

[AdiSalisbury]

Why can't an adult male claim refugee status TTR?

[swaledale]

I can honestly say I've never read more pie in the sky fantasy than that last paragraph. Corruption is endemic in most if not all "third world economies". Every penny of aid results in more than a penny of it endind up where it shouldn't. Its just like pouring it into an open sewer.

I'm not saying "the west" is innocent, we probably taught them how to do it, but the more you pour in the worse it gets. There is no viable solution where humans remain greedy and self centred, wherever they live.

The pie in the sky fantasy is in your mind, one I suspect persuaded by right wing commentators. I do have a laugh when the citizens of the country with a glorious imperial past, that built its wealth on the exploitation of so called "third world countries" become all smug about corruption and this just after our own PM hands out peerages to his cronies, funders and his own brother. When a government minister is shown to have had funds and contact with a developer whose scheme he just happens to have approved overruling the local authority, yet remains in post. When a leading advisor clearly breaks government instructions, but lies about it and is backed up by the PM. I could go on but you get the drift!

Yes its true, a lot of aid doesn't actually go to where its needed, for a number of reasons, corruption is one, though ts not at the level you suggest, a lack of focus on recoridng outcomes, i.e. what the aid actually achieves and indeed Aid Agencies who like most organisations become fixated with their agenda, rather than solving the issue and getting out.

But and its big but, aid does indeed have significant positive effects, both for the people in the countries involved and indirectly for us the Uk citizen.

Some examples


In the five years from 2011 to 2016, UK aid provided almost 20 million food rations for Syrian refugees. This helps prevent them migrating and adding to our migrant issue, as well as being purely humanitarian. After all the majority would rather return to thier homes in Syria eventually.

Tackling violence against women and girls: the UK’s international aid budget funds programmers in 29 countries. Improving and educating womens lives, helps to modernise a country and improves the economic, health and welfare prospects of its citizens, it cuts down on migration.

280,000 people in Nepal received lifesaving shelter, funded by UK aid. Humanitarian aid after the earthquake.

13.2 million people were given access to TB treatment from 2002 to 2016. Curing TB and other infectious diseases not only improves the economic, health and welfare of a country but means these countries aren't reservoirs for such diseases and the source of future pandemics.

Over 10 million children are supported to get a good quality education by the UK aid budget. The more people are educated the more they can improve their prospects and the more they are able to withstand bad governance within their own country ad this does work, as has shown by East Timor where a basket case of a country was turned into a functioning democracy through foreign aid.


Yes there is corruption, but actually it depends upon the country, but ranges from 2% of the aid budget to around 20%.

0.7% of the Uk's GDP is overseas aid, that does a tremendous amount of good around the world, tackling diseases, improving food production, enabling local people to become self sustaining and able to improve their lives.

To criticise foreign aid on the basis that some of it is lost to corruption ignores outcomes that do have positive effects for the UK citizen, we are going to need to do more, if we don't then the current refugee problem is going to be a blip, climate change, food shortages disease, economic collapse will further push migrants towards europe and it will cost more to deal with them then than direct resources to correcting the issues that have forced them to leave.

Saying every penny spent on aid is like pouring it into an open sewer is not just wrong it ignores the fact and I stress fact (I know the Daily mail likes to pretend otherwise) that the vast majority of foreign aid has positive outcomes.

[AdiSalisbury]

The pie in the sky fantasy is in your mind, one I suspect persuaded by right wing commentators. I do have a laugh when the citizens of the country with a glorious imperial past, that built its wealth on the exploitation of so called "third world countries" become all smug about corruption and this just after our own PM hands out peerages to his cronies, funders and his own brother. When a government minister is shown to have had funds and contact with a developer whose scheme he just happens to have approved overruling the local authority, yet remains in post. When a leading advisor clearly breaks government instructions, but lies about it and is backed up by the PM. I could go on but you get the drift!

Yes its true, a lot of aid doesn't actually go to where its needed, for a number of reasons, corruption is one, though ts not at the level you suggest, a lack of focus on recoridng outcomes, i.e. what the aid actually achieves and indeed Aid Agencies who like most organisations become fixated with their agenda, rather than solving the issue and getting out.

But and its big but, aid does indeed have significant positive effects, both for the people in the countries involved and indirectly for us the Uk citizen.

Some examples


In the five years from 2011 to 2016, UK aid provided almost 20 million food rations for Syrian refugees. This helps prevent them migrating and adding to our migrant issue, as well as being purely humanitarian. After all the majority would rather return to thier homes in Syria eventually.

Tackling violence against women and girls: the UK’s international aid budget funds programmers in 29 countries. Improving and educating womens lives, helps to modernise a country and improves the economic, health and welfare prospects of its citizens, it cuts down on migration.

280,000 people in Nepal received lifesaving shelter, funded by UK aid. Humanitarian aid after the earthquake.

13.2 million people were given access to TB treatment from 2002 to 2016. Curing TB and other infectious diseases not only improves the economic, health and welfare of a country but means these countries aren't reservoirs for such diseases and the source of future pandemics.

Over 10 million children are supported to get a good quality education by the UK aid budget. The more people are educated the more they can improve their prospects and the more they are able to withstand bad governance within their own country ad this does work, as has shown by East Timor where a basket case of a country was turned into a functioning democracy through foreign aid.


Yes there is corruption, but actually it depends upon the country, but ranges from 2% of the aid budget to around 20%.

0.7% of the Uk's GDP is overseas aid, that does a tremendous amount of good around the world, tackling diseases, improving food production, enabling local people to become self sustaining and able to improve their lives.

To criticise foreign aid on the basis that some of it is lost to corruption ignores outcomes that do have positive effects for the UK citizen, we are going to need to do more, if we don't then the current refugee problem is going to be a blip, climate change, food shortages disease, economic collapse will further push migrants towards europe and it will cost more to deal with them then than direct resources to correcting the issues that have forced them to leave.

Saying every penny spent on aid is like pouring it into an open sewer is not just wrong it ignores the fact and I stress fact (I know the Daily mail likes to pretend otherwise) that the vast majority of foreign aid has positive outcomes.

**** me, I actually agree with most of that. Is this the field you actually work in?

[swaledale]

Yeah, we just bomb the **** out of countries, that's it. Surprised our little island is capable really. All these mercenaries running around, lust for blood and that. I love a friendly Taliban fighter me. Good blokes, trust them with my daughter.

Ah well so your saying that the UK has never since World War 2 engaged in activities overseas which at best were questionable and at worst downright illegal? That they have not been engaged in military action which directly or indirectly has resulted in thousands of innocent civilians being killed, their homes destroyed, countries plunged into civil war?

In fact we have undertaken airstrikes in a number of countries where actually we achieved very little other than more destruction. Your oblique reference to Afghanistan is interesting - how many years have we been involved there, what has the loss of our soldiers lives achieved so far?

Not to mention of course a UK arms industry which sells to countries who use these arms to kill innocent civilians! The situation in Yemen being just one current example.