2021 – 038 Five ways to resolve the illegal migration, the fishing dispute and bypass the ECHR

Fishing and Immigration

https://www.theeuroprobe.org/2021-038-two-ways-to-solve-illegal-immigration-and-the-fishing-dispute/

On Nov 22 2023 a dinghy capsized 7 miles off the French coast with 60 people on board and two died and why, oh why did the RNLI travel 7 miles into French waters to bring the survivors another emergency at sea to the UK?

This article could be a solution to the illegal migrant problem as it is a voluntary solution so will bypass the ECHR, socialist activist judges and spiv lawyers and no need to give France £500m or get their agreement to take back illegals.  If you find it of interest please forward it on to your MP as well as all your contacts. It could also resolve the fishing dispute while we are at it and the asylum seekers can apply for asylum so in a safe place without risking drowning crossing the channel.

Open Borders is causing the citizens of the EU the same problems as British citizens.The best way to resolve this dilemma is for UK, France, Belgium, Holland, Spain and Greece to cooperate in removing migrants (illegal arrivals and those already here) back to Africa and help them to do some work there to improve their own countries. It is very unlikely that the governments of the EU and the UK will do anything to stop, let alone reverse, the flood of uninvited migrants into the EU or the UK as that is what they want irrespective of the wishes of their countrymen.

The migrant problem will only be solved when more Migrants leave than arrive.

We also need an NGO with the necessary authority and tasked to find illegals hiding in the populace and detain them and to pass onto the police for deportation.

However why do we want to stop these immigrants? Both Egypt and Jordan have refused to accept any refugees from Gaza as they do not want potential Muslim terrorists getting into their countries. So why do the UN, EU and our UK political elite want these potential terrorists in our countries? We are not being told. If you vote Tory, Labour, Lib Dem or Green you will be getting what you have voted for.

The 2 problems are to stop more uninvited migrants crossing the channel but also to send back to the EU all those who were illegally assisted by the EU to get to the UK from a safe country France. They came from the EU illegally so it cannot be illegal to send them back. You cannot stop the boats leaving the EU as the EU coastlines are too long and often remote. A process is also necessary to return those who manage to get into the UK illegally. Whatever process is to be used it must be retrospective to remove all the illegals already here. This solution should apply to all migrants who set foot on UK soil without a pre arranged visa.

Why are our government tinkering with the problem and not solving it. One can only believe the government and Civil Servive do not want to solve it. They presumeably want the British culture and population to be destroyed.

This proposal will solve several problems

• Asylum seekers will not need to cross the dangerous and deadly channel.
• They can apply for asylum and be processed in a safe country
• It will resolve the housing of asylum seekers in hotels.
• It will resolve most of the fishing disputes and return the UK waters to UK fishermen.
• It will provide for the safe removal of failed Asylum seekers who have arrived in the UK illegally.
• It will sideline the ECHR, Spiv Lawers, Spiv judges and anti UK ‘charities’.
• Provide a fund for sea life conservation and controlled harvesting of fish.
• Provide accommodation for succesful claimants in a housing shortage.

Those arriving in the UK in inflateable boats or the backs of lorries are coming from a safe country – the EU and mainly France. As such they are not in danger in the EU and therefore cannot be entitled to seek asylum in the UK. They are being allowed to do so illegally by our UK Home Office.

No reason why we should not assist France in solving the problem they have once the illegals have been returned to France

The cause of Britains illegal migrant problem is entirely due to the EU wanting to cause UK a big problem for Brexit with considerable help from the UK left wing in the Civil Service and the legal profession. The EU have an even bigger problem with migrants due to Merkels following of the Coudenhove plan.

When we have removed all the uninvited migrants completely we can then decide how we respond to the UN order to accept migrants. Our acceptance of asylum seekers should be linked to asylum seekers being housed in all M. East and African Countries first and we should have complete authority to decide whom we accept.

For a possible reason for the mass immigration read  https://www.theeuroprobe.org/2021-029-the-britons-and-caucasians-who-are-they/

The solutions below are an alternative for the migrants to have a ‘safe route’ without having to risk their lives in the dangerous crossing of the Channel.

Essentially the French and the EU have a massive problem with migrants and their solution is to pass their problem on to the UK without our agreement.

Co-operation with the French will be impossible. Having worked in Paris I became aware that the French come in one of two types. The Metropolitan French who have a deep seated and visceral hatred of us Brits and will do anything they can to cause the UK problems. ( Macron is a Metropolitan Frenchman and despite the back slapping and smiles we will get no cooperation from him, We can only hope for Le Pen to replace him. The Provincial French in the countryside are generally very friendly to us indeed. They also dislike the Metropolitan French intensely. The obvious solution is for France to take back all those who have come from France and the French and British then to cooperate in returning all those in France who came from Africa back to Africa and help with them to improve Africa.

A way to resolve this is – read below.

It would seem that the international Corporates and the CBI want unlimited immigration for plenty of cheap labour instead of an increased birth-rate of the British peoples and training their children. There is also the strong suspicion that our Home Office is quite happy for illegal immigration to continue. Home Office personnel should have no say in vetting migrants.

The government are going to extreme lengths to enable the illegal migrants to claim asylum and enable them to stay permanently against the wishes of those who will have live among them. No government plans are in place to return the bogus asylum seekers to where they came from or the return others when their countries are safe again.

The cost of supporting the illegal migrants should be paid for in its entirety from the Oversea Aid budget and the personnel vetting of asylum seekers carried out by mostly UK ex military.

Home Office staff dealing with immigration either do not want to stop illegal immigration or are completely incompetent at doing so. Remove the job from the Home Office staff and employ people who will do the job – UK ex military would be ideal.

The UK Home Office official responsible for stopping the swarms of illegal aliens entering by boat was a pro open borders Arab lady Emma Haddad who has now joined Amnesty International.

Many Spiv Lawyers have been exposed in supplying bogus asylum seekers with false stories to get asylum.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5597167/Home-Office-official-led-6m-scam-allowing-437-illegal-immigrants-UK-jailed-11-years.html

A Home Office worker at the centre of a £6m conspiracy allowing hundreds of illegal immigrants to stay in the country was yesterday jailed for 11 years. Shamsu Iqbal, 61, was the ‘lynchpin’ of a gang which exploited his ‘trusted’ position to falsify records so at least 437 people could remain in the country.

These solutions could run in conjunction with the Rwandan operation ( which I think is a dead duck as it does not deal with illegals already here)  or any other solution and would not need a parliamentary vote or ECHR approval to implement. The UK must either leave the ECHR or change our law so that it is only advisory and UK law has ultimate authority as in the EU.

read  https://www.theeuroprobe.org/2012-019-european-court-of-human-rights-and-its-link-to-the-eu/

This is what Poland does and is the path many EU countries have taken – even EU law itself is not subject to the ECHR. They are in the ECHR but it is only advisory and does not override their national law. Our problem is our Supreme Court who accept the ECHR rulings as final. Why?  read https://www.theeuroprobe.org/2020-11-the-appointment-of-judges-and-magistrates/

This proposal is also a safe way to remove those already here who should not be here.

There is now another route into UK. The EU is dumping thousands of migrants into Eire. Once processed there they can all legally enter the UK under the Good Friday agreement. Migrants processed in the EU must not have the right to enter the UK by such a route only via the UK processing units relocated in Paris and Brussels.

First the Fishing Problem –

The following rules to apply to all commercial fishermen in UK waters whether UK fishermen or from the EU in the interests of ‘fairness’.

Please forward this post on to all your contacts and your MP.

First  – there can be no solution to the illegal migration while we are still under the authority of the European Court of Human Rights and the UN Migration Pact. The ECHR was a separate stand alone body when set up in 1951. Since then it has been steadily and stealthily taken over (hijacked) by the EU and is now completely an EU construct with mostly EU judges. read  https://www.theeuroprobe.org/2012-019-european-court-of-human-rights-and-its-link-to-the-eu/  The other problem is the UN Migration Pact. May signed us up to that without it going through parliament and on her personal whim. We must withdraw from it as it also seems to be the source of the requirement for Diversity as well. Why is it the responsibilty of Western countries, Europe and the UK to accept unlimited migrants and not the Middle East, Japan, S America et al? Just because the UN says it is?

The UN promotes migration into Western countries only – Why? The UN, with its 2030 plan, wants to eliminate the White DNA from the human gene pool by mass migration of coloured migrants into white countries to form Coudenhove’s single Mestizo breed.  read  https://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-043-un-agenda-21-and-eu-coudenhove/

If a French fishing boat was sinking inside French waters would the RNLI rescue them and take them back to France? Yes they would.  If that is so why don’t the RNLI rescue the boats from French waters and take them back to France or are they only at risk once they cross into UK waters?

The overarching principle with fishing in UK waters is that the UK must have complete sovereignty over its waters and any concessions are at the sole discretion of the UK. It is not acceptable that the license to fish in UK waters is dictated by the French and EU. The UK must be who dictates the conditions of the license and the EU will have accept it if they want access to UK fishing grounds.

To achieve this it is not necessary to leave the European Court of Human Rights (read  http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2012-019-european-court-of-human-rights/ ) but to establish a UK Court of Human Rights, which must include Human Resposibilities, and have precedence over ECHR whose decisions will only be advisory. Also if the French want a concession from the UK to fish our waters they must give the UK what the UK wants in return.

read also to see why it is so difficult for the UK to leave the authority of the ECHR  http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2020-11-the-appointment-of-judges-and-magistrates/

If someone arrives at Gatwick without papers they are not sent to a hotel  but returned on the next aircraft to where they came from.

Protocol 1

It starts with Fishing in UK waters

• There is a crisis in North Sea fishing stocks due to overfishing and species depletion. This is the prime reason given for this proposal. UK fishermen were just as guilty of this as EU fishermen but the EU is much more so now.
• It is also to enable the migrants to apply for asylum is a place of safety and not to have to cross the Channel in unsafe dinghy’s.
• All commercial and pleasure activities in UK waters to be under the authority of a UK Seas Authority (UKSA).
• The EU fishermen to be given temporary discretionary access to British waters to enable them to reduce their fishing fleet in an orderly manner. A concession that was not given to British fishermen when the UK joined the EU.
• All fishing boats registered in the UK must be owned and crewed by British nationals or other non UK crewmen with a limited life working visas.
• The total annual catch of fish to be harvested in UK waters is to be assessed annually by a UK scientific department of the UKSA and applied to both UK and EU fishing boats. An EU representative may attend as an observer only. The UKSA to decide the % of that total that goes to UK and EU fishing.
• Set up conservation, non fishing areas of the spawning grounds with no fishing there whatsoever.
• Total annual catch for all EU boats to be limited by UKSA and where one EU boat catches an excess of his allotted catch harvest or a super trawler catches a vast haul then it reduces the catch that other EU boats are allowed to catch. The EU to be responsible to allocate the share of the EUs total harvest to each EU boat and to inform the UKSA of their alloted harvests .
• UK boats can catch an equal tonnage of fish in EU waters as EU boats can catch in UK waters.
• An annual license per boat to fish in UK waters at a cost of £1,000 to £10,000 (? depending on the size of the boat) a year for UK and EU fishermen to fund the conservation necessities issued by the UKSA. It can be reclaimed as a legitimate business expense by a UK fishermen from the UK Inland Revenue at the end of the year and the EU fishermen to reclaim their £5000 from the EU  Inland Revenue. That way the EU pays for our UKSA not the UK fishermen or UK taxpayer, (This could also apply to lorries over 20 tons which are causing so much damage to our roads. Every lorry in the UK or coming from the EU (many of which are overloaded) has to pay £100 every 3 months ringfenced to repair the potholes. UK lorries can claim it back as a legitimate business expense from the Inland Revenue and EU lorries claim it back from the EU Revenue? That way the UK gov would get the cash for a year to repair our roads)
• A similar license required by UK fishermen to fish in EU waters.
• Eventually a number of licenses can be available for EU fishermen and can be open for them to bid for. They can then reclaim their license and bid fee from their home EU Inland Revenue when the concession ends.
• The certificate to be in English and the EU to be responsible for translating. Review all the EU applications for a license and reject any with spelling mistakes, wrong colour ink, translation errors etc.
• The number of annually reducing licenses and harvest issued to EU boats and time scale is to be at the complete discretion of the UK Fisheries and fish stocks.
• Annual harvest taken by EU Boats and licenses issued to the EU boats to be incrementally reduced each year and transferred to the UK fishing fleet to enable the EU fisheries to gradually adapt to the new fishing climate.
• Where super trawlers make a massive catch then that reduces what other EU boats can catch.
• The licenses would limit what the EU and UK fisherman can catch to prevent species depletion.
• Licenses awarded to UK fishermen cannot be sold on to EU or any non UK fishermen – only to other UK working fishermen and family cooperatives  but not to corporates of any nature.
• Government interest free loans to UK fishermen to get new boats etc.
• No correlation between EU and UK annual harvest
• Unintentional overfish by an EU boat to be cross decked onto a UK boat or landed at a UK port- not dumped overboard.
• To be granted a license to fish the EU Fishermen must have documented proof they have historically fished in UK waters (?).
• The EU boats must be fitted with a tracker (with a unique signal linked to the licence) and the UKFA informed of their intention to fish, where and when before being given permission to commence fishing.
• Fishing in UK waters to be monitored by drone and satellite by a UK company in the UK with UK staff and paid for out of the license fee.
• When the fishing trip is completed all fishing boats, UK and EU, must check-in at a UK port, or at sea, to verify its catch is within the license before a UK boat is unloaded or an EU boat before returning to the EU for unloading there. On board inspection can be by a UKSA personnel at sea. Any EU boat caught trying to sneak back with an excess catch to be heavily fined and lose their license.
• The UKFA to have the right to board and inspect any fishing boat at any time as a condition of the license anywhere in UK waters and before they leave UK waters.
• It is now essential to find a way to avoid the migrants having to cross the highly dangerous Channel. This suggestion would ensure their safety. At the end of each fishing trip into UK waters all EU boats must then return to the EU ‘voluntarily’ taking back to the EU with them with a number of illegal immigrants from the UK. The number depending on the size of the boat for the migrants to then go to the reception offices in Paris or Brussels (transferred and off shored from Dover) for processing if they want a license to fish in UK waters. The reception centers must be attached to, or within, the UK embasies as they are UK territory and France cannot interfer with what we do in them.
• The migrants to be collected from a UK port. The EU Fishing boat owner must sign the licence to agree that he will ensure his boat ‘voluntarily’ collects and returns the illegal migrants to the EU. No need for the European Court of Human Rights or spiv lawyers to get involved as the EU fishermen are doing it ‘voluntarily’. The EU fishermen will be only too pleased to do this as it will save the migrants having to risk their lives crossing the deadly and dangerous channel.
• The migrant reception center would move from Dover and be off shored to Paris and Brussels for all refugees and potential migrants to be processed and registered there for Visas – if applicable.  – that way the migrants are in a place of safety while their cases are considered.
• They would be given a Knapsack with food and water and a one man tent (All manufactured in the UK) and train ticket to Paris or Brussels from the port they are delivered to and a map of how to get from the train station to the Processing centers.
• There is absolutely no need for potential migrants to risk drowning in the Channel when they can stay dry and safe near these Processing Centres.
• This is a rigid condition of being granted a license to which the EU fishermen will need to sign ‘voluntarily’ (I.E. they can either volunteer to take the migrants and get the licence or they can refuse and then not get the licence.) No voluntary return of migrants no licence. There is an EU precedent for this in that if you want to join the EU you have to join the ECHR – it is ‘voluntary’ but you do not have a choice. 
• If they have no passport or paperwork it is of no matter as they will be going to an assessment center in France or Belgium – both safe countries. However once back in the EU they would have to seek asylum in one or all of the 26 EU countries first before seeking it in the UK’s Paris or Brussels Offices.
• As an addition any migrant, even if they have a UK passport, who commits a crime with a custodial sentance has to go to Paris or Brussels with their nuclear family to regain the concession to have a UK passport and (and UK citizenship) to come back to the UK with their nuclear family. Their UK passports can be cancelled if appropriate.
• The EU fishermen will still have their licenses so cannot complain
• Once this procedure is established as a gesture of goodwill we could offer it to Eire for small fee per migrant to remove their illegal migrants.
• As France is enabling the movement of their unwanted migrants to the UK then we must have the ability to return them in a way the EU cannot prevent.
• This can be done without reference to the ECHR or spiv lawyers.
• This is a way to also remove illegal migrants in the UK who have managed to evade the correct and legal procedure and get into the UK.
• If any solicitor demands a second legal review it can only mean that he did not do his job properly first time – for any reason then they have one shot only using Legal Aid or nowinnofee and if they fail they become liable for all the legal costs of the government. Lawyers are supposed to be experts. They should get their case right first time and not have several goes if they keep getting their cases wrong. He must conduct his appeal while the Migrant is in Paris or Brussels.
• When all the illegal migrants have been returned to the EU and the concessionary fishing period has ended the EU fishermen can bid for the limited number of licences to fish in UK waters that we decide to allow.
• It should be understood that it is not illegal to cross the Channel. Many yachtsmen do so to go for lunch then go back home. What is illegal is to stay there without a visa.
• It is illegal to land in the UK without a passport or papers. Anyone who does must be considered illegal.
• What about ‘genuine’ refugees? Open migrant processing offices in the UK Embassies, or buy suitable warehouses, in Paris and Brussels instead of Dover as the only place to process the migrants and asylum seekers. All illegals in the UK would need to do is to get taken to a UK fishing port for the EU fishrmen to give them a free trip to France to then travel to Paris or Brussels where their claim can be assessed. If they have no papers a simple DNA swab from the inside of their cheek would reveal their origins. More in Protocol 2.
• Any illegal migrant coming to the UK from the EU on a UK or EU fishing boat, lorry or aircraft will result in that boat, aircraft or lorry being impounded with a heavy fine and imprisonment of the skipper/driver/pilot and no further licenses allowed to that fishing company or transport company.
• The travel company to be responsible for the migrant to have the correct paperwork before leaving the port of embarkation and allowing them to travel to the UK. Any that do will be responsible for returning them at their expense.
• If the UKSA decides to allow future licenses for EU boats the EU fishermen will have to bid for them. Licenses are not an entitlement. They are a temporary concession. Possibility of future licences at the UKSA discretion.
• Any attempt by the EU to exploit the licenses for petty reasons should result in the UK cancelling all licenses issued to the EU.
• It must be the responsibility of the claimant to speak English or bring an interpreter with them.
• Fish Quotas to be initially the same for UK and EU. EU to decide how much each EU boat can catch from their total quota. UK quota to increase each year and EU quota to reduce each year until the UK has 100%. However a limited number of licenses could then be for EU fishermen that they have to bid for when the initial period is over.
• How to house successful asylum applicants during a housing crisis. First renew the 1679 Billeting Act to give this legal status. read https://www.theeuroprobe.org/2020-21-a-suitable-solution-to-the-accommodating-illegal-economic-migrants/
• To achieve this it is first necessary to leave the EU Human Rights Act or make it advisory only in the UK and establish our own CHR, leave the UN Migrants Pact, which we never agreed to join, and leave Dublin 111 and Marrakech Migration Pact. Change the Commissioner for Migrants into a Commissioner for homeless Britons, remove the processing of asylum seekers from the Home Office to a new department with new personnel.
• Make UK laws and regulations that will be the only laws that apply in the UK,
• This solution does not need to go through parliament or be vetted by the legal profession but just needs a slight alteration to the Fishing Licences.
• As we are ensuring that migrants are being processed in a Safe country and do not have to put their lives at risk crossing the channel then world opinion will bless us surely?
• The UKSA should consist only of personnel from the inshore and offshore fishing community, fish wholesale and retail, electronic experts for monitoring sea activities, experts in the sustainability and conservation of fishing, water quality experts – definately no Civil Servants nor political appointees.
• If any foreign person who has settlement rights or has been given UK citizenship commits a crime that carries a custodial penalty they must also be returned to their original country or if that is not known then sent to the reception centers in Paris or Brussels and have to plead their case there to get their status returned.
• Protocol 2
• As soon as an inflatable leaves the French shore in theory the migrants are not at risk of drowning until they enter UK waters and need to be rescued by UK Border Force and the RNLI
• An alternative could be to set up a charity in France  (L’Association de Sauvage en Mer de France – the LASMF) to buy a French registered and flagged ship and convert it to save illegal migrants from drowning on the French side of the Channel. Ship to be named ‘Sauvetage en Mer’. funded by EU public donations and UK donations. It can also save all other mariners who get into trouble anywhere in the Channel. It must have permission from the UK to save people at risk in UK waters to return them to France.
• Preferably all boats to be intercepted while still in French waters.
• Once on board they would immediately be subject to French law and can be taken straight to France. If a UK ship has a duty to bring any rescued illegals they save to the UK then France has an equal duty to bring the illegals saved in French waters on a French vessel to France.
• Fit a lifting frame on the stern that can be used to raise the inflatable out of the water with all the passengers still in the dinghy so the migrants can walk straight into the stern instead of risking falling in the sea.
• The ship will be controlled and crewed by all who are British born Anglofiles and fluent in French.
• The inflatable boat organisers and the boat pilots subject to draconian penalties (25 years in prison with no parole) if identified.
• The LASMF would be financed by volutary donations and perhaps those currently donating to the RNLI would like to transfer their donations to the LASMF instead.
• The UKSA can hire Le Suavetage en Mer the for UK fisheries protection duties as a means of financing it with the money USFA gets via the EU Inland Revenue when not saving migrants from drowning.
• Le Suavetage en Mer may have to have armed guards on board to prevent the RNLI boarding and press ganging the migrants to take them the Dover.
• The small boats could be rescued in the Channel by UK RNLI and handed over to Le Suvetage while still in the Channel for returning to France.
• The rescued are then given a knapsack (made in the UK) with water, food, a train ticket to Paris or Brussels and 50 Euros with a map showing how to get from the station to the UK Visa office as per Protocol 1.
• If a migrant comes in on a short stay Visa they must deposit a Bail Bond of £10,000 returnable when they leave the country or if their Visa expires. If they over stay their Visa they forfeit the Bail Bond
• A high speed assessment if the potential migrant has a job to come to, accommodation arranged, health insurance and financially self supporting.
• Promote a rumour that Great White sharks have now been spotted in the channel due to Global Warming who are very partial to feet and legs hanging over the sides of inflatables.
• Another alternative would be for the British Government rent hotels or holiday resorts in France for the ‘refugees’?
• perhaps  If we only employ Doctor’s Receptionists in the Border Force no illegal migrants will ever get in.
• As a gesture of Good Will we could offer this facility to Eire to enable them to return uninvited and criminal migrants to the EU via the UK and the EU fishing fleet for a small fee.
• Why doesn’t the @RNLI  advertise for donations on French TV as its people are escaping from their dangerous, war torn shores 
• Another possibility is that we should take the £500 million we give #France and give it to #Belgium instead, on the understanding #illegals arriving in #UK are returned to Belgium, who can then send them back to fellow #EU member France? Belgium detain 90% of the boats leaving their beaches even if they are already at sea. If Belgium can do so then so can the French.
• Protocol 3
• Purchace a several working French fishing boats registered in minor French ports
• Give them fishing licences to fish in UK waters
• Crew them with fluent French speaking British skipper and a UK crew.
• Register them as charity boats in France
• They catch fish and when they have finished their days fishing they return to a UK port to unload their fish and then they return to France taking with them 5 – 10 illegal migrants or failed asylum seekers in the UK who have been collected from UK hotels back to their home French Port.
• Give the migrants the means to get to the migrant reception centers that have been moved from Dover to Paris or Brussels. A French coach or a rail ticket to Paris or Brussels.
• The Skipper receives the sale of the fish and a payment for eack migrant returned to France to fund the boat.

If all these people coming here on dinghies are doing so as they speak English and have family there, why do the Boarder force need to employ interpreters? and why are their family not paying for their board and lodgings?

• A fourth way is to move the embarcation for Rwanda to Newry Airport in N Ireland and assemble those to be deported in an open center there. If any illegals abscond to get to EIRE via the open border so be it and they are replaced by more illegals from the UK. Eire can the put pressure on the EU and we can then agree to accept them back after France agrees to accept theirs back and does so. Any spiv lawyer wanting to claim asylum must do so in Newry. The co operate with the EU to return the migrants back to Africa and elsewhwere and help them to develop their own countries’
• The Irish have turned a boat of illegal migrants round in the middle of the Irish sea that had left the UK to go to Eire. The ECHR were strangely silent at this as they have been used against the UK for wanting to doing the same. So if Eire (the EU) can turn the boats back the surely the UK can turn them back mid Channel to return them to France (the EU)?

If a French fishing boat was sinking just inside French waters would the RNLI rescue them and take them back to France? Yes they would. So why don’t they rescue the small boats in French waters and take them back to France or are they only at risk once they cross into UK waters?

To accommodate illegal migrants  read  https://www.theeuroprobe.org/2020-21-a-suitable-solution-to-the-accommodating-illegal-economic-migrants/

Dear Reader – this a request that if you find these Posts of significant interest would you consider making a small donation of £1, $1 or €1 to help with the running costs. Go to https://www.theeuroprobe.org/ and donate at the top right

• Mick Greenhough 4 10 2021