Hundreds of illegal migrants to be put in existing military barracks

Exactly

I’ve watched clips Shinemae, where they have got off small boats & run off into the distance. Especially in other EU countries.
Maybe they have a better system here now of rounding the small boats up.

They are the migrants that genuinely need our help.
Not all, wyllow3 are escaping from war, torn countries.
Where are the wives & children, that’s what I would like to know.

LemonJam

MT62

Maybe next door to you Lemonjam.
Or are you one of these people that think’ just not in my backyard”?

I agree with the majority of other posters that this solution to house asylum seekers, whilst their asylum applications are being processed, seems better than hotels and HMOs, even in barracks close to where I live.

Barnham is fairly near. I agree with this partial solution.

NotSpaghetti

Oreo

So anyone who has been serving a 15 year sentence for rape or manslaughter who would have got out in 10 years with good behaviour will now be released after 7 .5 years? Which is half the original sentence.

The 15-year case, Oreo is a perfect example of why the media headlines are causing confusion.

Under the Sentencing Act 2026, that individual will serve 10 years, not 7.5 years.
That 10-year release point stays completely frozen.

The 7-Year Rule is totally fixed. The drop to a 50% release point only applies to standard determinate sentences under 7 years.
If a sentence is 7 years or longer for manslaughter or serious sex crimes, the law completely blocks them from the halfway rule.

Thanks for digging into this, the newspapers are very confusing on it.👍🏻

Yes. They really are.
I honestly think it's deliberate "shock horror" or clickbait type stuff.

Why explain the nuance when you can just write dramatic headlines!
🙄

Manslaughter is a difficult one as some are very unlikely to kill again. The woman suffering years of abuse who finally turns and kills the abuser is not likely to kill again.
There can be quite a lot of extenuating circumstances for manslaughter which means some of those people will not offend again.

We don't have a proper legal route for asylum seekers to go through. They end up in France surviving in the forest/woods. They are frequently sprayed with pepper sprays by the police and moved on to the next forest. Until they choose to risk their lives across the channel. We are paying France a large amount of money to try to stop the boats. That is why the numbers are down. There needs to be greater international cooperation. And the UK should offer legal routes for asylum seekers to apply and be vetted. Until the UK does this the boats will continue.

I agree that using ex military barracks being used, but these immigrants should not be allowed to roam freely in the neighbourhood.

So I think the barracks are a better option prior to vetting. As the Labour Party were trying to calm the vigilantes from attacking hotels following a couple of cases of asylum seekers offending. The reason it didn't happen under the Tories is because they had too much opposition from locals near to the barracks.

In Crowborough, for example, they are reportedly bussed into Crawley during the day. These are undocumented adult males whose identities and backgrounds have not yet been fully established. I don't understand why this is permitted, and I believe there should be greater supervision until their status has been determined.

sundowngirl

I agree that using ex military barracks being used, but these immigrants should not be allowed to roam freely in the neighbourhood.

Many posters have clarified this before- but here we go again:

Asylum seekers are not automatically classified as "immigrants" legal or otherwise in the UK. Seeking asylum is a legal right and entering a country without prior permission to claim asylum is a recognised process under the 1951 Refugee Convention. The UK has very few authorised routes however and the person has to be in the UK physicallyuto claim asylum- a bit of a catch 22- hence small boat crossings.

An illegal immigrant refers to someone residing in the country without legal right to be here or pending applications such as visa overstayers or those who bypass border controls entry (like on the back of lorries) without declaring themselves to the authorities. The barracks are for asylum seekers who have made an application not illegal immigrants.

LemonJam

sundowngirl

I agree that using ex military barracks being used, but these immigrants should not be allowed to roam freely in the neighbourhood.

Many posters have clarified this before- but here we go again:

Asylum seekers are not automatically classified as "immigrants" legal or otherwise in the UK. Seeking asylum is a legal right and entering a country without prior permission to claim asylum is a recognised process under the 1951 Refugee Convention. The UK has very few authorised routes however and the person has to be in the UK physicallyuto claim asylum- a bit of a catch 22- hence small boat crossings.

An illegal immigrant refers to someone residing in the country without legal right to be here or pending applications such as visa overstayers or those who bypass border controls entry (like on the back of lorries) without declaring themselves to the authorities. The barracks are for asylum seekers who have made an application not illegal immigrants.

You always post this as justification, but nevertheless they arrived illegally - but let's not split hairs - do you think they should be allowed to roam around? unchecked???

We personally don't know anything about British people's past either sundowngirl. Well not until they commit a crime! I don't see a problem with being allowed to go to the local town. They haven't committed a crime. And if any do, like the rest of the population they will be dealt with. Much more quickly too.

Exactly AGAA4

I suppose that's why they are keeping the 7 years as a split. Between the 50% and 66.6%

Plevey08 - So why do we have a border force at all - why not let everyone in if we don't need to know their background?

You may not have a problem with groups of young men wandering around the town but I'm sure if you asked the people of Crawley/Crowborough etc they would have a different opinion

We can check on Uk citizens by using sarah’s Law, Clare’s Law etc. We can find out about people who commit domestic violence and who abuse children.

sundowngirl

LemonJam

sundowngirl

I agree that using ex military barracks being used, but these immigrants should not be allowed to roam freely in the neighbourhood.

Many posters have clarified this before- but here we go again:

Asylum seekers are not automatically classified as "immigrants" legal or otherwise in the UK. Seeking asylum is a legal right and entering a country without prior permission to claim asylum is a recognised process under the 1951 Refugee Convention. The UK has very few authorised routes however and the person has to be in the UK physicallyuto claim asylum- a bit of a catch 22- hence small boat crossings.

An illegal immigrant refers to someone residing in the country without legal right to be here or pending applications such as visa overstayers or those who bypass border controls entry (like on the back of lorries) without declaring themselves to the authorities. The barracks are for asylum seekers who have made an application not illegal immigrants.

You always post this as justification, but nevertheless they arrived illegally - but let's not split hairs - do you think they should be allowed to roam around? unchecked???

Even if they did arrive illegally (and that's a moot point), they are not illegal immigrants, if they are asylum seekers. It's not splitting hairs. It's impossible for asylum seekers to have illegal status. There is absolutely nothing illegal about applying for asylum.

sundowngirl

Plevey08 - So why do we have a border force at all - why not let everyone in if we don't need to know their background?

You may not have a problem with groups of young men wandering around the town but I'm sure if you asked the people of Crawley/Crowborough etc they would have a different opinion

But we don't just let anyone in, do we? We check passports and visas of people who have them. We turn people back if their paperwork is not in order, unless they apply for asylum, which is perfectly legal.

GG13, I asked Google, 'before BREXIT did more or fewer migrants arrive in small boats'
Google says 'far fewer'.

Maremia

GG13, I asked Google, 'before BREXIT did more or fewer migrants arrive in small boats'
Google says 'far fewer'.

Yes, they used to arrive hiding in lorries and cars now they use boats.

Europe is seeing more and more migrants/asylum seekers reaching its shores, the world has become more unstable in the last 10 years, hence the mount of young men fleeing Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan and many other countries.

I think it's an excellent idea hotel accommodation is far too attractive.
Concentrate them in camps with basic barrack facilities then they can be processed efficiently, their legal representatives should also be resident in the camps.
The genuine assylum claimants can be separated from the economic migrants who can be sent home, not allowed to disappear.

Primrose53

We can check on Uk citizens by using sarah’s Law, Clare’s Law etc. We can find out about people who commit domestic violence and who abuse children.

Primrose53
You cannot use these laws to run a background check on a complete stranger just because you saw them in public, nor can you ask the police for a general list of offenders - even those living on your street.

The UK does not have a public access "sex offender registry" map.

​Our law is entirely based on relationship and contact.

It applies to (close) neighbours or people you are actively involved with.

Oh David49!!!

their legal representatives should also be resident in the camps.
🙄

I'm not the type of poster on here who gets stroppy or defensive when corrected, so I apologise if I used the incorrect terminology

At 6 am after a night of sweating in bedroom temperatures of 26 degrees after a daytime high of 42 degrees, I apologise if I used the wordillegalwhich I drew down from the title.

Additionally, my current language is very much French based for 8 weeks, and anyone arriving heresans papiersis often referred to asun illégal.
It is, however, true that several media outlets over the past decade have been limiting the use of the wordillégalto describe thosewithout papers, so I'll join them in correcting my use of that terminology.

Sorry, sorry, sorry. Humble apologies x 3.

I'd like to continue contributing to the thread, so humble apologies in advance if I slip up.
Sorry x 4.