The British despair over the flow of boat migrants across the Channel that will never end. For every proposal the government makes, the lobbyists raise a storm. On Wednesday, a new law was passed in parliament, which was immediately labelled as “controversial” by the media.

The government received a majority of 289 to 230 at the third plenary session. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak says the law will deter tens of thousands of migrants who try to reach Britain via the English Channel each year.

Immigration Minister Robert Jenrick said during the debate in the House of Commons that the law’s intention is to send the following message: If you enter the UK illegally, you will not be able to build a life here.

The law now goes to the Upper House, which has no power to stop the law, only advisary. But it has the international apparatus that immediately sounded the alarm.

The UN High Commissioner for Refugees is strongly against the law and says that in practice it means a ban on seeking asylum.

The Council of Europe also warns the British government against adopting the law and says that it is not compatible with the country’s international obligations. (NTB-Reuters-AP)

The British media is already putting pressure on Immigration Minister Suella Braverman to open an airlift for Sudanese. She rules out that it will happen.

She said: “We have no plans to do that. Our focus first and foremost right now, bearing in mind this is a fast-moving situation and a complex situation, is to support British nationals and their dependents.”

No European country cooperates on migration. Everyone tries to shift the responsibility onto others. The British no longer want to be the terminus.

Some 3,191 Sudanese came to the UK last year. With demands for family reunification, the number is growing rapidly. 600 of them were unaccompanied minors, who require large resources.

Sudan also had the fourth highest number of unaccompanied children who claimed asylum last year, at 600, behind Afghanistan, Eritrea and Iran.

One must see the migration in a historical light. 3,191 each year becomes a large number over ten years and a nation must plan for a longer time perspective.

But the UN, Amnesty, lawyers and the media don’t think like that: They share out of a kindness for which they don’t have to bear the costs.

UNHCR is outraged because Braverman says Sudanese can apply for asylum through them.

She was rebuked by UNHCR for claiming Sundanese people should contact them because “they are the right mechanism by which people should apply if they do want to seek asylum in the UK”.

UNHCR said there was no mechanism to claim asylum in the UK through themselves, and that an “overwhelming majority” of refugees had no safe and legal routes to claim asylum in Britain. A senior UNHCR source said this meant any Sudanese people seeking to come to the UK would have to consider illegal routes.

It is striking that none of the migrant lobby asks the obvious question: Is there an upper limit to how many a country can accept?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/04/26/braverman-rules-out-asylum-routes-for-sudan-refugees/