Comments by "Steve Parker" (@steveparker8065) on "Professor Tim Wilson"
channel.
-
229
-
163
-
159
-
114
-
103
-
89
-
87
-
84
-
79
-
77
-
70
-
69
-
55
-
55
-
52
-
50
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
48
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
37
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
30
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Chance doesn't come into it, a free market doesn't exist when you have embargoes, tax breaks, subsidies, monopolies, sanctions, creative duties, or mass production of one product in poor countries. Diamonds aren't rare ask De Beers, the market is controlled, we have FIAT currency and Central banking run by a fractional reserve system which creates a $300 trillion global debt which is around 3.5 times global GDP. The Tories do what they're told and profit from their part in an illusion. Democracy has never existed - Lobbyists, special interest groups and corruption prove that.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Anita-gp1gv He sounds like he was a good man. My apologies for the following but I have to spread my own tenets of truth as I perceive them.
They should have written "To those who bar their doors to the homeless, to those who build grand artifices to power and wealth, to those who allow children to suffer at the hands of those who should be trusted, to those who give power and blessings to megalomaniacs who war for resources, to those who collect money to enrich their own while many starve, thirst, freeze and live in poverty and distress."
My conversation is always considered and I've read many texts from various religions. A good person remains a good person whether Muslim, Jew, Gentile, Atheist, Mormon, Christian, Hindu, Shinto, Confucian, Buddhist, Catholic, Spiritualist, Agnostic etc.
Anyways, again my apologies for my candor. Take care!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I enjoyed your recitation, I'm more of a socialist rhyme artist. Parodies-R-us!
"Every worker in Britain liked Christmas a lot.
But the Tories, who lived in luxury, well, they did not!
The Tories dislike Christmas, the giving time season.
And we all know why; their selfishness the reason.
Could it be that their heads aren't screwed on quite right?
Or could it be, perhaps, that their fists are too tight?
But with Tories the most likely reason of all,
Is their freezing cold hearts are a few sizes too small.
Whatever the reason, for their uncharitable views,
They stand there at Christmas, making profits for the few,
Staring down at the Populus with a sour, grouchy frown,
At the poor blighted workers in Britain's cold towns.
For every worker in Britain, they would love to bequeath,
In place of mistletoe a withered old funeral wreath.
"No hanging of stockings!" the Tories doth jeer,
Tomorrow may be Christmas, but the Tories don't care.
They scowl at the thought of a little drummer boy drumming,
So they crashed the economy and stopped Christmas from coming."
By Moi.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@DropdudeJohn This is the specific and additional, that you seem to have a different version of, as this is dated 2001 I'd say your 1999 edition is out of date if not incomplete or purposely omitting details. Editorial note: UN doc. A/55/383, Nov. 2000. (Summary Conclusions: Article 31 of the 1951 Convention Expert Roundtable organized by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the Graduate Institute of International Studies, Geneva, Switzerland, 8–9 November 2001)
Specific considerations
10. In relation to Article 31(1):
(a) Article 31(1) requires that refugees shall not be penalized solely by reason of unlawful entry or because, being in need of refuge and protection, they remain illegally in a country.
(b) Refugees are not required to have come directly from territories where
their life or freedom was threatened.
(c) Article 31(1) was intended to apply, and has been interpreted to apply,
to persons who have briefly transited other countries or who are unable
to find effective protection in the first country or countries to which
they flee. The drafters only intended that immunity from penalty
should not apply to refugees who found asylum, or who were settled, temporarily or permanently, in another country. The mere fact of
UNHCR being operational in a certain country should not be used as
a decisive argument for the availability of effective protection in that
country.
(d) The intention of the asylum seeker to reach a particular country of destination, for instance for family reunification purposes, is a factor to be
taken into account when assessing whether s/he transited through or
stayed in another country.
(e) Having a well-founded fear of persecution is recognized in itself as
‘good cause’ for illegal entry. To ‘come directly’ from such country via
another country or countries in which s/he is at risk or in which generally no protection is available, is also accepted as ‘good cause’ for illegal
256 Illegal entry (Article 31)
entry. There may, in addition, be other factual circumstances which
constitute ‘good cause’.
(f) ‘Without delay’ is a matter of fact and degree; it depends on the circumstances of the case, including the availability of advice. In this context
it was acknowledged that refugees and asylum seekers have obligations
arising out of Article 2 of the 1951 Convention.
(g) The effective implementation of Article 31 requires that it apply also to
any person who claims to be in need of international protection; consequently, that person is presumptively entitled to receive the provisional
benefit of the no penalties obligation in Article 31 until s/he is found
not to be in need of international protection in a final decision following a fair procedure.
(h) The term ‘penalties’ includes, but is not necessarily limited to, prosecution, fine, and imprisonment.
(i) In principle, a carrier which brings in an ‘undocumented’ passenger
who is subsequently determined to be in need of international protection should not be subject to penalties.
11. In relation to Article 31(2):
(a) For the purposes ofArticle31(2), there is no distinction between restrictions on movement ordered or applied administratively, and those ordered or applied judicially. The power of the State to impose a restriction must be related to a recognized object or purpose, and there must
be a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the end and
the means. Restrictions on movement must not be imposed unlawfully
and arbitrarily.
(b) The detention of refugees and asylum seekers is an exceptional measure and should only be applied in the individual case, where it has
been determined by the appropriate authority to be necessary in light
of the circumstances of the case and on the basis of criteria established
by law in line with international refugee and human rights law. As
such, it should not be applied unlawfully and arbitrarily and only
where it is necessary for the reasons outlined in Executive Committee Conclusion No. 44, in particular for the protection of national security and public order (e.g. risk of absconding). National law and
practice should take full account of the international obligations accepted by States, including through regional and universal human
rights treaties.
(c) Refugees and asylum seekers should not be detained on the ground of
their national, ethnic, racial, or religious origins, or for the purposes of
deterrence.
(d) Initial periods of administrative detention for the purposes of identifying refugees and asylum seekers and of establishing the elements for
their claim to asylum should be minimized. In particular, detention
Summary Conclusions 257
should not be extended for the purposes of punishment, ormaintained
where asylum procedures are protracted.
(e) Detention beyond the initial period must be justified on the basis of a
purpose indicated in 11(b) above.
(f) UNHCR Guidelines on Applicable Criteria and Standards Relating to
the Detention of Asylum Seekers provide important guidance. Families and children, in particular, should be treated in accordance with
international standards and children under eighteen ought never to be
detained. Families should in principle not be detained; where this is
the case, they should not be separated.
(g) There is a qualitative difference between detention and other restrictions on freedom of movement. Many States have been able to manage
their asylum systems and their immigration programmes without recourse to physical restraint. Before resorting to detention, alternatives
should always be considered in the individual case. Such alternatives
include reporting and residency requirements, bonds, community supervision, or open centres. These may be explored with the involvement of civil society.
(h) Access to fair and expeditious procedures for the determination of
refugee status, or for determining that effective protection already exists, is an important element in ensuring that refugees are not subject
to arbitrary or prolonged detention.
(i) In terms of procedural safeguards, at a minimum, there should be a
right to review the legality and the necessity of detention before an independent court or tribunal, in accordance with the rule of law and the
principles of due process. Refugees and asylum seekers should be advised of their legal rights, have access to counsel and to national courts
and tribunals, and be enabled to contact the Office of UNHCR.
(j) UNHCR should, upon request, be advised of, and allowed access to, all
cases of detained refugees and asylum seekers.
(k) Where detention is deemed necessary, States should ensure that
refugees and asylum seekers are treated in accordance with international standards. They should not be located in areas or facilities where
their physical safety and well-being are endangered; the use of prisons
should be avoided. Civil society should be involved in monitoring the
conditions of detention.
Additional considerations
12. Non-legal strategies and necessary follow-up are also critical. These include the preparation and dissemination of instructions to relevant levels
of government and administration on the implementation of Article 31,
258 Illegal entry (Article 31)
training, and capacity building. Particular attention should be given to ensuring that strategies and actions taken by States do not serve to exacerbate racist or xenophobic perceptions, behaviour, or attitudes.
13. States should maintain accurate records of all cases where refugees and
asylum seekers are detained or where their movement is otherwise restricted, should publish statistical data of such detention and restrictions
on movement, and should regularly inform UNHCR of cases of detained
refugees and asylum seekers pursuant to their obligation under Article 35
of the Convention.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@indivisible4835 Dear god, I don't want or need to argue pedantic nonsense. When my likes are at 2 and go down to 0 it's obvious people are down-marking my comment, I'm followed by trolls but can't get rid of them I can only block them from commenting on my videos, as I'm commenting on news and other channels videos I have no control under the YT system. I have not blamed malign actors, and I have not suggested some undefined agency, those are misinterpretations of my comments. I have simply stated it is YT filtering. I have proven I use empirical data and given you the method, there is no discussion it is fact! You are still debating me over some petty misinterpretation of facts and your misunderstanding of the word Empirical (verified through repeatable observation and not based on theory or logic IE how we determine scientific fact) and you ask me how you are inferring I'm wrong? I've already proven my point, I've already proven your misunderstanding of words used and suggested your hurt pride is the reason for your continual pedantry. You can misinterpret my comment to continue this pointless sealioning as much as you like, but I've given you the tools to prove it. I'm simply pointing out that the more you upset the status quo, the more you get filtered and silenced. I don't want to debate allies over petty nonsense, I choose my words carefully as I've been forced to, to avoid censorship...
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davedogge2280 Agreed, apart from Brexit, Grenfell, Economic Euthanasia, Disabled Vilification, Election Fraud, Contempt of Parliament, Windrush Scandal, WASPI, Working Poverty, Homeless Crisis, Hostile Env, Food Banks, Universal Credit, NHS Crisis, Austerity what have the Tories ever done for us?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DropdudeJohn I also noticed you haven't copy and pasted the general considerations. Have a read! Note that compliance with international human rights legislation and individual case merits as well as expectations need to be considered. None of which we can know until they are processed. Editorial note: UN doc. A/55/383, Nov. 2000. (Summary Conclusions: Article 31 of the 1951 Convention Expert Roundtable organized by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the Graduate Institute of International Studies, Geneva, Switzerland, 8–9 November 2001)
Illegal entry (Article 31)
General considerations
1. Article 31 of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees presents particular challenges to States seeking to manage asylum applications effectively, while ensuring that specific international obligations are fully implemented.
2. The interpretation and application of Article 31 requires that account be taken both of the developing factual circumstances affecting the movements of refugees and asylum seekers, and also of developments in international law, including the impact of regional and international human rights instruments, the practice of treaty and other monitoring bodies, and the provisions of related treaties, such as the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children,and the Protocol Against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air, Supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime.1
3. It was recalled that the UNHCR Executive Committee had acknowledged that refugees will frequently have justifiable reasons for illegal entry or irregular movement, and that it had recommended appropriate standards of treatment in, among others, Conclusions Nos. 15, 22, 44, and 58.
4. It was also observed that for States Parties to the 1951 Convention and/or 1967Protocol, Article 31 combines obligations of conduct and obligations
of result.
5. Thus, Article 31(1) specifically obliges States not to impose penalties on refugees falling within its terms. Article 31(2) calls upon States not to
apply to the movements of refugees within the scope of paragraph 1, restrictions other than those that are necessary, and only until their status is regularized locally or they secure admission to another country.
6. The effective implementation of these obligations requires concrete steps at the national level. In the light of experience and in view of the nature of the obligations laid down in Article 31, States should take the necessary steps to ensure that refugees and asylum seekers within its terms are not subject to penalties. Specifically, States should ensure that refugees benefiting from this provision are promptly identified, that no proceedings or penalties for illegal entry or presence are applied pending the expeditious determination of claims to refugee status and asylum, and that the relevant criteria are interpreted in the light of the applicable international law and standards.
7. In particular, while the relevant terms of Article 31 (‘coming directly’, ‘without delay’, ‘penalties’, ‘good cause’) must be applied at the national level, full account must always be taken of the circumstances of each individual case if international obligations are to be observed. It was further noted, on the basis of the practice of States, that these obligations are implemented most effectively where accountable national mechanisms are able to determine the applicability of Article 31, having regard to the rule of law and due process, including advice and representation.
8. Steps are also required to ensure that the results laid down in Article 31(2) are achieved. In particular, appropriate provision should be made at the national level to ensure that only such restrictions are applied as are necessary in the individual case, that they satisfy the other requirements of this Article, and that the relevant standards, in particular international human
rights law, are taken into account.
9. The incorporation and elaboration of the standards of Article 31 in national legislation, including by providing judicial review in the case of detention, would be an important step for the promotion of compliance with Article 31 and related human rights provisions.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yes mate agreed, but to be fair, Nigel Farage is a coast cruising, cliff clutching, shore shagging, surf stalking, seaside scampering, beach bothering, boat buggering, pier patrolling, promenade picketing, ferry fondling ferkwit...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"What feckless leadership the Tories provideth, as they strive with lies and thus divide us.
What food and energy can a working wage buy, when Tory profiteering bleeds our Country dry?
With hungered belly and empty wallet, houses like ice with frozen toilets.
The workers who provide the hands, that toil so hard across this land,
Are left alone to fend unprotected, while corporate taxes remain uncollected.
As cruelty reigns and poverty encircles the vulnerable and impoverished workers,
'Help' we cry in desperation, inept Tory policy inspires inflation.
We drown in debt, they drown in champagne, their lives are shallow, self-serving and vain.
With unity and action direct, the people can stop this inhumane neglect.
It's time to stand, as one and shout 'Get those fecking Tories out!'" Steven Parker...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@blackbeard6423 We have increased funding of around 170 billion (since the pandemic) in the NHS but this is being wasted. Most of that money goes to private companies, not to the NHS. Our GDP is just under 3 trillion. We pay through taxes and N.I. contributions and had a far more efficient service years ago before the Tories sold off assets and increased outsourcing, management, admin etc Blair also played his part by using John Major's PFIs which the Tories extended until 2035 while adding another layer via PFI2. I'm saying that the money is being wasted on contracts with big pharma that charges 10x the cost of generic medications for brand names, excessive admin and management on huge salaries, the sale of profitable NHS assets, the cost of outsourcing and soft privatisation coupled with private finance is draining the funds. Not to mention until recently the underfunding of the NHS. The huge cost of legal cases due to mismanagement. We could pay for the 100,000 staff shortage, the increase in wages for staff and funding new hospitals and emergency stations by simply removing these drains on resources. As for the 1% have a look at the richest people in Britain list and then compare that to the list of highest taxpayers in Britain, you'll find the richest aren't there In the highest taxpayers list. This is because we don't tax wealth, we tax income from work. The richest don't work, they invest and take money from other sources while avoiding inheritance tax, using tax loopholes and creative accounting. The money to have an excellent health service is already in place, it's being siphoned off to shareholders and wasted through mismanagement. PS you seem to be talking about health and social care in general as regards the elderly comment, immigrants have nothing to do with it they pay their share, the subject is the NHS!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tcskips Free market capitalism has never existed - embargoes, trade tariffs, sanctions, blockades, resource wars, petrodollar hegemony. Before privatisation was installed via Thatcherite neoliberalism we had nationalised industry that fulfilled all our needs for over 40 years. For instance, the NHS was fully funded, no waiting lists, we had family doctors, twice the hospital beds, twice the staff and a far more efficient service in the 70s for a far smaller cost... Now we have corrupt contracts that charge 10 times the price of generic medication, outsourcing, layers of admin and middle management, loss of profitable assets (emergency blood supplies, land, hospitals) and that's only soft privatisation. Neoliberalism and its primary failure of privatisation have led to huge debts in every country it's used. Four decades of privatisation has doubled GDP spending and yet government services has been reduced greatly. Unless you got anything better than PR, then I suggest you read some articles.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1