English Channel migrant crossing crisis #2

[Merpedy]

Government calls time on ‘ludicrous’ asylum challenges

EXCLUSIVE: Figures show 9,483 migrants are currently living in hotels or similar accommodation, adding to the £1.5billion annual cost of the UK's asylum system.

www.express.co.uk

They don’t seem to have an awful lot on them when the courts or the legal processes are agreeing with them also god forbid the lawyer works for the best outcome for their client

I have talked about NRM referrals before - they’re far rarer these days because they delay the claim being processed and there’s already a massive backlog and people are waiting years and years
Albanian clients seem to be the exception atm, at least judging by the stats on waiting times for claims as I’ve discussed before, but it’s because the majority are claiming to have been trafficked. The few experiences I have had with NRM referred clients, it was very obvious that they likely had PTSD and required support


All in all, it feels like the government is trying to push the blame of their failures on lawyers. Sooner or later this sort of action is going to end in a disaster - though, as mentioned before, it seems that some people/firms had already been attacked

 

[Moth]

Government calls time on ‘ludicrous’ asylum challenges

EXCLUSIVE: Figures show 9,483 migrants are currently living in hotels or similar accommodation, adding to the £1.5billion annual cost of the UK's asylum system.

www.express.co.uk

They don’t seem to have an awful lot on them when the courts or the legal processes are agreeing with them also god forbid the lawyer works for the best outcome for their client
I have talked about NRM referrals before - they’re far rarer these days because they delay the claim being processed and there’s already a massive backlog and people are waiting years and years
Albanian clients seem to be the exception atm, at least judging by the stats on waiting times for claims as I’ve discussed before, but it’s because the majority are claiming to have been trafficked. The few experiences I have had with NRM referred clients, it was very obvious that they likely had PTSD and required support
All in all, it feels like the government is trying to push the blame of their failures on lawyers. Sooner or later this sort of action is going to end in a disaster - though, as mentioned before, it seems that some people/firms had already been attacked

Absolutely on brand for this government to try to inhibit judicial oversight of their actions. A decent government would see an independent judiciary and legal system as an important cornerstone of the constitution. This government clearly sees it as a barrier to be overcome and if at all possible diminished. We are continuing to head towards authoritarianism and I am genuinely frightened for what this will mean for my kids and grandchildren.

 

[monga]

Maybe they’re trying to bring the rest of the UK into line with NI where democracy doesn’t exist and they do exactly what they want, I can confirm voter id isn’t that bad lol.

 

[Moth]

Though I'd post this article as an example of the blatant lies told by our media about asylum issues which unfortunately some people will choose to believe. This has The Sun achieving the double whammy of being anti-asylum seekers and anti-EU. Meat and drink to their readers and people of a similar mindset.

Fury as bid to house migrants in tents and ships blocked over EU rule concerns

MINISTERS want to house migrants in tents on disused airfields and cruise ships — but are being blocked by officials claiming it would breach EU rules. The furious dust-up comes as Prime Minister R…

www.the-sun.com

However as with most things written in The Sun, it's nonsense. The reason for government officials questioning the use of tents to house asylum seekers is because it could be in contravention of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) by which the UK has agreed to be bound. Article 11 of the ICESCR gives people 'the right to an adequate standard of living (including the right to food, clothing and housing).

The Covenant was accepted by all members of the EU which incorporated it into EU law as a EU directive while the UK was still a member. However it is not 'EU law' as The Sun claims and that is not the reason why UK government officials are doing their job by pointing out that the government could contravene international law (not that it seems to care about such things). It's also true that many EU countries use tents to house asylum seekers because there is no universally accepted standard for what constitutes 'an adequate standard of living'. The UK could choose to abrogate it's responsibilities under the ICESCR as part of it's bonfire of EU legislation which given it's hostility to inconvenient international law and conventions would not be surprising.

 

[monga]

France use tents as do Ireland , it’s not only Brussels.

 

[Moth]

France use tents as do Ireland , it’s not only Brussels.

Doh! That's why I said "many EU countries use tents to house asylum seekers"

 

[monga]

Doh! That's why I said "many EU countries use tents to house asylum seekers"

So what point was it you were trying to make? It’s clearly not against the law if numerous countries do it
If they’re housing them in buildings then there are various health and safety laws that must be followed, a disused hospital in Dublin was deemed unsuitable because it fell below the standard required so the alternative is modular housing.

 

[Merpedy]

Given the discussion a day or so ago about how there’s more “deserving” people to give asylum to and complains about men making the journey:

Children among 59 people killed in boat wreck off Italy’s coast

Boat believed to be bringing refugees from Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan struck rocks off coast of Calabria

www.theguardian.com

At least 43 people, including a newborn baby, have died in a shipwreck as they tried to land on a beach in rough seas off the coast of Italy’s Calabria region.

An estimated 120 people were reported to be onboard the boat before it crashed into the rocks. Eighty people have so far been rescued.

According to the International Organization for Migration’s Missing Migrants project, 20,333 people have died or gone missing in the central Mediterranean since 2014.

Almost 60 people dead after shipwreck of boat carrying migrants near Italy

Dozens of bodies including children were found washed up on the shores of Steccato di Cutro, a seaside resort in the province of Crotone in southern Italy

inews.co.uk

Another Italian news agency, AGI, said a baby and several children were among the dead after the vessel crashed against rocks in rough seas and run aground by the coast.

 

[Blueblue123]

Government calls time on ‘ludicrous’ asylum challenges

EXCLUSIVE: Figures show 9,483 migrants are currently living in hotels or similar accommodation, adding to the £1.5billion annual cost of the UK's asylum system.

www.express.co.uk

They don’t seem to have an awful lot on them when the courts or the legal processes are agreeing with them also god forbid the lawyer works for the best outcome for their client

I have talked about NRM referrals before - they’re far rarer these days because they delay the claim being processed and there’s already a massive backlog and people are waiting years and years
Albanian clients seem to be the exception atm, at least judging by the stats on waiting times for claims as I’ve discussed before, but it’s because the majority are claiming to have been trafficked. The few experiences I have had with NRM referred clients, it was very obvious that they likely had PTSD and required support


All in all, it feels like the government is trying to push the blame of their failures on lawyers. Sooner or later this sort of action is going to end in a disaster - though, as mentioned before, it seems that some people/firms had already been attacked

Funny that they come for "lefty activist" lawyers and not the judges who are ruling in their favour in accordance to the law. These cases aren't being presented to a jury but I guess attacking judges would be too much like criticising their own.

The judicial system is accepted and effective until it holds the government to account. Veerryyyy interesting.

While we're on the topic of taxpayers' money being wasted on legal battles, let's remind ourselves that our wealthy former prime minister who's earned millions in a matter of weeks is asking us to foot the £200,000 bill to defend his Downing Street parties.

 

[Merpedy]

Some reactions from legal Twitter:

 

[Moth]

So what point was it you were trying to make? It’s clearly not against the law if numerous countries do it
If they’re housing them in buildings then there are various health and safety laws that must be followed, a disused hospital in Dublin was deemed unsuitable because it fell below the standard required so the alternative is modular housing.

My point was that the article in The Sun misrepresents the facts when it claims "moaning civil servants in the Housing Department and Ministry of Defence are trying to kibosh the plan" to house asylum seekers in tents by claiming that "it would breach EU rules — known as directive 2013/9/EC — which sets high standards of accommodation that asylum seekers must be housed in".

The EU Directive simply implements the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) which the UK and all of its former partners in the EU have agreed to follow. The UK agreed to abide by ICESCR in 1976, the EU directive wasn't issued until 37 years later in March 2013. The EU Directive doesn't set any standards for the accommodation that should be afforded to asylum seekers. This is what allows EU members to say that they are abiding by the EU directive while arguably being in contravention of the ICESCR.

It is the job of civil servants to point out to government when their plans may be in contravention of UK or international law. That doesn't mean they are 'moaning' or 'trying to kibosh the plan'. However The Sun knows that it's readers won't understand that and plays to the wider opinions that asylum seekers are somehow getting away with something and the EU is inhibiting our 'sovereignty'.

Ironically the true purpose of the proposal to house asylum seekers in tents is laid bare in the article by the government spokesman who admits that it is intended to save money and to deter people from coming to the UK to seek asylum. Agreeing to abide by a convention that people should not have to live in horrible and inadequate conditions and at the same time saying that we are going to house asylum seekers in horrible and inadequate conditions in order to discourage them from coming to the UK are not compatible and provide prima facie evidence that by doing so the UK (and EU countries) are in contravention of the convention.

 

[monga]

Oddly an immigration lawyer that was interviewed said the new questionnaire is likely to encourage more people to come.

 

[Blueblue123]

Some reactions from legal Twitter:

Also, lol at the government self snitching.

If they acted lawfully then lawyers wouldn't be taking them to court and winning.

 

[Merpedy]

Maintenance failures sparked Heathrow detention centre disturbances, FoI reveals

Freedom of information responses reveal damning findings of internal investigations into power cuts at Harmondsworth in 2022

www.theguardian.com

When asked about the failures identified in the internal reports Home Office sources said they were unable to comment on details as a full review is under way. However, a Home Office spokesperson condemned the large number of small boat arrivals at the time of the incident.

When in doubt, blame the small boat arrivals

 

[Blueblue123]

Maintenance failures sparked Heathrow detention centre disturbances, FoI reveals

Freedom of information responses reveal damning findings of internal investigations into power cuts at Harmondsworth in 2022

www.theguardian.com

When in doubt, blame the small boat arrivals

Great insight into how easily the government blames vulnerable and/or less powerful people for its own failings, knowing it'll be swallowed up unquestioned by enough of the British public for them to get away with it.

Hmmm . I wonder what else they blame migrants/refugees for ? Hmmmmm

 

[Blueblue123]

Asylum seeker plans legal challenge to Home Office questionnaire

Lawyers for Sudanese man launching action say questionnaire being circulated to 12,000 asylum seekers is discriminatory

www.theguardian.com

The asylum seeker bringing the legal challenge arrived in the UK two years ago. He is arguing that the policy is discriminatory because it excludes other countries with a high asylum grant rate, including Sudan, which has a high initial asylum grant rate of 84%.

His lawyer, Martin Bridger, joint head of public law and community care at Instalaw, told the Guardian the legal challenge was being launched because of the multiple concerns about the questionnaire.

“We believe that the policy is discriminatory because it excludes asylum seekers from certain countries and is only available in English,” Bridger said. “We are also concerned that the timeframe of 20 days prevents access to legal advice. This is not sufficient time.”

There are also concerns that many will not be able to access legal advice at all. Almost half of asylum seekers are unable to access legal aid, according to recent analysis carried out by the Free Movement website.

Concerns have also been raised about the complexity of the questions and the unwillingness of many who have been sexually abused, tortured or trafficked, either in the home countries they fled from or on their journeys, to disclose this sensitive, personal information in a written questionnaire. Many from the five countries are likely to have passed through Libya, where this kind of abuse is endemic.

 

[Merpedy]

Asylum seeker plans legal challenge to Home Office questionnaire

Lawyers for Sudanese man launching action say questionnaire being circulated to 12,000 asylum seekers is discriminatory

www.theguardian.com

The asylum seeker bringing the legal challenge arrived in the UK two years ago. He is arguing that the policy is discriminatory because it excludes other countries with a high asylum grant rate, including Sudan, which has a high initial asylum grant rate of 84%.

His lawyer, Martin Bridger, joint head of public law and community care at Instalaw, told the Guardian the legal challenge was being launched because of the multiple concerns about the questionnaire.

“We believe that the policy is discriminatory because it excludes asylum seekers from certain countries and is only available in English,” Bridger said. “We are also concerned that the timeframe of 20 days prevents access to legal advice. This is not sufficient time.”

There are also concerns that many will not be able to access legal advice at all. Almost half of asylum seekers are unable to access legal aid, according to recent analysis carried out by the Free Movement website.

Concerns have also been raised about the complexity of the questions and the unwillingness of many who have been sexually abused, tortured or trafficked, either in the home countries they fled from or on their journeys, to disclose this sensitive, personal information in a written questionnaire. Many from the five countries are likely to have passed through Libya, where this kind of abuse is endemic.

This seemed sort of predictable but at the same time I didn’t expect it.

The countries chosen did seem a bit weird to be as there are plenty of others with similarly high rates of acceptance. It might be linked to the complexity of the cases though? The countries targeted appear to have a history of civil wars that only recently ended or are still ongoing apparently (Yemen), though Sudan has also been affected by a civil war and conflicts so
---
I had a quick scroll through 2021 statistics as listed on World Data, because I’m on a phone and don’t want to be scrolling through HO’s documents and excel sheets
Afghanistan seems like the odd country from the selected list - 82% acceptance rate
Eritrea - high 90s; seems to be a lot of conflict between neighbouring countries that is ongoing, and it’s apparently worse than North Korea in all respects, there’s a report on how families of those who evaded conscription were being punished too
Syria - high 90s; civil war still ongoing according to Wikipedia
Libya - 100% but relatively few applications; Wikipedia says that their civil war ended in 2020 after six years
Yemen - 100% but relatively few applications; Wikipedia says that their civil war is still ongoing

Obviously the Taliban is the most standard answer for Afghanistan being included, and there’s probably some sort of special selection the HO may be able to do as they should surely have data on persecution vs war basis for claiming asylum. Still a bit of a weird choice?

 

[monga]

Military sites being looked at

Asylum seekers: Home Office to review use of Rotherham hotel

The hotel in Rotherham saw a protest between pro and anti-immigration groups earlier this month.

www.bbc.com

 

[Polythene Pam]

Military sites being looked at

Asylum seekers: Home Office to review use of Rotherham hotel

The hotel in Rotherham saw a protest between pro and anti-immigration groups earlier this month.

www.bbc.com

They housed a lot of refugees in the barracks on a disused RAF base near me. The locals (who primarily live in former base housing) were furious. Someone will always be unhappy. Bottom line is lot of people don't want refugees here in any way, shape, or form.

 

[monga]

They housed a lot of refugees in the barracks on a disused RAF base near me. The locals (who primarily live in former base housing) were furious. Someone will always be unhappy. Bottom line is lot of people don't want refugees here in any way, shape, or form.

Better that than hotels , once it starts impacting the tourist trade I’m sure they’ll be a lot more than locals being annoyed.