I think most of the Ukrainians are planning to return home I’d doubt it will be the same for the Afghans, it’s longterm accommodation they’ll be looking for.
---
A lot of shocking reports online
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
---
A lot of shocking reports online
They’re likely looking for something more stable than a hotel. Especially with the hotels often providing meals and no cooking facilities . Not that different from Ukrainians who want to live independent lives, nor can they be certain that in a few months or a year they will be able to return - or want to return to begin with
It’s interesting that the underlying idea appears to be that there is no way these people could possibly find ways to live independently and try to build up their lives here from scratch, even if they have to live in crappy housing for a bit
I’m sure it would be a struggle without gov assistance, those that have the right documentation might fair better though…A lot of Afghans wanted to return home they couldn’t stand being crammed into the hotels I’m sure families would struggle more than singletons.
Could you not stop the insults and just answer the question? What is it that you think should be done?I think you’re just trolling at this stage,” get out of bed on the wrong side again “
If I had the solution I’d sell it to the government and put it towards my retirement fund, economic migrants can already apply for work visas as can student’s ,it’s people trafficking they need to stamp out but like every other underworld dealer there’s no easy solution when you’ve got those intent on breaking every rule…What’s yours?
Or do you not see a problem?
Don't I see a problem with people trafficking? Of course I do. I'm just curious what that has to do with 95% of the rhetoric that you post about asylum seekers some of which are the victims of people trafficking.
One of the things the government could do that would reduce the reliance on people trafficking is to open 'safe and legal routes' that would allow asylum seekers to apply from outside the UK. I'd also suggest that reducing the huge and completely intentional delay in actually assessing asylum claims and putting greater effort into reaching agreements to return unsuccessful asylum seekers to other countries (which of course we had until it was thrown away by Brexit in the headlong rush to 'defend our borders').
What I definitely wouldn't do is to criminalise the victims of people trafficking, arbitrarily and subjectively classify whole groups of asylum seekers as 'illegal immigrants" and threaten to deport them to Rwanda which is what the government is planning.
I don’t know what you’re talking about at no time have I said genuine victims shouldn’t be helped, 30% of migrants have come from safe countries, some have paid to come or made their own way ,how do you distinguish between genuine and not so genuine when the lines are completely blurred ? that’s what the government need to be focusing on otherwise people in desperate situations will be returned to those situations and those playing the system will continue to play it.
---
They’re planning on banning appeals
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-su...-migrants-from-appealing-deportation-12802611PM plans to ban Channel migrants from appealing deportation
---
Denmark have abandoned the Rwanda scheme.
Europe has lost control of the migrant crisis
Piers Morgan brought out the bulldog in Rishi Sunak during their interview on Thursday evening. ‘If you come here illegally – if you’re an illegal migrant here – then you will not be able to stay here,’ thundered the Prime Minister, in as much as he ever can thunder. People who arrive in...
www.spectator.co.uk
Last edited:
Presumably by 'migrants' you mean asylum seekers. Do you have a source for the 30% statistic or can you explain what you mean by a 'safe country'?
There is no such thing as 'genuine and not-so-genuine' asylum seekers. Asylum seekers are asylum seekers. The decision whether grant asylum to an asylum seeker is made on the basis of the immigration rules (which were modified by the Nationality and Borders Act 2022).
Do you have an opinion on whether these are good or bad things?They’re planning on banning appeals
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-su...-migrants-from-appealing-deportation-12802611PM plans to ban Channel migrants from appealing deportation
---
Denmark have abandoned the Rwanda scheme.
Europe has lost control of the migrant crisis
Piers Morgan brought out the bulldog in Rishi Sunak during their interview on Thursday evening. ‘If you come here illegally – if you’re an illegal migrant here – then you will not be able to stay here,’ thundered the Prime Minister, in as much as he ever can thunder. People who arrive in...
Migrants are not asylum seekers…The home office quoted 30% in a recent interview, a safe country is one not at war or where persecution is minimal, a bit like our own.
---
Those things will only work if they can decipher those in genuine need.
Europe has lost control of the migrant crisis
Piers Morgan brought out the bulldog in Rishi Sunak during their interview on Thursday evening. ‘If you come here illegally – if you’re an illegal migrant here – then you will not be able to stay here,’ thundered the Prime Minister, in as much as he ever can thunder. People who arrive in...
www.spectator.co.uk
Attachments
Last edited:
The problem is people muddle the terms migrant and asylum seekers.
Now the government is proposing policies that will reach the boundaries of international law and are willing to withdraw from the ECHR if needs be.
A) Why can't the government just behave in a way that doesn't threaten human rights? And B) you'd be a fool not to think this won't eventually trickle down and impede on the rights of the less powerful in British society.
But hey, whatever it takes to sort this out, right? Bring the public to the point of almost begging for this to be fixed so we'd accept almost any solution, even ones which threaten our own human rights.
Sinister.
Now the government is proposing policies that will reach the boundaries of international law and are willing to withdraw from the ECHR if needs be.
A) Why can't the government just behave in a way that doesn't threaten human rights? And B) you'd be a fool not to think this won't eventually trickle down and impede on the rights of the less powerful in British society.
But hey, whatever it takes to sort this out, right? Bring the public to the point of almost begging for this to be fixed so we'd accept almost any solution, even ones which threaten our own human rights.
Sinister.
All migrants don’t want to stay permanently some come for short term economic reasons but some people for whatever reason can’t see that, Hotels in ROI are now refusing to accept any asylum seekers/ migrants because locals are kicking up a fuss about the volume of young single men being placed there most without any identification…It would be wrong to opt out of the ECHR but I’m sure most people haven’t got a clue about what they actually do.
Some argue we should only allowed "skilled, valuable" migrants and/or refugees but doesn't seem like the support is there for those with such qualities
www.theguardian.com
Let's also not forget the stereotype of foreign graduates coming to the UK and doing menial jobs because their qualifications aren't valued by UK employers.
Afghan refugee in London told to give up doctorate and move to Yorkshire
University asks home secretary to intervene in move that would deprive him of scholarship and teaching roles
www.theguardian.com
Let's also not forget the stereotype of foreign graduates coming to the UK and doing menial jobs because their qualifications aren't valued by UK employers.
This is exceptionally confusing. 'Migrant' is an umbrella term that covers anybody that moves from one country to another including people that come to work, study, reunite with family etc. Why does it matter whether the country they come from is safe or not? I suspect although you would have to confirm this because as I say your comments are very confusing, you are thinking of the small proportion of people who arrive through 'irregular routes' who do not claim asylum when they arrive in the UK.
The only issue where a 'safety' is an issue is where someone asks to given protection by another country because their country of origin is not safe for them. They are by definition seeking asylum.
It's a shame that you can't quote a substantive source for the 30% figure or explain what it represents. I've searched but can't find anything about '30%' or any data that might substantiate the figure.
Again it's unclear what you mean. Are you responding to my comment that "the decision whether grant asylum to an asylum seeker is made on the basis of the immigration rules (which were modified by the Nationality and Borders Act 2022". If so then this is how you "decipher those in genuine need".
Again you post links without comment or explanation about how they relate to your point. Do you think these are good or bad things?Europe has lost control of the migrant crisis
Piers Morgan brought out the bulldog in Rishi Sunak during their interview on Thursday evening. ‘If you come here illegally – if you’re an illegal migrant here – then you will not be able to stay here,’ thundered the Prime Minister, in as much as he ever can thunder. People who arrive in...
Personally I loathe the 'dog whistle politics', appealing to the right wing by adopting blanket policies based on subjective and arbitrary decisions at the potential expense of 'genuine' asylum seekers that they profess to want to support.
I’d be interested to know how many dinghies are intercepted/helped by the coast guard and people on those dinghies, assuming they include economic migrants, are then “forced” to make an asylum claim and go into the system
From most of the stories about the issue, I get the impression that the majority of these boats are “welcomed” by someone - charities often seem to volunteer in the areas too and the people appear to report new arrivals going by social media posts
So really, if you are an economic migrant trying to evade the authorities, arriving by boat is probably not preferable. Also it’s stupidly dangerous and anyone with a brain cell would know that
---
I love some procrastination:
90% of those arriving are claiming asylum. These arrivals only account for “41% of the total number of people claiming asylum” in that specific time frame - can someone explain what this actually means?
It’s interesting to me that the whole thing is specifically on small boat arrivals and does not really mention the other methods until the very end. I’m sure there are some better numbers in the data they publish alongside with this
If the HO genuinely believes that these people are working illegally while waiting for their asylum claim to be assessed then surely there are fixes for this? Other than obviously speeding up the process for assessing claims
There’s a bunch of estimates for the number of undocumented people but most notably:
From most of the stories about the issue, I get the impression that the majority of these boats are “welcomed” by someone - charities often seem to volunteer in the areas too and the people appear to report new arrivals going by social media posts
So really, if you are an economic migrant trying to evade the authorities, arriving by boat is probably not preferable. Also it’s stupidly dangerous and anyone with a brain cell would know that
---
I love some procrastination:
90% of those arriving are claiming asylum. These arrivals only account for “41% of the total number of people claiming asylum” in that specific time frame - can someone explain what this actually means?
It’s interesting to me that the whole thing is specifically on small boat arrivals and does not really mention the other methods until the very end. I’m sure there are some better numbers in the data they publish alongside with this
If the HO genuinely believes that these people are working illegally while waiting for their asylum claim to be assessed then surely there are fixes for this? Other than obviously speeding up the process for assessing claims
There’s a bunch of estimates for the number of undocumented people but most notably:
Last edited:
What’s your definition of a “ genuine “ asylum seeker?
As you know the criteria you mentioned above do have the option to apply for visas before they arrive, I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make…Nor the constant reference to “ right wing “
Last edited:
It means of all the people coming to the UK and claiming asylum, 41% arrived by boat. So it includes other means like car or plane.
To add to that, it means nearly everyone who arrives by boat is claiming asylum.
That’s what I thought it meant when I originally read it but was surprised to see that the % is fairly low. The news would make you think nearly everyone is arriving by boat
Illegal immigration includes anything from going to another country via an informal route to arriving legally, say on a student visa, then remaining longer than allowed.
As I said before there is no such thing as 'genuine' asylum seeker. An asylum seeker is someone who has asked for asylum. Once their claim has been assessed they may be successful and given refugee status or unsuccessful and liable to be removed from the country.
You seem to want (I say seem because you refuse to make your position clear) people to be assessed before they make a claim for asylum which seems illogical to me.
Let's be clear what the government' position is:
- You can't claim asylum unless you are in the UK
- There is no 'legal' way to enter the country in order to claim asylum
- If you arrive at the border by an 'irregular route' you are an 'illegal immigrant'
- Illegal immigrants will not be permitted to apply for asylum and will either be returned to the country they came from or sent to Rwanda.
- The UK will only consider requests for asylum received through 'safe and legal routes' i.e. The UK Resettlement Scheme, Community Sponsorship, and Mandate Scheme, nationality specific schemes e.g those for Ukraine, Afghanistan and Hong Kong
- If you are facing persecution in a country not covered by those scheme - go somewhere else.
Last edited:
There’s people arriving on the back of lorries and planes it’s not only boats.
---
….it’s like knocking your head against brick wall trying to understand the points you think you’re making.
So let’s be clear you think we should welcome every illegal migrant even those that had claims refused elsewhere and put them up at the taxpayers expense? because that’s what’s happening.
---
You’re literally just after posting about “ genuine asylum seeker “ and now you’re contradicting yourself
….it’s like knocking your head against brick wall trying to understand the points you think you’re making.So let’s be clear you think we should welcome every illegal migrant even those that had claims refused elsewhere and put them up at the taxpayers expense? because that’s what’s happening.
Attachments
Last edited: