Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Why is the public directing their anger at the individual asylum seeker that arrives at the shore…

882 replies

AnotherNC12345 · 17/09/2025 10:54

… rather than the smuggling / trafficking gangs that are responsible for the journey?

I think it’s very extreme to put all of the blame and the anger at the individual that arrives, rather than the people responsible for orchestrating the whole process. These individuals are often ‘sold the dream’ and hooked in by organised crime groups who direct them to the UK. I’ve looked at sample routes from different parts of the world (screenshots may be pending) and these are complex and would need local people, as well as law enforcement, customs officers and other government officials to turn a blind eye involved in smuggling across multiple borders.

It’s no secret that these crossings likely cost a lot of money, and I think it would be safe to assume that refugees would often be in crippling debt to the OCGs who will put pressure on them to pay it back, by threatening them and their families and I would go as far as to say they could then be coerced in to further committing crimes when granted asylum in order to pay back their debt.

These OCGs are likely involved in other trafficking / crime, not just of asylum seekers but likely drugs, weapons and sex as they have the connections across those borders.

I think it’s very unlikely that an asylum seeker is sitting there looking at all the European government websites and shopping for a country with the best benefits package and approaching a trafficker with a brochure like they’re picking a Jet2 holiday. But this is the narrative that’s often put us and fuelled in the media.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have a better system and want to control our borders better on a whole, but this sheer anger and blame placed at the human in front of us seems very misplaced, when they were likely manipulated in to thinking they can have a better life in this particular country and not another, and the problem is way way bigger than an individual.

Why is the public directing their anger at the individual asylum seeker that arrives at the shore…
Why is the public directing their anger at the individual asylum seeker that arrives at the shore…
OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Papyrophile · 19/09/2025 17:54

Rewilding is a whole new issue. It's fashionable, but deluded IMO. Most large estates owned by wealthy families are carefully managed to be productive and profitable, even grouse moors bring in revenue despite being fairly useless for agricultural pursuits.

38thparallel · 19/09/2025 17:42

Owlbethere sorry I sent my last post before I’d finished it.
Can you give some examples of areas of land owned by the royal family that do nothing? Parks like Windsor are grazed and are beautiful places for people to walk.
You may be referring to Povslen’s large scale rewilding which I agree there may be arguments against .

38thparallel · 19/09/2025 17:16

the royal family are one example, Anders Holch Povlsen is another. Such Uneven distribution of wealth is wrong.

Ok well please will you answer my question; how much land should one family be allowed to own?
Does Povslen just let all the productive land he owns lie fallow? Or is it farmed? Moors and mountains cover many acres but it’s mostly unproductive except for sheep. However as far as I know people can walk on it and enjoy the beautiful scenery.

OwlBeThere · 19/09/2025 16:52

MaturingCheeseball · 19/09/2025 14:43

I like the countryside and I don’t care who owns it as long as public footpaths are honoured. I do not care at all to see it concerted over for new housing; plenty of brownfield for that. A population increasing at the rate of knots, with many demanding public housing - we’re all going to have to learn to like living in flats.

I’m not suggesting we fill the countryside with houses.

OwlBeThere · 19/09/2025 16:50

38thparallel · 19/09/2025 14:05

I mean hoarding. Keeping it for themselves. It’s obscene when we have a purported housing crisis and there are people living in giant mansions with acres of lands doing nothing really.

Do you mean large gardens? If so, what’s the maximum size of garden anyone could have before it becomes obscene?
If you don’t mean that, can you give some actual examples of what you do mean?

I said acres of land, not a large garden.
the royal family are one example, Anders Holch Povlsen is another. Such Uneven distribution of wealth is wrong.

PurpleNurple23 · 19/09/2025 16:45

MaturingCheeseball · 19/09/2025 13:19

It’s peculiar then that those fleeing violence/war/peril become involved in crime….

Some posters might want to look at the Swedish experience - choose any news source, left, right or centre. They are really suffering with gang and drug warfare, with politicians admitting that integration has not happened and that the Swedish tolerant and liberal lifestyle has not been embraced.

I remember seeing on the news in 2015-2017 the alleged increase in crime (especially rape) in Sweden and Germany from the asylum seekers.

If it was just right wing media hysteria and the data doesn't actually show this then I'm happy to be corrected.

OwlBeThere · 19/09/2025 16:38

Vindaloro · 19/09/2025 13:35

I don't want them here. We do not benefit from having them here.

Well at least you are honest in your bigotry.

OwlBeThere · 19/09/2025 16:37

MaturingCheeseball · 19/09/2025 13:19

It’s peculiar then that those fleeing violence/war/peril become involved in crime….

Some posters might want to look at the Swedish experience - choose any news source, left, right or centre. They are really suffering with gang and drug warfare, with politicians admitting that integration has not happened and that the Swedish tolerant and liberal lifestyle has not been embraced.

its not strange at all, desperate people do desperate things. Also please don’t suggest that crime is the norm for asylum seekers because it isn’t.

PurpleNurple23 · 19/09/2025 16:35

SleeplessInWherever · 19/09/2025 12:05

Genuinely - what’s that got to do with you? That woman may be waiting for lessons, she might be midway through learning, a whole range of things which remain nothing to do with anyone else.

I’m perfectly happy for people to live in whatever culture they live in, within ours. I’m fine with us being a mishmash of multiculturalism and diversity, and I’m fine with someone speaking whatever language they speak. It doesn’t make me more or less anything, and doesn’t impact my life in any way.

So you support trapping people in a war torn country to fight a war they may not want to, because they happen to have been born there? Not for me thanks.

I also think, that if you self identify as British Indian, your family evidently migrated here at some stage. So did mine. It would be incredibly hypocritical of me to judge others doing the same, don’t you think?

I don't think multiculturalism and diversity has all been that great. We all live together in a society. You can't be a fully integrated and functioning member of society without knowing the language.

If you mention British expats moving to Spain, I would say, yes they need to learn Spanish.

I do think people should fight and defend their nation in times of dire crisis. Like how Ukrainian men (for the most part) haven't fled and have stayed.

I did migrate with my DH back in the 90s. We have never taken a dime from the tax payer and have always been self reliant.

You can be an immigrant and realise the damaging effects of mass migration be it legal, illegal or asylum shopping.

ForgetMeNotRose · 19/09/2025 15:30

usernamealreadytaken · 19/09/2025 15:10

You could be a politcian, given your nom-answer. So, I'll ask again; do you actually think any of those immigrants came on a boat? Or do you think these highly educated individuals already shared Western values and applied and paid to come legally?

I did answer. If there are no safe routes, how do you imagine that works? We're talking about asylum seekers here, people fleeing war, persecution.

usernamealreadytaken · 19/09/2025 15:10

ForgetMeNotRose · 19/09/2025 11:35

You're forgetting that there are no safe routes for some asylum seekers. Being talented or well educated doesn't change that.

You could be a politcian, given your nom-answer. So, I'll ask again; do you actually think any of those immigrants came on a boat? Or do you think these highly educated individuals already shared Western values and applied and paid to come legally?

Papyrophile · 19/09/2025 15:07

Contraceptives in the water? Sorry, that's facetious of me, but any solution has to involve reducing the total global population. I would prefer it to happen humanely and gently but nothing I have read in history makes me think mass migration will be anything other than bloody and barbaric.

EasternStandard · 19/09/2025 14:53

MaturingCheeseball · 19/09/2025 14:43

I like the countryside and I don’t care who owns it as long as public footpaths are honoured. I do not care at all to see it concerted over for new housing; plenty of brownfield for that. A population increasing at the rate of knots, with many demanding public housing - we’re all going to have to learn to like living in flats.

I don’t think we will have to. Or shouldn’t anyway. We don’t need to just keep going upwards on population.

MaturingCheeseball · 19/09/2025 14:44

concreted over! Autocorrect has visions of Glyndebourne!

MaturingCheeseball · 19/09/2025 14:43

I like the countryside and I don’t care who owns it as long as public footpaths are honoured. I do not care at all to see it concerted over for new housing; plenty of brownfield for that. A population increasing at the rate of knots, with many demanding public housing - we’re all going to have to learn to like living in flats.

Timeforabitofpeace · 19/09/2025 14:32

@VindaloroYou don’t know what you’re talking about.

38thparallel · 19/09/2025 14:05

I mean hoarding. Keeping it for themselves. It’s obscene when we have a purported housing crisis and there are people living in giant mansions with acres of lands doing nothing really.

Do you mean large gardens? If so, what’s the maximum size of garden anyone could have before it becomes obscene?
If you don’t mean that, can you give some actual examples of what you do mean?

SleeplessInWherever · 19/09/2025 13:50

Vindaloro · 19/09/2025 13:35

I don't want them here. We do not benefit from having them here.

Great. We have progress. Who is “them.”

Vindaloro · 19/09/2025 13:35

bemoresloth · 19/09/2025 11:58

Because it's a ready made excuse, easier to use than to say that they just don't want those people here.

I don't want them here. We do not benefit from having them here.

MaturingCheeseball · 19/09/2025 13:19

It’s peculiar then that those fleeing violence/war/peril become involved in crime….

Some posters might want to look at the Swedish experience - choose any news source, left, right or centre. They are really suffering with gang and drug warfare, with politicians admitting that integration has not happened and that the Swedish tolerant and liberal lifestyle has not been embraced.

OwlBeThere · 19/09/2025 13:07

PurpleNurple23 · 19/09/2025 09:16

Why claim it here? Why not in the first safe country they reach? Why not somewhere where they have a closer cultural similarity to? Even so, how does having them here benefit the UK?

Also (I'm okay to be challenged on this) why don't the young men stay and fight for a better country? The Ukrainian men are doing this. If Britain was under siege wouldn't you expect that the men of the country stay and fight for a better tomorrow?

In countries where the Taliban etc are in charge, young men are drafted into their armies and forced to comply, if they don’t they are killed. Would you want your son/brother/husband/friend doing that? Maybe given the regime’s running the countries they don’t WANT to fight for their country. And that’s ok.

LittleBitofBread · 19/09/2025 13:04

PurpleNurple23 · 19/09/2025 11:36

We should limit migration then to the number of vacancies in each industry we have a vacancy in. This is beside the point. Why should we as a nation have to support people fleeing elsewhere? How about we should Iook after our own citizens first?

Not everything is about the economy. We have to look at the cultural and societal implications as well. Especially the lack of integration.

What's the point of claiming somewhere as a home if when the nation is under attack men don't stand up to protect and defend their country? Russia would have fully conquered Ukraine if the Ukrainians had this view. If Britain was under attack from evil powers I'd expect people to band together to fight back.

What's the point of claiming somewhere as a home if when the nation is under attack men don't stand up to protect and defend their country? Russia would have fully conquered Ukraine if the Ukrainians had this view. If Britain was under attack from evil powers I'd expect people to band together to fight back.

This has been said many times on here already, but do you know what happens to men of fighting age in e.g. Afghanistan? Have a google if not. It's not like in WW2 in the UK when the worst you could fear was someone shoving a white feather at you.

OwlBeThere · 19/09/2025 13:03

Youdontseehow · 19/09/2025 09:22

So you are refuting your previous claim that everyone in small boats is coming here legally?

No. If you intend to claim asylum then you can enter via small boat. That is not illegal. It is not illegal for anyone to make a claim to asylum. If that claim is rejected then at that point you are no longer an asylum seeker and you don’t a visa to remain, so you must leave.

OwlBeThere · 19/09/2025 12:59

Youdontseehow · 19/09/2025 09:21

Well this is the point though isn’t it. When they sprint across the beach after the boat lands or through the streets when they exit the back of the lorry, they don’t run to the nearest hospital to take up a post as a surgeon.

They run to places where people they know can hide them. They are lost into society. That is part of the problem.

Add to that - the people in boats are not all legal asylum seekers/refugees. They may claim they are - but they are not. That is why we need processing centres. If they were all coming legally, there’d be no need to process/check their claim is genuine.

And maybe you’d like to give an answer to the question @ForgetMeNotRose has swerved. Even if they were all legal, how many of the 1billion plus people living in conflict/war zones can the UK safely accommodate?

Yes, those people are a problem that needs tackling, I don’t advocate for that as those are the people most likely to be exploited in sweat shops and forced prostitution rings. I have spoken to women who came across and intended to claim asylum but were bundled into vans and forced to work. Those kind of things are problematic and definitely need addressing, I don’t disagree with that. But those are not the people being targeted at hotels and etc are they?
I’m not naive enough to think that every single person crossing that way has a legitimate claim to asylum, that’s what the process of claiming asylum is for to figure out which is which.

both or these issues are issues with government departments, not the fault of people in hotels and b&bs.

to answer your last question I think every country that is able to should be taking a share of the worlds refugees. What exact share that should be is way above my pay grade, but a fair share based on size of population, size of country, wealth of country etc etc.

Cosmicbroccoli · 19/09/2025 12:56

PurpleNurple23 · 19/09/2025 11:38

Maybe it's best if they stay in neighbouring countries then?

the majority do:”^In reality, 70% of refugees remain in countries neighbouring their homeland. For example, Jordan currently hosts 1.3 million refugees from neighbouring Syria. ““https://www.rescue.org/uk/article/why-dont-refugees-stay-first-country-they-reach^

This page includes information on the multiple reasons why people might seek refuge further away including; conflict in the region, family ties. It also states that we accommodate 1% of the worlds refugees.

Why don't refugees stay in the first country they reach? | The IRC

Do refugees have to seek asylum in the first country they enter? Why don't asylum seekers stop before they get to the UK? It’s time to separate the myths from the facts…

https://www.rescue.org/uk/article/why-dont-refugees-stay-first-country-they-reach

Swipe left for the next trending thread