Why do Labour not get it?

Charities, the ones encouraging them to come can pay. Most of the rest of us have had enough.

Love that idea.
Also, I'm.out 😁

The things that make them 4 star are the pools, spas etc and they don’t have use of these. So it’s just a bed in a basic room.

This is totally incorrect! I stay in a lot of UK hotels for work and these are generally 4 hotels with swimming pools and restaurants, at £100-200 a night. Business hotels, basically. Over the past 5-6 years, I’ve seen numerous hotels house refugees. Security guards, social workers, and translators are common. These are *cushy hotels by most people’s terms.

You?

It could be an optional extra tax. We could call it the ‘morally superior person tax’. I won’t be signing up for it, but you could.

The charities who persist in encouraging them to come over. The human rights lawyers who fight to keep them here after their asylum claims have failed and the caring British person who thinks that the rest of the world has a right to come to the UK and live off tax payer money.

So you don't want to pay for their upkeep. Who do you think should pay?

I am no expert on this, and I agree that the system is not foolproof. My point was that I don't agree with locking people up when we can't prove they have committed a crime.
How would you make the system less gappy? Genuinely interested.

You can't no. But there isn't much reason to leave. The one i know is surrounded for miles by fields. There is no public transport. There are facilities (old RAF site) on site. It has a canteen, the old gym from RAF days. Healthcare could be provided there.

Many concerns come from the wandering around town. Men following teenage, pre-teen girls and women and behaving inappropriately towards them. Seemingly adult males trying to access the school system and using it to behave inappropriately towards young girls. There have been attempted and successful rapes and attacks on women by males housed in hotels. At least in military barracks, away from the public with only fields and no public transport, with guards checking them in and out, our girls and women would be protected.

Apparently it’s a case of at least he didn’t have to be detained whilst we found out more about this person.

Not having them detained appears more important than outcomes like this.

The list is not rigorous at all for many people. Asylum is not refused if nothing comes up. It still doesn’t mean they haven’t committed a horrendous crime before arriving.

It isn’t rigorous process at all. It’s full of gaps.

I agree that hotels should not be used. Serco, Mears and Clearsprings might think differently, lucrative cntracts and big profits.

The shared hotel rooms are standard basic accommodation

Let's unravel this, shall we?

Just because you might be paying some towards the upkeep of the people you don't want to shelter in your home, doesn't mean you are not happy to other to pay as well, even though they might not share your opinion.

As for the BIG question , I don't think there is any dehumanising going on. Or scapegoating.

I see young men who are happily using the accommodation and services provided for them. Even though I'm sure they would welcome a few home cooked meals and the comfort of a cat or seven.

I agree that a criminal from Afghanistan is unlikely to be identified as one by asking the Taliban, and that that information is unlikely to be trustworthy if it is recieved.
That is precisely why the home office use many other forms of evidence in order to corroborate a person's claim. If they do not feel they have sufficient evidence to suggest that a person is eligible for asylum, then their claim is refused.
Is it a perfect system? Far from it. But I don't think the fact that we cannot 100% guarantee that someone is not a criminal means that they should be locked up.

We should do what other countries do,put them in tents ,they won’t come over then

You can’t stop people going in and out nor stop them accessing facilities.

I'm happy that the bill for migrant housing falls to the tax payers. Just not hotels. Standard basic accommodation only should be provided.

The checks won’t include a criminal from Afghanistan. There will be many who commit horrendous crimes who do not end up on what you’ve listed. They also could have no ID at all.

Can you see that?

Is that aimed at me?

While being all virtuous and oh so kind.

Yes, it's exactly the same.

Because there are thousands of homeless consultants roaming the streets and the NHS are looking to rent people's garages to accommodate any MRI equipment that's going spare.

Hmmm and what about those who threw their documents into the sea and those whose "personal details" are nothing but fiction.

I can see why barracks would be a good idea. Most abandoned barracks are in the middle of nowhere so not really near any existing communities. I once visited one of the barracks which was been used as part of an exhibition on the military as part of work. Despite been somewhat "abandoned" as a MOD facility it still had armed guards at the gate and checks in and out of the site.

Many people in the country are not happy. Labour need to do something as Reform are doing well. If Labour don't do something soon, it won't just be reform that get a voice in the mainstream, more extreme right wing groups (EDL/ BNP) will start to also get a voice. Something we always overlook - Hitler didn't come to power out of no-where. There was public support for him and his policies. He had a huge propaganda machine with him.

Whilst ever legitimate concerns about immigration/ use of hotels are swept under the carpet as and described "right wing and extreme right wing" it softens the definition of " extreme right wing". People start to think "right wing" or having "extreme right wing views" means concerned for their communities and speaking out against unchecked and out of control migration. Rather than actual far right wing and extreme right wing that in some cases advocates for eugenics and forced sterilisation programs, dehumanisation of certain races ect. It is so important that the terminology "extreme right wing" doesn't not become softened.

Won't include what? Sorry, I'm not understanding your question.