Illegal Immigrants In Hotels

[Goldengirl123]

What are your thoughts?

So before they arrived, they filled in all the paperwork and got permission to enter? If so, why did they need to risk crossing the channel in a small boat? Why not just catch a plane or ferry?

Labour need to do something otherwise they are going to lose the next general election to Reform.

I could argue that other British citizens are not my responsibility. Why am I paying to keep them warm? It should be down to their offspring. Get round there and pay Mum and Dad's heating bills, and stop being a tight wad.

But we don't say that do we? We pay our taxes (well, some of us do). So we function as a society. We rely on the government to take care of those in need, wherever they live, whatever colour or religion they are. And asylum is one of the ways we exist in the world. One of the benefits of treating people who arrive here well, is so that we are treated well when we go abroad. It's called 'International relations' and it generally keeps us all safe.

I agree with you that something needs to happen, but a detention centre on an uninhabited Scottish island would fail for exactly the same reasons that the Bibby Stockholm failed. It’s not just about staffing it. You’re detaining men, women and children for up to a year and effectively detaining the staff as well. If people wanted to work in those conditions, they’d work on a North Sea oil rig.

.

You’re a British citizen who has had their schooling paid for and health care paid for etc by those who were adults and are now retired.

I really think this a bad faith argument to try and detract from the actual topic here.

And people do work on oil rigs…

So it’s possible

No, because we don’t deport failed asylum seekers. Deportation orders are really serious things and reserved for criminals and the like.

Failed asylum seekers are administratively removed.

.

You’re not going to solve this issue arguing about semantics

Oh dear God, you’re just being silly now.

Explain?

You’re saying no one would do it because it’d be like working on an oil rig

except lots of people work on oil rigs.

I think I should have reworded that.

Our pensioners are British and they live in Britain

Someone tried to overrule us before and they failed.
Here we are again. Be proud to be British.
Stick those British flags up.

I’m not trying to solve it. If I had any sensible, affordable or even just sane and legal ideas about how to solve it, I’d be on the phone to Kier, sharing them with him.

What I’m trying to do is get at least one person to understand what illegal entry is, that it’s an offence, that we don’t prosecute because we’re signatories to the Refugee Convention but that doesn’t mean that it’s not still an offence, that some asylum seekers in small boats have entered illegally and that some asylum seekers in small boats have arrived completely legally and that we do not sodding deport failed asylum seekers unless other factors come into play.

Again, irrelevant. Both my parents, and step parents, worked and paid taxes. So that argument is moot. I do not have to be grateful because some old people paid tax. We all pay it. That's how a national economy works.

We exist in a society. We don't have to house asylum seekers on an individual basis. Like we don't have to pay for our own parents' pension upkeep. The argument "well, you put them up then" is nonsense. And is used by people who wish to derail intelligent debate.

We absolutely have to house asylum seekers on an individual basis. That’s exactly what the process of their application involves.

Finding out whether they, as an individual,
should be granted asylum.

But that’s just a distraction.

The legal language around it isn’t relevant. That’s not what is causing the issues in communities. We could rename them “happy butterflies” instead of illegal or legal migrants. The fact of the matter is that there are tens of thousands of undocumented men arriving in our towns every year. And that having undocumented men on this level is a safeguarding risk.

I have been in multiple hotels that accommodate refugees and asylum seekers
They are basic. Very. Small room. No cooking faculties. Some have Small microwaves bolted to wall.

Regards finances Asylum seeker get £49 pw on a prepaid ASPEN card if in self catered accommodation eg no meal provision . £49 for all your food,toiletries,travel,clothing,phone

Catered accommodation eg If meals are provided they get £9.4 pw on ASPEN card for all your ,travel,clothing,phone. The Home Office provides asylum seekers with:

• accommodation eg hostel, b&b ,hotel
• 3 meals a day
• allowance of £9.40 per week
• change of bed linen once per week
• laundry once per week

To be clear it’s basic, no frills

Labour need to do something otherwise they are going to lose the next general election to Reform.

What are reforms policies for the NHS ? Dentistry ? Education including SEN provision ? Housing including social housing ? Raising the standard of living ? Inflation ? the environment including dealing with water related pollution ?

True, but at the moment this is No. 1 issue in polls.

@CoffeeLipstickKeys That's why many of them are working for Deliveroo and similar, under the radar. The police know this and are ignoring it.

True, but at the moment this is No. 1 issue in polls.

Which polls ?

YouGov

I’m factually stating what the finances & accommodation provisions are. No one is getting £££despite what’s in the press

Do some folk work & cheat the system?yes. Working whilst in receipt of benefits isn’t unique to asylum seekers. A Minority UK citizens claim benefits and work. A minority of asylum seekers illegally work. It’s a high risk activity as it impact upon applications

overall Physical and mental health is compromised. Low income and uncertainty demonstrably impact health. Ostracism and stigma with increased threats to safety are commonplace

If a hundred percent of men from a particular small destination committed rape then the majority of rapes would still be committed by British people but those men from that destination would still be represent a certainty of rape offending. Can you not understand that?