Will you sign up to the new refugee sponsorship scheme?

[JoyousOpalLemur]

The Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is apparently announcing next week a new refugee sponsorship scheme.

It would allow households to privately sponsor refugees from conflict zones.

Applications open this autumn, with the aim of resettling more than 10,000 people.

It’s modelled on Canada’s scheme and the Homes for Ukraine programme.

Sponsors would commit to providing financial, emotional and practical support.

What do people think? I just can't help thinking that with the current pressures on housing, schools, GPs and local services, how this will actually work in practice? Has anyone been involved in the Ukraine sponsorship scheme and can share what it was really like day-to-day?

Curious to hear everyone’s views.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/home-secretary-announce-scheme-refugees-uk-lgdr8ff25

Could you answer how you’ll stop men arriving and applying.

We get you like this scheme on top but it doesn’t curtail the established route for men. Can you see that?

Exactly this. All the people willing to help a refugee because they have the resources, spare room etc, why were they not offering to house a homeless person already in this country? There are thousands of homeless families in the UK. Why were they never considered?

Absofuckinglutely not. My Spare rooms will stay spare.

Millions? There have been about 150,000 small boat arrivals since 2018. 25% of those were women and children. It’s a bit hysterical to describe the number as “millions”.

I'm sure some men will. People may want a magical solution to the crisis of populations displaced by war, terror and tyranny. But it wouldn't be adult of me to pretend there is one. Still, we can try to mitigate problems, and we know the dramatic increase in small boats since Brexit should be studied if we want to reverse it.

The point of having a managed and more efficient system for dealing with refugees is that it enables Britain to meet international obligations and to draw on international cooperation in stopping the launch of small boats and facilitating return to safe countries. So one might expert fewer small boats and fewer successful applications to remain, with less pressure on systems.

Harnessing willing volunteers to help refugees admitted to the country to integrate is beneficial to the refugees themselves and to the wider community. Most people won't be in a position to do this. Many won't want to. That's fine. But it's a plausible attempt to find solutions where previous policies haven't been very successful.

Which countries are you returning men to? You do know about refoulement under international law. Are you opting out of that law?

Your posts are just let’s take a small number on top of the system we have now.

Btw you’re incorrect re asylum numbers, they were high in 2002.

Ok, so you accept that the boat numbers won’t be reduced.

There are quite a number of schemes in place to facilitate this also, with government support.

That is that opposite of what I said. I said it would not be adult of me to suggest there would never be another small boat. I'm sure everyone can see that.

I also said that, by addressing the issues caused by Brexit which led to the surge in arrivals, we should expect them to be reduced.

We need to reduce the pull factors. Even Macron has told us this. Companies that employ illegals should be massively fined or shut down so that asylum seekers would be unable to repay the massive debt they owe to the gangmasters that bring them over. That would kick a hole in the business model of the gangs.

Trouble is, the solution of those in power is to pretend that the asylum racket isn't a problem and to hope that everyone will shut up about it (cue more restrictions on free speech).

Ok, the boats will be reduced?

What is going to stop them?

You are talking about returning people to first safe country (or indeed to their place of origin if that is safe). That's not in breach of refoulement law. But it requires international cooperation. Which requires taking a share of refugees.

What's your point about 2002?

Ok so which first safe country do you envisage saying yes? Will Greece, Italy or Spain say yes to the 1000+ mostly men arriving this week?

Why should they? Why would their electorate say yes to taking everyone who arrives here and how would you prove how they entered?

I would have an Afghan woman if I had a spare room.

European (French) investment in the issue, which requires Britain to collaborate, not simply to decide unilaterally to be a refugee free zone.

Another measure which I would say are having an effect are new laws on right to remain. One which might be considered is a more robust identification system (ID cards). Tackling gangs (international cooperation again). Routes to legal application without risking the small boats.

This scheme makes sense as part of a managed refugee system, and part of that is accepting and integrating a number of refugees. Processing abroad and bringing a balanced population here is obviously a better alternative to the current situation. And once they are here, integration should be a priority. That's an advantage of this scheme.

You said you had a DH. That's why I assumed you had a husband.

But if you would only host a single woman, why not a single man?

You do realise some nations aren't party to the refugee convention. I was reading this, India isn't actually. And their supreme court has ruled that because India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, the principle of non-refoulement is not a binding, absolute bar on deportation.

As I said in my first post, I think we should cap the number of refugees. My starting point would be at 20k, which was the figure the Conservatives came up with. I have sympathy for someone genuinely fleeing oppression, but the majority of the world's population live under regimes that might be regarded as oppressive. This includes all of Russia, China and 2/3rds of Africa. We do need to be realistic about how many people we could take.

Another nail in Labour's coffin

Oh yes. A bit like the doctors and engineers that are already coming over in droves. No goat-herders whatsoever. 🙄

How many refugees are you personally housing? There's a difference between being allowed entry into and residence in a country, and living in a household within that country.

It's a bit concerning how many people seemingly can't tell the difference.

I do have a DH. However he has dementia and I am his full time carer now. I do not think under these conditions we could actually have anyone in the house.

The French are being paid, even if it’s not their job to be our border amazingly they are. They are now allowed riot gear on the beach and other stuff in new policies. Still 1000 in a week arrived so what else will you do?

So you think l the numbers arriving in the boats will be reduced because of European/French investment?

is that a joke?

And are capable of giving a clear and concise answer?

Oh sorry, also ID cards and smack the gangs.

Of course!