Anyone who has no legal basis (and never has had) to be here should be dealt with within the law. Deportation where possible, but returning them to a war zone is not allowed so I’d like to see a solution to that.
Over stayers should be reviewed on a case by case basis. To deport all of these may not be in our interests. For example, a father who is supporting his family, part of the community, contributing to the exchequer, working in an industry that has a shortage of labour (construction for example), but for the sake of some dates paperwork that might have elapsed, but he was too busy to notice, or finds navigating the complex system a bit problematic? Deporting that guy would be cutting off our nose to spite our face. Overstayers who came here on a student visa, barely studied and has disappeared into the gig economy, avoiding taxes, yeah, that guy is not good for our economy and shouldn’t be here.
It is entirely unreasonable to tar all young men from another country with the same brush, whilst ignoring the unbelievably misogynistic and violent nature of British men, them being the ones who commit over 95% of VAWG. It feels very disingenuous to have men protesting to “protect our girls”, to find that 40% of them have domestic abuse convictions. It is dishonest to use false statistics to bolster their case, particularly where the basis they provide for their numbers ignores the complex issue of rape reporting and institutional biases in the police and justice system. I would be entirely on board with a strategy to target men in reducing VAWG, which would include exploring cultural attitudes, but specifically targeting immigrant men for that would make little difference to the problems women face in the U.K.
That there are problems with the asylum system is not in doubt. As with any government process in the U.K., there is the ability for it to be abused. Whether it is our benefits system, taxation, the NHS, our justice system, there are always people who find a way to sneak through the cracks. The answer isn’t to say we need to reduce the numbers, it is to fix the system. You claim you wouldn’t need a small boat if you are legitimate, but you realise there is no, safe, legal route for someone to claim asylum in many cases in the U.K.? You have to get to this country (or approach a consulate) to claim asylum. If you are a victim of the Taliban in Afghanistan, there is no U.K. consulate you can go to, you’d need to get a visa to go to the nearest one (Pakistan). That is incredibly difficult to do, particularly if you are trying to remain under the radar. The schemes we had to help those we left behind when the West fucked up their country have all closed. When you do get here, the evidence you need to provide is quite detailed. There has been much made of the report that a guy was taking money off people to advise them simply to claim they were gay and they would get in. What is missing from most of those reports is, there is no evidence that any person who paid him was successful in their application. It’s important to deal in facts when we talk about asylum. People’s lives depend on it.
The international treaties we were instrumental in setting up and voluntarily signed are reviewed all the time. Naive to think people smuggling is a new phenomenon, but the system was not simply designed for armed conflict. The nature of oppression has changed, but also political and geological climates have changed. Are we really going to argue that when a developing nation faces a climate crisis largely caused by developed nations results in a country becoming unliveable, we have zero responsibility to provide a home for those who are displaced? When the west starts a war in the Middle East with no exit strategy and it leads to a dangerous dictatorship rising to power (often because of our own political meddling) and the people within that nation face destitution or death because of our actions, we do not have any obligations? The world is more complex and therefore so are the reasons for seeking asylum.
I can’t find any basis for the 40% statistic, I’d be interested to see where that comes from. How does it relate to the number of vulnerable, elderly people who come here? However, rather than focussing on a statistic, it’s important to find out why that is the case. What is preventing people from finding and staying in work? Is it a reluctance on employers to hire them? Is it a result of chronic mental health issues (PTSD etc) caused by their experiences? Is it that their skills are not transferable and training is difficult to access? Is it that the only work available is low paid and keeps them below the threshold? I’m sure there are some who just choose not to, in the same way as we have some in the U.K. who do the same, but as with the vast majority of people born here, people want to work. Data helps us fix that problem.
I agree that these conversations are not happening, and they should be. A lot of good work is done by charity organisations to explore all these issues, but the the discourse is derailed, largely because of the divisive nature of our politics and our society. Too many people just don’t want to hear that these issues have a solution, they just want to jump to “we’re full, get them out”. Much of this is because of media and politicians who are scapegoating. The economic problems we have won’t be solved by reducing immigration to close to zero. We could rid the country of every non taxpaying immigrant, legal or not, and we would still not be able to get a GP appointment, our schools would still be over crowded and wages would still be low. The reasons for this sit with the small number of people with the power and the money, but it’s not in their interest for us to be told that so instead we’re told to blame “others”. That allows the conversation to be commandeered by racists who love the arguments it gives them because they can pretend it’s not about racism. The internet’s algorithms then manipulate those who are not racist into genuinely believing they are at risk and that’s how we get far right parties leading in the polls.