To ask where I can send my 57p?

[drspouse]

According to the Mirror if all the asylum seekers currently in Calais came into the UK and (highly unlikely) never paid any tax, it would cost each of us 57p.
To save a group of people from some of the most unimaginable horrors in their home countries, I'm more than happy to pay that.
So, where do I sign to pay up (and make it clear I'm happy for them to officially seek asylum and have their claims verified)?

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/not-migrant-hordes--people-6165167

There's plenty of money in this country - it's just concentrated in a few hands. Sort out inequality & there'd be more to play with to help the 'illegals' (I know it was pages back but did I REALLY read that? Illegals?).

I'll happily pay 57p (& haven't been to a London, let alone Islington for years). I did live in London for a few years but South of the river....

Maybe they could ask Bono and Bob Geldof for a few quid?

You know Bono and Bob Geldof are Irish, not British?

I'd just rather donate my 57p to people who are prepared to apply by the legal routes and who aren't showing contempt for our laws before they even get here.

Can you elaborate on the accessible legal routes?

You know Bono and Bob Geldof are Irish, not British?

Bob lives in South London. Has for years. Got a nice posh place in Kent, too.

No, I can't, why would you expect me to?

I know where Bob lives, Jassy. I was expressing confusion as to why swallowed would expect Irish musicians to subsidise illegal migration to the UK.

Is it MN anti-Irish time again?

No, I can't, why would you expect me to?

Because if you're suggesting people only apply for asylum through those routes, it's reasonable to expect that you have thought about what those routes are and whether they're at all accessible to the vast majority of people wishing to claim asylum in the UK.

On Geldof - I just thought it was rather bizarre to exclude a long-term resident on the basis that they're not a citizen. Speaking as an immigrant myself.

The 'anti-Irish' comment was drawing rather a long now based on what I posted, wasn't it?

This 57p. It would probably go further and do more good supporting the far larger numbers of refugees who are in camps close to their country of origin. For example the 1.5 million in Turkey, the 350,000 in Dadaab, 200,000 in Ethiopia, 125,000 in Kenya, 125,000 in Jordan etc, etc. I could go on.

These 5,000 people are people who have had the money to pay people traffickers to get here in the first place (so likely not the poor destitute little flowers some like to pretend) and are ruthless enough to take part in some pretty unpleasant and illegal acts to get into the UK.

I don't think they are the most deserving recipients of the 57p by a long chalk.

Just a little fyi for the godwin "bingo" shouters. Godwins law was devised for bringing the nazis into random un-related events. Like for eg, say some women promote breastfeeding and get called 'breastfeeding-nazis'... It was never meant to be used when talking about say, a racist political party or asylum seekers. Giyf. :)

Garlick, the article in The Independent says the flights cost £5,000 per person, not £50,000. I don't think that you could build much infrastructure over here with that amount of money.

If just 57p can help 5000 refugees we are seriously overpaying the queen then aren't we.

1p is overpaying the queen, imo...

Jassy,

I think people who apply to come here by legal means should take precedence over those who don't. So shoot me.

Asylum has nothing to do with it. EU law requires asylum to be sought in the first safe country (if safety is the issue). In the case of the Calais migrants, that is clearly not the UK and probably isn't even France.

I thought it was bizarre that swallowed happened upon two Irishmen to be the ideal contributors of a 57p x multiple. There are a large number of wealthy British people living in Britain, after all.

As the child of Irish immigrants it struck me that it could either be a pointed comment or simple ignorance of Bob and Bono's origins. MN has been known to be somewhat anti-Irish and it has been pointed out in countless threads passim.

Hmm. Taking 'anti-Irish' as the default of any comment about an Irish person because some MNers have been anti-Irish isn't a million miles from saying anyone raising concerns about immigration is racist, simply because some people who want stricter immigration rules have also stated racist views. Neither seems terribly helpful or productive to me.

Thanks for clarifying the position - that you'd rather legal economic or family migrants rather than asylum seekers, unless there are legal and accessible routes available to asylum seekers? That's a clear position, even though I disagree with it. I thought you were suggesting that there were accessible legal routes for most asylum seekers.

From my perspective, I think it's pretty shitty (and shitty to other European countries as well as to potential asylum seekers) that we make it so very difficult for people to seek asylum here - much more so than on the Continent.

Interesting article about facts and figures, which of course will be dismissed by the anti-migration lot, as it's from the Guardian: www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/01/calais-illegal-immigrant-uk-facts?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

As I said before, I don't know what the legal routes to Britain are for asylum seekers, Jassy, any more than you do, though I know they exist. Of course I support legal and honest applications for asylum in the UK. I was simply clarifying that none of the Calais migrants should be eligible for asylum in the UK because they can legally seek asylum in the first EU country they reach.

I asked swallowed if she knew Bono and Bob are Irish. If she didn't, my default card stays in my pocket. If she did, the comment may be pointed. If it is pointed, I have as much right to play my card as others do theirs. She hasn't come back to me yet.

As for the nasty UK, several of the would-be migrants have stated that we are "nicer" than the French, Spanish, Italians etc. We are not making it harder for genuine asylum-seekers, we are just geographically further away from the troubled areas and the EU has existing laws for this purpose.

As I said before, I don't know what the legal routes to Britain are for asylum seekers, Jassy, any more than you do, though I know they exist.

How can you know that accessible legal routes exist if you don't know what they are?

We are not making it harder for genuine asylum-seekers, we are just geographically further away from the troubled areas and the EU has existing laws for this purpose.

What laws are those, please?

And you'd have to agree we made it significantly more difficult after 2002, increasing the burden on our neighbours - who were correspondingly pissed off, reasonably.

There is a law that you must claim asylum in the first safe country you come to. That is not the UK... Or France. Why didn't they do that? And why do you think it's okay that they are breaking this law?

Can't be arsed to Google for you Jassy; terribly sorry.

Widowwadman

Thats an interesting article. I don’t think most people know that the demographics of most European countries shows that we aren’t achieving the desired 2.3 children per couple to achieve population replacement. Our population is at a high because we are all living longer but there will come a point when that stabilises and our population will start to fall unless we get some form of immigration. The problem with that(for some people) is that the nature of our society will change. Our society does change anyway and it’s very unlikely in my lifetime that the ruling elite will be anything other than stale, male and pale but my children may grow up to see our first ethnic prime minister. I think that is reflected in the disenchantment with our current political parties. I can’t vote tory, too nasty. I can’t vote Labour, no proper direction. The Lib Dems are gone. UKIP, I’m not that old, thick or harking back to a utopian time that never existed. So I vote for fringe or single issue parties that I can rely on not to get elected.

There have been suggestions that the French should send in the Army. Why? Unless you’re planning to use their expertise in heavy weapons, why would the army be more effective than the police?

The only way I can think of dealing with this is to have a european wide asylum system where once they cross the border of Europe, they submit their claim, state a country of preference and why(family, language etc) and if they can prove no proper link to that country they should be shared equally by population amongst the whole of the EU. Germany, France and Italy are taking more than we are. Greece in the middle of an economic crisis is having to deal with hordes of hungry refugees. A little bit of financial assistance for them wouldn’t be a bad idea.

Good point Widowwadman. We definitely need imigration to sustain our population and to fulfill specialist vacancies but are the type of people trying to access our country illegally via the tunnel really going to enhance our society? We need the brightest and the best from all over the world. I'm amazed at prevoius posters offering to donate their benefits to those who choose to break our laws. They make very free with money they haven't earned or paid tax on. I'm grateful that the majority of posters on this thread don't reflect the views of the UK electorate.

*previous

How do you know anything about the qualifications and talents and skills of the refugees at Calais? Some may have not anything (but their drive and resilience), others are highly qualified people. But you can't attach tier 1 or 2 work visa conditions to asylum claims unless you deem some people not worthy to be safe.

All this "why aren't they going elsewhere" shit really makes me cross when it's only a tiny minority of migrants looking to get to the UK in the first place. Why should Britain leave the rest of Europe to deal with it? Also, various posters seem to believe that it's deplorable for people wanting to make a choice of where they want to live, when home is not an option. As someone who made that choice (but not fleeing oppression), I find pretty offensive. But I guess it's just people who don't make active choices about their destiny feeling threatened by those who do.