Withdrawing the £36 a week from families with children, whose asylum applications have been rejected is a challenge to our humanity

[Figmentofmyimagination]

We should feel ashamed.

Fascinating, tiggy, thanks.

I see from this migrationwatch report (paragraph 19)
www.migrationwatchuk.org/pdfs/BP10_19.pdf

that the exact problem I'm talking about, homeless failed ASs wandering the streets has happened in Holland as a result of evicting them from their accommodation! To be fair, it's obvious that's going to happen, what other result is there? And, what do the Dutch local authorities do? Re-house them!!! What else can they do? They can't have destitute people wandering around en masse.

It has surely always been inevitable that the chaos of the third world would spill out and become a threat to the stability and prosperity of the first world.
I can't see any workable solution to this .

I'm afraid I agree with this. This is a problem which is going to get worse...and worse...and worse. Reasons: overpopulation, overexploitation of natural resources including water, climate chaos and religious extremism.

This won't go away no matter how many fences, both literal and metaphorical, there are. I pity the children of today.

Bold fail.

It has surely always been inevitable that the chaos of the third world would spill out and become a threat to the stability and prosperity of the first world. I can't see any workable solution to this .

I wonder how long it will be before there is a general agreement to restrict the number of children people have. It must come eventually though perhaps not in our lifetime. Unless war or famine or natural disaster comes first. Don't mean to be too pessimistic but it simply can't go on as it is for the next milenium.

the rate of population increase is slowing and may well go into reverse so that underpopulation becomes more of a threat at some point

dont forget that populations will decrease exponentially as well as increase exponentially

When people can be 99% certain their children can survive and have access to contraception then families will decrease. There is no point in handing out condoms if parents know that their children have a 1 in 4 chance of dying before the age of five. In much of the third world having children and grandchildren is essential to survival.

We need to work hard to make sure that every child has access to a proper education. (rather than just learning the Quoran or Bible) We need to train up doctors and nurses. At the moment the UK steals lots of doctors and nurses from third world countries.

also there is an inverse correlation between fertility rates and female incomes/educational levels

Don't forget that without an ever expanding pool of young workers, the pyramid of pensions will collapse.

it's in the interests of the first world to improve conditions in the third world but a huge part of the problem is corrupt/incompetent govts together with dysfunctional institutions/belief systems

hard not to just see it as intractable

This will not save money. England's laws do not allow children to be destitute. But it will be the local authority picking up the tab now - rather than central government who pay for the asylum support directly. It's all just hot air that it will make any difference!

I tend to agree with the OP. The Calais situation is a nightmare, for years we've been wringing our hands about abject global poverty and despair and here it is, literally on Britain's doorstep.

Britain, and Europe in general (and the US) have a lot to answer for. Obviously, a sizeable fraction of the migrants are facing conditions made possible by colonialism/war/Western client-states etc.

Another grim inevitability coming to pass.

More people can be helped with less money if we spend money on my overseas aid instead of feeding clothing bogus ayslum seekers. Why do we get fussed about the children of illegal migrants more than some poor starving child in Africa. Is it a case of out of sight out of mind?

The sad thing is that people want cuts to both overseas aid and help to migrants.

oversea's aid is hardly straightforward though is it?

We can stop people falling into abject poverty in our own country via having a welfare state, legislation to protect the poor etc but we cant do so much about corrupt regimes in other countries (except make them worse evidently!)

I'm not arguing for or against anything in particular, I have no clue what the best way forward is.
The inequality gradient is very steep, any help we give to migrants will just draw more migrants

Such a lot of overseas aid never reaches its targets, RT. People are fleeing corrupt governments, some of which are supported by us and our pals, which divert aid to itself. They're fleeing bombs, bullets and demolished cities which result from our actions.

Since no wealthy nation is going to stop interfering with other nations - often with some sort of good reason - then our actions are not going to stop destroying other people's lives.

So we have to do something for them. Don't ask me what, but I'm pretty sure the answer doesn't lie in deliberately causing pile-ups of desperate human beings at various border points and allowing strays to wander our streets without hope.

Somebody upthread outlined a possible international scheme of payments relating to each country's capacity to absorb refugees. I vaguely recall there was something like that in my teens - the 60s? I wouldn't know what to search for to find out what happened to it, though.

We do need to sort something out, instead of just hoping they won't come if we leave them to rot.

^^ very badly written, sorry - am tired. Hope it's understandable!

totally comprehensible Garlick!

Spot on suzanneyeswecan ! That's why they are coming! They know that UK is almost land of milk and honey while at this moment just how many kids went to sleep without their third meal or washing or not having electricity! Their need is it looks like secondary to the one of migrants ( asylum, fails asylum etc).
Most ( majority) of asylum seeker they get provided with food and accommodation and I think it's not fair. Government should first help people of this country. Food banks are full of people trying to get food for their families and one asylum seeker the moment they get stay the whole family is brought to UK because of right on family life so you get at least another probably 5 people.
I think every country in EU should help BUT to certain point . Not being generouse like UK

Thinking aloud here ... If we can pay companies upwards of £1k a time to take on millions of free staff via the ridiculous Work Programme, then surely the minds who thought that up can find a way to occupy several thousand new residents? Maybe even stop sending unemployed people to do these free jobs and pay the companies that money to actually employ people? The govt could even fund a full year's NMW if the companies replaced 12 unemployed citizens with one worker who wasn't entitled to full benefits.

I know that's too simplistic. But I don't believe there are no ways; there's simply no will.

but it's a kind of catch 22, we have to treat the migrants who are here humanely but that makes the problem worse
rock and a hard place
damned whatever we do

Thanks, Suzanne :) I really should stop trying to think now ... !

The current system is not sustainable and a different solution to the problem needs to be found. From africacheck.org:

Projections for 2025 range from 1.397-billion to 1.486-billion. By 2050 the number of people in Africa is expected to increase by another billion and by 2100 the United Nations forecasts there will be 4.185-billion people on the continent. These projections – referred to as “medium variants” – are regarded as the most probable.

Statisticians also calculate “low” and “high variants”. The United Nations, for example, predicts Africa’s population could be as low as 2.826-billion by 2100, or as high as 6.007-billion. If fertility rates – based on data from 2005 to 2010 – remain constant, Africa’s population could grow to a staggering 17.221-billion.

Clearly if the current situation is causing so much debate, the situation is only going to get exacerbated as population pressures increase. The EU and AU (and probably China given their massive footprint with regards to infrastructure development in Africa these days) probably need to sit down and figure out how they're going to help develop the continent in the long term as opposed to having a costly and inefficient immigration system that usually only ends up benefiting the smugglers.

it's in the interests of the first world to improve conditions in the third world but a huge part of the problem is corrupt/incompetent govts together with dysfunctional institutions/belief systems

I was thinking this exact thing while pondering the issue this morning.

Well exactly. How does a developing country become a developed one?