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.

Anyone fancy having a stab at this thread?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2439854-If-you-lived-in-Syria-Libya-Eritrea-etc-what-would-you-do

I'd love to know what people would do if they were in the same situation as the migrants.

Outrageous OP, personally I'd prefer them to have to repay everything they'd received before leaving. That may cut down on the amount of bogus claims we are forced to pay to process.

well then it's BOTH isn't it

but it's very wrong to say it's given to 'failed AS' - it's given to support their children - but this still isn't people who have exhausted every option - it's people who's initial claim has been rejected and they are appealing

once people have lost their appeals they get nothing - those awaiting get very little

again other EU countries pay AS MORE than the UK

But thanks for posting the link - it clears things up a bit from the OP :)

did anyone see the young man on the news today. his "desperate" reason for wanting to come to England.......to see his sister!!! for this he will break the law and cause disruption and risk his life.....

the government(when scameron gets back of his holiday) need to stop this.
if we are really so poor we are cutting money (benefits) here....well heres a good way to start

Sam if you where displaced and the rest of your family where in Greece would you not want to see them?

We are NOT poor - the cuts are ideological not necessary

anyway bed!

I have enjoyed this thread - it's been interesting and on the whole rather less hysterical than some x

get real
we have had loads of threads on mn benefit bashing, (and yes some disability bashing)
but now we are talking illegal migrants its all change.

Samcro - there is someone in this world who wants him. Someone who will welcome him after a journey across Europe. Someone who can speak of family. You would begrudge him that? Who knows what her situation here is. She may have a sofa he can sleep on, food to give him.
Money was spent after WW2 reuniting siblings of displaced people.

you pay for it then

that's nice :)

Illegal immigrants have no recourse to public funds

AS appealing a decision are not illegal

night night

Oh xpost. Illegals get nothing. This doesn't affect them. If that young man seeks asylum then his claim will be considered under international law. He will get basic support while that happens.

Its not just migrants who have rights. My brother was working in France and returning to England. He was stuck in a traffic jam and experienced a group of migrants attempting to break into his van using a crowbar. He was utterly terrified and thankfully the French police did intervene. What would have happened if the French police had failed to intervene does not bear thinking about. Frankly there is no excuse for such behaviour.

We need a European wide system for processing the applications of potential asylum seekers. Its not realistic to expect countries like Greece or Italy or France to cope with this on its own. Sucessful ayslum seekers should be allocted to a european region and forbidden from settling in any other region of the EU for ten years. The costs of accomodiating ayslum seekers needs to be shared fairly among EU nations.

Maybe we should think what is the most economical way to process and house possible asylum seekers while their applications are considered. We also have to be mindful of Europe's dark history of concentration camps in Poland. I am not sure how you can securely house asylum seekers but allow them as normal a life as possible. Prehaps tagging with a GPS system is an alternative to imprisonment.

Sam are you a net contributor to the state here? If not then you're on thin ice with that view. Don't you think there are Conservative MPs sat at home wondering why they should pay for people who take from the system?

Really yes that would be fairer. However the government aren't up for sharing in the Med crossings. And it would certainly mean an increase in migrant numbers.

im not on benefits if thats what you mean\just a parent watching my kid being shat on
(hiding this hypocritical thread now)

"Really yes that would be fairer. However the government aren't up for sharing in the Med crossings. And it would certainly mean an increase in migrant numbers."

Would it necessarily? Migrant numbers would have be negioated, however there are countries whose woking populations are decreasing due to migration. It is sense to send people where the population is decreasing. (Whether the cause is low birth rate or migration.) It makes sense to look at the density of population in particular regions of the EU (excluding unhabitable land).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_decline

Wealthier countries/ regions that take less migrants should shoulder more of the financial cost of managing ayslum seekers.

Poland, Estonia, Lativa are safe countries. They might not be wealthy, but it would be safe. Poland would benefit from an injection of cash from wealthy countries. Countries who are reluctant to stomp up cash could take a higher quota of migrants.

Sam oh no don't construe it as benefits bashing at all. Most people are 'takers' including me. We pay higher rate tax but we use the NHS and state education. I have a couple of chronic health conditions.
Really if we had to stump up for Poland's share of the migrants do you think that would go unnoticed? And to be honest I'm not sure I'd choose a former Eastern bloc country over a Western country.

Oh for goodness sake they're not asylum seekers. They could have applied for asylum in the half dozen countries then came through to get here. They would have been perfectly safe in any of those other European countries. They're here because the know we're a soft touch.

If the European countries followed the asylum rules and only asked us to take our fair share it would be a different story.

YANBU. It makes it easy to decide who to vote for though, if there's any party left who are willing to stand up for vulnerable children and refugees and so on. I'm not convinced it's the Labour party - this stuff takes money, and they seem very reluctant to admit to raising taxes - so I guess it is green all the way for me.

The interesting point is they have made it to the EU/West to France one of the richest nations there is so why not just stay in France.
DM today says 7 in 10 of those in Calais ultimately get to the UK. If true that is much higher than I thought - more likely than not to make it.

..and as Serco's holding centres are full some have been put up in 3* hotels to the chagrin of some other guests.

I'd be very surprised if any of them are staying in hotels/B&B's. That must be Daily Mail nonsense.

Did anyone here the Swedish immigration minister being interviewed yesterday? It was a complete breath of fresh air. They take the view that if you come from somewhere like Syria you deserve asylum virtually automatically, and they just get on with it. Result: much less money spent out on processing claims, legal challenges etc, and a happy, productive group of immigrants contributing to the economy of the country.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33754595

it goes further it prevents landlords from renting to them too