To think an amnesty needs to be made asap for Grenfall residents

[brexitstolemyfuture]

Mayor Kahan supports this but government officials haven't granted it yet. Surely these people have been through enough without persecution for subletting or visa issues!

We all saw the photos, the fire spread up the outside of that tower in 15 minutes! It should never have happened.

Beryramd you're right re deletions. Just depressing to share the same planet as these people.

Well, this is about the most depressing thread I've seen on mumsnet.

Disgusting.

I hope none of the Grenfell residents are on mn

Have you seen that video from inside the fire engine when the firefighters first saw the tower-saying things like "How is that even possible?"

Yes it was chilling. They are discussing it on Question Time now.

I don't think any one has suggested that the firm responsible for the cladding and the people who made the decision to use the particular type of cladding should get off Scott free. That is a completely separate issue to whether there should be an amnesty for illegal immigrants. No one is denying that all victims should be given immediate help bit I think we have to be realistic about putting through any measures that will be viewed ( or misconstrued) to be encouraging to illegal immigrants. The pp who said that any amnesty should have been done on the quiet was correct. by announcing it, Khan may be misinterpreted by the unscrupulous and the desperate as setting a precedent for illegals who have suffered a grave misfortune. People are prepared to maim themselves and cut off their fingertips to avoid fingerprint detection, please do not underestimate the lenghts people will go to.

How the fuck can you do an amnesty 'on the quiet'? The whole point is to encourage people to come forwards who haven't yet contacted the authorities.

This thread is deeply depressing.

Everyone who keeps using the word 'precedent' should stop and learn the meaning of the word before they post.

Plenty of people get away with things without being prosecuted where it is deemed not to be in the public interest to do so. This is not new.

And if flats were built to decent safety standards, no amount of arson would lead to the kind of disaster that causes 79+ deaths. And arson is easy to detect, and the arsonists would be prosecuted.

Have a think about what you're saying, seriously.

Woman - precisely.

Perhaps precedent is the wrong word, but if people knew there was a discretion and they perceived that discretion would be easily exercised in a particular set of circumstances, then they may be more likely (not definitely) to try and engineer the circumstances to encourage that exercise of discretion. Sure, it would be found out quickly but someone who is not educated or forward thinking or just too desperate may not think in rational terms.

puzzled Interesting that a PP mentioned Hurricane Katrina - I wonder if there are any lessons to be learned from the widespread fraud and criminality which followed that disaster?

Interestingly, quite a lot of the fraud from Katrina was facilitated by local government officials on the make.

There's an NYT article about it that makes interesting reading.

www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/washington/27katrina.html

"easily exercised in a particular set of circumstances,"

What-where a council has attached inflammable cladding to a tower block? One hopes not an easily replicable set of circumstances........

Great point Charlotteswigwam.

MrsHathaway: "I don't think there's any official suggestion that illegal immigrants living in Grenfell should be given automatic citizenship - that would be far too open to abuse, not to mention unfair - but rather that their immigration status should not affect any claims for immediate assistance or later compensation."

Exactly. So many people on this thread seem to be confused about what is actually meant when amnesty is being talked about, and there are a lot of ludicrous suggestions that being a victim of a tragedy will grant automatic immunity from armed robbery, arson, murder and war crimes. We should all look at the actual facts before leaping to fanciful conclusions.

Quiet: I am not sure that those links you provided say what you think they say? They certainly don't suggest that a mass murderer of hundreds has been granted asylum and is freely wandering the streets of London with the Home Office's blessing. The articles raise some concerning points, but do not for a moment suggest that being suspected of a war crime helps someone's immigration case! Concerns over human rights may make it difficult to deport some suspects, but if the evidence is there and they can't be deported we can detain them in our own system. More resources would help, of course.

We all know that there are some despicable people out there, but your posts are becoming increasingly histrionic: "If you give an amnesty to illegal Grenfell residents, then you will not only get bogus Grenfell claims (which will delay and complicate the claims of genuine victims) but also people that are perfectly prepared to torch a residential building in order to claim similar."

This is just bullshit on so many levels it is hard to know where to begin. If an illegal immigrant is living under the radar of authorities, why the fuck would they bring themselves to the notice of those authorities by burning their house down? Never mind the bastard factor, how stupid would they have to be? The whole point of the amnesty for Grenfell residents is that by coming forward as residents they are making themselves known to the authorities, and hence may be put off from doing so in fear of the consequences.

What you seem to be objecting to re Khan, is his desire for things to be done in a transparent and consistent way. You want things "fudgier" and more covert. This sort of approach would only lead to further problems of mistrust, confusion, conspiracy theories, and people in need not getting the help they deserve.

Right now there are apparently 11 blocks with that cladding. I expect that to change very rapidly though. No council CEO will risk prison by leaving it there (you would hope).

So those would-be-opportunistic-immigrant-arsonists living within those 11 blocks had better grab those matches and get shimmying up those panels sharpish before the opportunity passes. Then they, too, could be in with a chance of getting their smoke inhalation, burns and head injuries treated for free on the NHS, and maybe even a brief stay in a hotel without their details being passed on to the home office.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/22/grenfell-tower-survivors-too-scared-to-seek-help-because-of-immigration-status?CMP=share_btn_tw

How the fuck can you do an amnesty 'on the quiet'?

You make decisions on a case-by-case basis as you investigate the incident and uncover further victims, and do not publicly announce an overall amnesty policy to the public.

The whole point is to encourage people to come forwards who haven't yet contacted the authorities.

And that is the rub. You will get people coming forward, trying their luck, that have never been anywhere near the Grenfell Tower in their lives. And all that does is jam up the process of identifying genuine victims that need aid.

We had a similar issue in our area after an incident (that was spun as a natural disaster but was really an issue of persistent local government short-termism over a period of thirty years). There were people coming forward, using emergency facilities and aid, that were not affected by the disaster at all; they just wanted free stuff. There were people trying to put in claims for damage that was nothing to do with the disaster. And the people that had lost everything were struggling to access any kind of help at all, usually because they had their hands full with trying to salvage what remained of their lives.

puzzled "Interesting that a PP mentioned Hurricane Katrina - I wonder if there are any lessons to be learned from the widespread fraud and criminality which followed that disaster?"

I expect that criminality was the same as that those Hillborough lot!
I never knew there were so many people, just waiting for a disaster where hundreds die, then they can spring into action, committing crimes.

Was it flooding related Quiet?
I don't deny that some unscrupulous people will come forward for free stuff, but amnesty is a bit different, because if you didn't come forward, you wouldn't need amnesty.

Weirdly, I don't remember as big an outcry about victims of flooding getting help from the government and charities (although I don't think they always got enough help). Yet in this case, some people are really resentful and angry that those who lost everything (including loved ones) getting handouts and assistance. It is not just amnesty that some are objecting to, but help and sympathy too.

do not for a moment suggest that being suspected of a war crime helps someone's immigration case!

It does if it means you cannot be deported to a country where you would face the death penalty.

Again, from another angle on this criminality issue in terms of strengthening asylum claims, Marie Woolf at the Sunday Times reported on 4 January 2015, in No crime check on asylum, that: "Ministers have admitted that no checks are made on whether asylum seekers have committed crimes including murder, rape or child sex abuse in their home countries because they claim such inquiries could increase their chance of being persecuted if they returned home.

This, in turn, would boost their case for having their claim for refugee status approved, according to a letter to peers from Lord Bates, the home office minister, obtained by The Sunday Times."

This is just bullshit on so many levels it is hard to know where to begin. If an illegal immigrant is living under the radar of authorities, why the fuck would they bring themselves to the notice of those authorities by burning their house down? Never mind the bastard factor, how stupid would they have to be?

It's not a question of stupidity. And my focus was more on traffickers using the principle for their own gain. I mean, we have traffickers that sell people dud life jackets for their children. Nothing is beyond these people.

I will explain why I see things in this "histronic" light. In the mid noughties, I lived in an EU country that developed a serious problem with illegal trafficking run by mafia groups into the country and beyond into wider Europe. The situation was dire, and beyond the scope of local law enforcement who were used to problems such as traffic accidents or tourists getting drunk and causing fights. As an example, while I lived there, a young woman jumped to her death from a fourth floor balcony to get away from her imprisonment in one of the brothels.

The situation got so serious and had so much money involved in it that these traffickers, who were not nationals of the country in question, then began to chuck hand grenades into rival business premises that were on the ground floors of ordinary residential apartment blocks in the town where I lived. People got badly injured. They were firebombing shops and cafes, all in the name of protecting and promoting their trafficking business interests in one way or another.

This is why I don't think that the idea that criminal elements involved in illegal migration flows will attempt to use an amnesty principle is far-fetched or "bullshit" at all. They have no compunction about this type of action. These are criminals who will pack people into refrigeration containers where they suffocate, bomb people's homes, send kids out to drown in leaky boats, and traffick teenage girls into hell.

So I would not put it past them to torch residential buildings if they think they can charge tens of thousands of euros for someone to get the right to remain in Britain. And if it doesn't work, then the poor sods have still paid, won't they?

I don't see anyone who is resentful and angry about any of the victims, illegal or otherwise receiving handouts and assistance. I think some poster just want to be sure about what amnesty means in real terms. Would it be a springboard to indefinite leave or citizenship to remain regardless of the person's personal history? What would be the ramifications if this concession was to be misunderstood? I dont think anyone,or certainly not myself is resentful that someone receives temporary housing in a hotel or medical aid or monetary aid in the meantime. I do think though that ifbthete is an amnesty there should be a strict time limit. Otherwise what is to stop someone coming by 2 years or 5 years down the road and saying they are scared at the time or suffered amnesia etc and they were actually victims?

To second @quietcorday I too have experience of people who are prepared to sacrifice their own sense of morality to live in the UK. And while I am fully aware that anecdata is questionable, I have personal qualitative research on people (men) from what is popularly known as the most homophobic country in the world and violent homophobes themselves willing to declare to to the home office that they were gay simply to avoid deportation. This trick used to work fairly successfully up till the early 2000s. And they would have fellow country men with leave to remain (also violent homophobes) willing to back up their story and claim they were lovers. They were willing to do this as it would be well known in their community that they were simply saying it for immigration purpose and so would not face repercussions from their homophobic countrymen.

fatdogs Men claiming to be gay isn't really the same thing as men setting houses on fire though.

And it now has terrible repercussions as actual gay men from that country have been deported as Home office is very distrustful of claims of gay persecution coming from their citizens.