Channel crossings

[Tevion28]

Whats your thoughts on this are these people really desperate fleeing worn torn countries do you feel sorry for them etc

@RuggerHug Because in the past Britons 'migrating' by choice (not seeking asylum or fleeing anything awful)never resulted in war or any issues.

Not sure I quite see the relevance. We all know about colonisation etc. There is one ever so small difference though - the population levels and density of the land. Where people from the British Isles colonised in the past, as in loads of people settled elsewhere, they did so in lands that were not in use by agricultural peoples - Australia, New Zealand, America. It is slightly different when Britain is already full.

And Britain is full, it is is one of the more densely populated countries in the world, and does not have the resources to feed all the people here. Land is over-farmed, soil qualities are falling and nutritional levels and production are falling. Distribution is an issue: but resources are finite.

That does leave a significant minority who are not and who will mostly remain here.

I though the new normal was to ignore anything less than 52% ?

@Tevion28

From what I hear most asylum cases are unsuccessful in the uk so in some respects they never move on with thier life here because they are stuck in the asylum system for years with no decision surviving on £37 a week then end up working illegally.

48% are unsuccessful, around a third of them (16%) appeal.

Of that 16%, around a third (so just over 5% of total applications) succeed at appeal.

So slightly more than half of asylum applications are successful.

Source: commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01403/

I feel really sorry for them. How desperate must people be to take a notoriously dangerous crossing in a small boat?

France is not war torn. The agreement is asylum seekers seek asylum in the first safe country they come to

I don’t believe these are asylum seekers but economic migrants pushing their luck

They are Frances problem and should be sent back to them

@DGRossetti

That does leave a significant minority who are not and who will mostly remain here.

I though the new normal was to ignore anything less than 52% ?

Good grief.

@Tevion28

Are those places supervised though

I have a friend who came here as an asylum seeker, and on the basis of her experience, I'd say not.

When she was in the asylum seeker hostel, she was raped, assaulted, racially abused and utterly traumatised. And all that after being imprisoned and tortured for 3 weeks by the government of her country of origin.

(She succeeded first time with her asylum application and has had fantastic help from some refugee support organisations. Since being in the UK she has got a degree, a good job, extensive therapy for her PTSD and has been working for 3 years.)

@Chloemol

France is not war torn. The agreement is asylum seekers seek asylum in the first safe country they come to

I don’t believe these are asylum seekers but economic migrants pushing their luck

They are Frances problem and should be sent back to them

That's an EU agreement and post-Brexit it doesn't apply to the UK.

If the government supported the vulnerable in our society, and we, as one of the wealthiest countries in the world didn't have children skipping meals because their parents can't afford to feed them, women fleeing abuse weren't holed up in tiny bedsits for long periods, people waiting on social housing lists for literally decades, areas with few opportunities, families plunged into poverty if one of them becomes unable to work through illness or disability etc, people could access timely and appropriate healthcare I'm sure people would be more welcoming. There are areas hugely affected by high levels of economic migrants, it's faux nativity and disingenuous to say otherwise.

I'd rather see a fairer and safer route for actual refugees- including women and children (it's all very well to say men send money home, but many women and children are in great physical danger in these countries; also these young men don't all have families), rather than boatloads of people who can afford thousands to make the journey.

@Chloemol

France is not war torn. The agreement is asylum seekers seek asylum in the first safe country they come to

I don’t believe these are asylum seekers but economic migrants pushing their luck

They are Frances problem and should be sent back to them

Even if this was true - France won’t take back people who have made it here so that won’t work.

@Tevion28

I really don't think alot are getting what people think they get they are usually not entitled to benefits unless they regulise thier stay which can be very difficult in this country.

Asylum seekers are not entitled to benefits. They become entitled to benefits only when they are granted refugee status and have leave to remain in the UK.

@Chloemol

France is not war torn. The agreement is asylum seekers seek asylum in the first safe country they come to

I don’t believe these are asylum seekers but economic migrants pushing their luck

They are Frances problem and should be sent back to them

How fucking unfair to the countries bordering is that attitude. UK is more than happy to go to war but as soon as its helping the civilians fleeing, somehow not our problem

I'd rather see a fairer and safer route for actual refugees- including women and children

Exactly. Until this happens, the only winners are the people smugglers.

Also, this way it would be possible to check who these people actually are.

Why is Poland allowed to sure up its borders but we aren't

I think it is dangerous for the UK that so many young men are arriving here. It feels like an invasion

@JunoMcDuff

I feel extremely sorry for them and feel we should do everything to support them.

Do you have a spare bedroom? If yes fill your boots!

@AllesAusLiebe

I'd rather see a fairer and safer route for actual refugees- including women and children

Exactly. Until this happens, the only winners are the people smugglers.

Also, this way it would be possible to check who these people actually are.

Yep, they make thousands upon thousands, it's disgusting yet for some reason the government don't seem that arsed about doing anything about it? You can be against crossing in dinghies but supportive or supporting refugees, they're not one and the same.

@woodhill

Why is Poland allowed to sure up its borders but we aren't

I think it is dangerous for the UK that so many young men are arriving here. It feels like an invasion

I dunno, why dont you ask the king of the whole fuckin world?? Ask them why Poland is allowed to ban abortion, have awful discrimination against gay people and have racist policies about refugees? Why cant we be more like that

It is not illegal for refugees seeking asylum to cross the Channel to enter the UK.
Other European countries have higher numbers than the UK - Germany have the most.
The lack of accessible housing probably has more to do with the fact that property developers make up a fifth of Tory donations.

@MidnightMeltdown

I think part of the problem is that it's extremely difficult to distinguish between genuine refugees and economic migrants, and many are the latter. They see the UK as a 'rich' country but the reality is that only a small proportion of the population are rich. Many people struggle to afford day to day living.

I don't think that we should be accepting anybody who turns up illegally on our shores. They are criminals and should be treated as such. All this does is encourage more and more to make dangerous channel crossings. There should be some kind of system that allows genuine refugees to make an application without turning up here. It would be fairer, and a quota could be agreed for all countries.

The UK is a signatory to the UN Convention on Refugees, which means the UK has agreed to admit refugees.

Until their applications for asylum are heard and determined, we don't know if they're refugees or not, so we can't turn away asylum seekers without breaching our responsibilities under the UN Convention.

We don't have to be like Poland in the areas you describe but I still think I make a valid point. Enough is enough especially with inflation and lack of housing

Allycott I'm already a social worker and sit on the NRPF board, volunteer for a charity supporting refugees, asylum seekers and homeless people. And I support a street homeless charity and sit on the housing strategyboard and volunteer for the "bed every night" scheme. My spare room is occupied. I'm not a hypocrite!

Inflation and lack of housing are caused by political decisions.

Possibly but still less resources to go round plus NI contributions are going up

I do think we have too many arriving in unplanned ways. It seems unfair and unmanaged. We need to do a lot more to get our newcomers from other countries to learn English more quickly as they will struggle to find and keep work or study otherwise. In my area of work I meet many refugees who only get a few hours a week of English lessons and there are long waiting lists.

Cultural understanding of life in Britain needs addressing too as I see how some traditional views conflict with expectations around women working for example.

If we dont get this organised we are brewing up conflict i fear.

By far the majority don't come. By far the majority stay in neighbouring countries. One in four people on Jordan is displaced from Syria. The rest of Europe also takes far more than the UK does.

@JunoMcDuff

Allycott I'm already a social worker and sit on the NRPF board, volunteer for a charity supporting refugees, asylum seekers and homeless people. And I support a street homeless charity and sit on the housing strategyboard and volunteer for the "bed every night" scheme. My spare room is occupied. I'm not a hypocrite!

Occupied by an asylum seeker?