To think the BBC is wrong an actually the U.K. is accepting its “fair share” of asylum seekers?

[Discovereads]

On another thread this screen shot of a BBC news report was posted. It shows a newscaster claiming the U.K. is a shameful 19th out of 20 (random) European and Scandinavian countries for taking in asylum seekers. The message was we are not doing our “fair share” compared to other countries to help asylum seekers. The newscasters face says it all really….

Now, I know the Home Office is a shit show of brazen inhumanity, callous disregard for human rights, and it’s Secretary likes spouting jingoistic rhetoric.
But this thread isn’t about their many failings. We know they can do much better, that’s not in question. It’s meant to be a let’s look at the hard data and compare it to other European and Scandinavian countries.

Now the BBC made two mistakes, the first I hinted to, they cherry picked 20 countries out of 32 in Europe and Scandinavia. They didn’t use a measure like largest or richest or safest 20 countries. The second mistake they made was calculating the # of asylum applications on a 10k per capita basis. Using the # of applications is meaningless because it bears no relation to the number of asylum seekers actually given leave to settle here, we have a high acceptance rate of 76% on initial decision, plus a further 3% after appeal so 79% of all asylum seekers end up settling here. The figure used should be #asylumees accepted not #asylum applications received. Then comparing us to other countries on a per capita basis is also a mistake because we have a very high population density- 5th highest in all Europe & Scandinavia and #1st highest of all countries of over 100,000km2 land area. Using per capita ignores the valid concern of overpopulation.

I personally think that looking at “fair share” should be based on balancing two factors: population density inclusive of accepted asylumees and total number accepted relative to the land area of the country. And then when when looking at a table, giving allowance for different climates, ie Iceland cannot support as high a population density as we can. So I’ve researched some stats which show that actually, we are doing our fair share and the next post will have two tables showing the data. For now, here is the BBC screen shot:

A low bar for racism?

well yes. As it should be the case 🤣 fucks sake. I have a low tolerance for racism. So what?

Who said Albania was safe for every single one of those individuals?

You’re avoiding my point about needing a decent system for processing claims and getting away from sweeping rhetoric about “Albanians”. Let’s focus on process here.
If we had a decent quick process then we could get through the claims more quickly and send people home if necessary.

Stop focussing on nationalities and making judgements and point the ire at the government who have overseen a collapse in the asylum process. If we had a decent process in place with proper gate keeping then it wouldn’t matter where people came from, because we would know that people granted asylum did so on legal grounds.

The housing crisis is caused by house prices being too high and people not having high enough wages to afford mortgages.

That isn’t quite the same as not having enough actual houses. For example, how many empty homes are there? How many overpriced houses are there which are owned by landlords and rented out instead? Imagine how different it would look if we stripped that away?

Building more housing is just a way of appeasing wealthy landlords so they don’t have to give up renting.

I don't disagree with you when you say you it's right to have a low bar for racism. @Believeitornot

Where I take issue with you is how you define racism, which seems to be trying to shut down debate by yelling racist at anyone who says enough is enough or even merely questions the system.

When would you say enough is enough and we simply cannot do any more? Do you even have a limit?

Again, process more quickly-that would be helpful-but while young men fleeing fuck all and connected to criminal gangs clog it up then that won't happen any time soon. See my earlier post that quotes from the BBC before you shout racist yet again.

Now will it happen, while there is an appeals process that takes years buoyed up by lawyers etc with a vested interest.

It has to be based on population not empty land for many reasons, for instance that land may not be useable for people, you need enough existing population to provide the services to absorb refugees into the population and also not all countries have the infrastructure and systems in place.

As for the not enough housing red herring - if you leave your London or Home Counties life and head north you will find towns and cities with boarded up empty housing that could be utilised if there was the political will

I take issue with the sweeping assumptions made about people from a certain country. That smacks of racism to me. And the racists always claim they’re being smacked down when their very racism is pointed out. Keep it to the process and I don’t take issue.

I don’t think the problem is numbers - the problem is the way in which people are coming to the UK (which is mainly via boats so they’re all hitting Kent. If we had proper routes then we could ensure people can be sent to different parts of the UK for integrating).

What happened if we had a massive humanitarian crisis and we needed to provide refuge alongside other countries as part of an agreement? We failed with Afghanistan and failed in part with Ukraine.

The problem is the lack of a proper process for people who want to apply. That stops us from saying no to criminals or people without a decent claim and it allows racists to conflate the issue of genuine claims with criminals/preconceived ideas about their intentions for coming here.

We don’t have a process. It has fallen apart completely and it’s a disgrace. That collapse has allowed criminals to exploit vulnerable people.

sigh.

It really isn't how the media at potraying it

What’s wrong with what I’m saying?

There will be criminals coming from anywhere and everywhere. Not just Albania.

how do we fix it? With a proper process!

Instead of bleating about Albanian criminals and Albania being safe blah blah. What does that do but stir up side eye rhetoric towards Albanians?

I will add. Some people from Albania will have a genuine case for asylum accepted.

But because of all the rhetoric stirred up about them, can you imagine the reception they’ll get from some people when they find out they’re an Albanian refugee? People will wonder “are they really a refugee? Aren’t there loads of Albanian criminals?” Etc etc

How can that be when we are one of the most diverse countries in the world, certainly in the EU?

Surely nobody takes the BBC seriously on this issue? They are so biased in favour of the migrants it's laughable. When you listen to the media, you come away thinking every migrant is a frightened little child fleeing war and persecution. Then you watch the footage of them arriving, and what do you see? Boatload after boatload of fit young men. Where are the women? And old people? And children? Presumably they've been left behind to face the war and persecution. And exactly what "war and persecution" are these young Albanian men running away from?

we are diverse because of the Empire? That’s got to be a huge part of it. But Windrush is will tell you how we treat people who were originally welcomed then discarded once their usefulness was deemed over.

Man alive.

There was someone on the news explaining to the camera that these people were fleeing poverty.

There was a good calling out of this the other day. Photos of men. And men only.

Then you pan out and see the women and children.

That sad picture of that dead boy on the beach still haunts me.

We need a proper system in place to process claims. We don’t have one and it takes too long and that’s why we have huge backlogs and big hotel bills

Do we know why they are processed so slowly?
Is it simply lack of staff to do the work or do we deal with asylum applications differently than other countries?

In Q1 2022 just over 5% of applicants were female, similar to recent quarters. In Q1 2022 44 asylum applications by unaccompanied children were made by girls

From the refugee council - no arguing with that as fact.
media.refugeecouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/17092544/Asylum-Statistics-June-2022.pdf

The Home Office has been cut like every government department and doesn’t have enough staff.

We didn’t bother to renegotiate any agreements post Brexit with our European neighbours for whatever bonkers reason. Ineptitude and extremist politicians with no pragmatism.

It is really shocking how ignorant people are of their own country's military interventions and occupations, and honestly if the OP is this ignorant then I think this discredits most of their opinion on this issue.

In 2003 the US and UK were the primary forces involved in the invasion of Iraq. The UK deployed 46,000 troops, that's more than the Falklands war, one of the largest since the Second World War. They were given responsibility for parts of southern Iraq, and remained in the country (in decreasing numbers) until 2011. If you want a summary of what an epic failure the British invasion and occupation was, google the Chilcot Report.

The US-UK invasion did not adequately plan for the post-invasion phase, a massive failure that led to years of civil war and chaos. One of the insurgent groups that emerged in that era, Al Qaeda in Iraq, later evolved into the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, one of the key groups driving refugees from the region in recent years.

The US and UK 'broke' Iraq. They deposed the dictator and left it in pieces. And now people say the UK has no responsibility toward Iraqi refugees? Really?

I know one thing is for sure. This issue will not affect the vast majority of MNetters in their lovely middle class areas. It will affect poor people in poor areas of the country. The Home Office needs a huge injection of cash to speed up processing applications.

We are an overpopulated island with not enough jobs, houses/accommodation, schools or surgeries. Housing waiting lists are years, you can’t get to see a Dr face to face, hospital waiting lists are off the scale and schools are bursting at the seams. There isn’t enough money to fund the amount of people we have and the infrastructure is at breaking point. And no I don’t want to pay more taxes!!

The UK should follow the Australian immigration model.

Are you deliberately misrepresenting that report or did you just not read down to the but where it says that women and girls are ~20%?

And now people say the UK has no responsibility toward Iraqi refugees? Really?

I don't think this is true tbh. I think most people would agree that we have a responsibility towards Iraqi's, Afghans, Syrians, Kurds. I think that most people are actually reasonable when it comes to wars, see also Ukraine. However those same people become less welcoming when applicants come from, for example, Albania, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam.

And for everyone bleating on about Albanian men, this is from the Home Office:

Only 14% of Albanian adult males whose cases were concluded in the latest year were granted protection, whereas for children and female Albanian asylum seekers the grant rate is currently 90%

So yes, lots of Albanian men are coming here, but most of them will be sent back. That's how the system is supposed to work. Restoring funding to the bureaucracy and working more closely with EU states can solve this issue.