People in small boats

[EndlessRain1]

With everything that is going on in the UK at the moment, can it really be true that one of the top 5 priorities in the country is to stop "people in small boats"?

I mean, I know a lot of people are against immigration in this form, but in the grand scheme of the shit show this country has been in the last couple of years that is in the top 5 priorities/ actions?

AIBU to think that's insane?

I do think it would be sensible if all Western European countries offered exactly the same “benefits package” to refugees and housed them in the same way while waiting for their claim to process.
That would be hard to sell - especially to the countries with fences and walls going up.

No but I can link to an IPPR report - here's a quote -

Another implication of Dublin withdrawal is that it is now significantly harder for the UK to return asylum seekers to other parts of the EU. Some have suggested that this has encouraged the rise in Channel crossings, because people are less likely to be returned to other member states.
However, on the evidence available this argument seems implausible. The number of transfers from the UK under Dublin was always very low: an average of around 300 people annually in the years 2015–2020 (Home Office 2022d). It is therefore unlikely to have ever been a significant disincentive for most people considering whether to cross the Channel.

barrowcadbury.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/understanding-the-rise-in-channel-crossings-october-22-1.pdf

What benefits do you think assylum seekers get? They get a very basic roof over their head, often in a camp or hotel which they are not permitted to leave. They also get £40 per week, out of wehich they have to pay for food, clothing, toiletries etc. Try living on £40 per week - it's hardly luxury.

@Aaron95 Exactly, and the £40 a week is the amount you get in self catering accommodation, and asylum seekers housed in hotels have a princely and massive £8 a week (yes, £8 a week) as food is provided - even though that food may not be nutritious, or meet dietary needs.

Meanwhile, the company that manages hotels and accommodation for asylum seekers is making bumper profits, while communities and asylum seekers suffer.

“The Home Office is effectively passing billions of the Treasury’s monies for asylum accommodation to private bodies with no plan to grip this. Much of this money ends up as bumper profits and dividends for private companies, directors and shareholders.
“By definition this profit is not going where it should: into good social housing in communities, into local services so they may support refugees and local people. It is blindingly obvious that this is neither sustainable nor in the public interest. We need swift high-quality asylum decisions and public monies for public good into communities; not into private profit and dividends. The new PM [Rishi Sunak] needs to grip this as that is the solution.”

amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/oct/31/firm-managing-hotels-for-uk-asylum-seekers-posts-bumper-profits

There isn't a human crisis that the Tories and their mates won't profiteer from.

I've often wondered if the human traffickers are Tory Party donors because the policy of not letting anyone apply until they are here literally drives most asylum seekers into those small boats

You know, if you're going to post verbally abusive posts to someone, you really should explain what your actual point is.

You might also learn a few basics on interacting in a civilised manner on a public forum.

But hey. You very likely have bigger issues

I am fully aware of what they get - I was quoting (in bold) a previous poster's suggestion and then disagreeing with it, not sure how you extrapolated that to me not knowing what assylum[sic] seekers get.

They get access to public services though.public devices like the NHS which is on its knees.Legal migrants have to pay an NHS levy

Free healthcare immediately and dental care.

Free accommodation.

Free education.

Do they get this in all European westernised countries?

Yes. And in far greater numbers than they do here.

Look at immigration numbers into France or Germany, for example.

What's your point?

Someone asked what are the benefits/freebies they get here

That's probably because France and Germany are larger countries @MaryMcCarthy

They're larger countries, who take in far more immigrants, relative to their size, than the UK does. Why not calculate the average number of migrants per capita and let us know what you find?

They are all roughly the same size in terms of population. France 67 million; Germany 83 million; UK 67 million.

Thank you @Aaron95
Why such an arsey reply @MaryMcCarthy , manners cost nothing

Even if you have more space, it doesn't mean you have more infrastructure. You can't stick a load of asylum seekers in an empty field.

Free healthcare immediately and dental care. Correct. Although they won’t be able to jump the queue if A&E is full, or their local dentist has no spaces.

Free accommodation. True, but in a location you can’t choose, with families often separated with men in one location, and their wives and children in a different hotel,
or siblings split up and sent to different ends of the country. You do though get a luxurious £8 spending money a week if you’re in a hotel, as food is provided, although it’s at a set time so if you have an appointment and miss lunch, you don’t get lunch. Also the food is often nutritionally lacking and unsuitable for kids.

Free education. Up to the age of 18, yes. However further education is not free.
as an asylum seeker you are allowed to go to university (unless you have 'no study' immigration bail conditions - please see here for more details). However, in England, Wales and Northern Ireland you will be charged tuition fees at an ‘international/overseas’ rate and will not be eligible for student finance (the loans from the government that other students can apply for).

www.reuk.org/hefaq-asylumseeker

I mean. I don’t get it. Would people rather asylum seekers had no access to healthcare or education? Or can we admit that the problem isn’t asylum seekers themselves, but the way the government is dealing with them - overburdening one part of the country causing a strain on communities, not considering infrastructure to support asylum seekers and communities, pumping money into accommodation providers’ profits rather than the communities desperately in need of GP surgeries and new schools?

”acceptable” standards.

Free healthcare immediately and dental care. Correct. Although they won’t be able to jump the queue if A&E is full, or their local dentist has no spaces.

Sorry to reply to myself here, but this “free healthcare immediately” isn’t even a guarantee for asylum seekers. I mean, it isn’t a guarantee for any of us at the moment. In theory, yes, but the reality is different.

Asylum seekers in hotels are being left without access to adequate healthcare, leaving torture injuries untreated, children suffering weight loss, and pregnant women without maternity services, doctors have warned.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/home-office-asylum-hotels-manston-b2231510.html

People who are angry that asylum seekers are “getting what British people are supposed to have” would benefit from looking into the reality of life for asylum seekers and not whatever bonkers narratives are being pushed on social media by certain groups.

Is a “free 4 star hotel” glamorous when you’re sharing a room with a stranger for months on end, when security stop you leaving, when the hotel don’t inform you of letters so you miss important appointments, when you can’t access healthcare because the staff claim not to understand your English, when your child is losing weight as they can’t eat the food, when you can’t work, can’t access English lessons to help you fit in, when the Home Office can move you to a completely different city with next to no notice? When you have £8 a week to live on? That’s enviable?

And pair that with news like this and it’s pretty clear to who’s to blame for British people not having enough social housing:

Forty councils in England saw no social rent housing built in five years in the wake of government funding cuts.
Kate Henderson, chief executive of the National Housing Federation, which represents housing associations, said: “There is a chronic shortage of social homes in England. We know there are 4.2 million people in need of a social home across the country, and this is likely to increase rapidly as a result of the cost of living crisis we are facing.
The DLUHC figures show that 122 local authority areas – more than a third of all councils in England – each saw under 20 social rent properties built or acquired over the five years.

www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/13/forty-councils-in-england-built-no-social-housing-for-five-years-due-to-cuts

I hink a lot of people would rather that the navy machine gunned the boats in the Channel.

Is that what you would rather @Aaron95 ?

No it is not.

Sorry to correct you @BewareTheLibrarians and I'm not looking for an argument but although there is security they are free to come and go and they do

@StubbleAndSqueak No arguments looked for here either 😊 For the sake of clarity, I’ll correct that to “where security have the power to stop you leaving with no clear reason should they choose to”. In a well run, well staffed hotel you’d hope that people were free to come and go as they please, as is the law, but not all hotels seem to be that well run.

This article has some examples.
libertyinvestigates.org.uk/articles/asylum-seekers-effectively-detained-at-home-office-hotels-in-potential-legal-breach/

Then you have situations like Manston where people who should be housed in the community are effectively held in detention, despite it being illegal for the Home Office to do that.

“By holding detainees at the non-residential Manston Short Term Holding Facility (STHF) for more than 48 hours without allowing adequate access to phones or legal help, the Home Office has breached its own rules and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) Article 5: Access to justice, says BID.”
www.leighday.co.uk/latest-updates/news/2022-news/legal-challenge-to-failure-to-give-asylum-seekers-access-to-lawyers-at-manston-asylum-centre/

Let’s be honest though, even if I was completely wrong about that point, the rest of the list is still very troubling.