Asylum seekers costing taxpayers £6mil a day

[HoraceCharlie]

Firstly- I appreciate this may be an unpopular posting.

I will say I DO agree with people seeking asylum if they genuinely need it- war etc.

But am I in the wrong they should be expected to DO something when they are here?

Provide them with adequate shelter, 3 meals a day, warmth and electricity and vouchers for clothing based on need. Include nappies and formula for babies.

Give free childcare to the children and they have to work on voluntary basis for a set period before they can apply to officially stay

thoughts?

Yes, it's an utter disgrace. The govt needs to get its shit together, recruit and train loads more staff and speed up the processing of asylum claims. It's ridiculous that people are left in limbo for a year or more before they are granted refugee status (which around 90% are) and are then allowed to work.

Still, this is what the Brexiteers voted for when they threw away the our right to return asylum seekers to the first safe country in the EU that they arrived in, so they need to shoulder their share of the blame as well.

The clothes are often donated, or they were wealthy before forced to flee their home. Left with nothing.

What you are suggesting IS slavery/ workhouses/ govt indentured servitude.

Pretty horrendous lack of humanity.

Yes. I voted to Remain. This is one of the most heartbreaking impacts of Brexit imho. However, even post Brexit nothing stops us from negotiating a refugee agreement with the EU and being part of a larger coordinated effort. Brexit ended our membership in the single market, but did not stop trade. So, to my mind, Brexit is not a valid excuse to allow this consequence to fester. We made sure trade didn’t stop…so now we are years post Brexit why are refugees not now a priority? Too many have drowned trying to get here. It is a sad state of affairs when the price of veg from Spain is a bigger priority than human lives.

I thought it was absolutely not allowed to work until asylum has been granted. I've worked with a few refugees over the years, and none of them were allowed to work until they were granted leave to remain.

I have a friend who came here to claim asylum, and she got a lot of support from an organisation that helps Kurdish refugees. With their support, she started a degree while she was waiting for leave to remain because she couldn't bear not working.

Letting possibly rapists and murderers i to the country is good ethics? How many illegal immigrants have you taken to live with you?

Kurdish refugees from Turkey (and possibly other countries in the region, but I've only met Kurdish people from Turkey) are often well educated and speak excellent English, but the main reason they prefer to come here is because there is already a network of Kurdish dissident refugees in the UK and they support one another.

Illegal immigrants - none. Never met any, have you?

Asylum seekers/refugees - many. I sprnd my life supporting Syrian refugees. How many have you helped?

Why? What's that got to do with the Navy refusing to be involved in Priti's ridiculous "pushback" policy?

@Bloopsie they aren't illegal immigrants until their asylum claim has been processed and rejected. I really hope that's clear enough for you, because I don't think it's possible to spell this out in words of one syllable or less. I mean, I hesitate to use the word 'thick', but I'm thinking it loudly.

Every asylum worker I’ve ever worked with (charity role) has wanted to work, contribute to society and support their family. (Sure, there are some who don’t or who turn to crime, but that’s hardly limited to asylum seekers).

The problems with asylum in this country are caused by political decisions, inaction and incompetence.

A way of processing claims outside the country, for example in Calais as has been offered multiple times by the French, would stop the vast bulk of dangerous channel crossings.

A fit for purpose system that worked at a suitable pace, adequately funded and with compassion would be more humane and reduce the bill.

The ability for asylum seekers to work and/or seek education (very hard to do right now with a lot of hoops to jump through) would reduce the bill, aid integration, be the humane approach and help address a lot of our workforce problems.

These options are all open to the government, but they have made the CHOICE to not implement them and instead to use desperate people as a political pawn to try to save themselves and distract from their appalling domestic record.

In some professions, they also have to do courses to be able to practise in the UK. Lawyers, surveyors, doctors, nurses and teachers definitely do.

Most of Syria is not at the war and if the UK and USA woulld not be occupying 20 pcnt there would be no reason to have refugees,.

Absolutely.

From my working with qualified teachers/doctors etc, thier qualifications from.thier home country makes it relatively straightforward to complete the courses to be able to practice in the UK.

If you're immigrants how did you get here and how long have you been here?

Frankly, you sound like the kind of immigrant who wants to slam the door behind you so noone else gets the opportunities you did

yes, for many professions, but it is not necessarily true for teachers, as many schools are now employing people as teachers with no/ untranslated qualifications - of course, they get paid less, so the school gets a qualified teacher for the price of an unqualified one

Only thick ones are letting men of fighting age with no knowledge of their background into this country- where are their children wives sisters mums and grandmums,left home to fight the war?

I think your (and Priti's) ridiculous idea of using the Navy shows your level of understanding of asylum seekers, refugees, war, government approved- torture/imprisonment, terrorism etc etc

This post also shows your complete lack of understanding of Syria.
Before you come back with questions - No, I'm not prepared to spend my time educating you on why there are refugees from Syria. Google it, the FCO have lots of information.

UK need to sort its borderforce put stop rnli human trafficking and get navy to protect uk

Sorry, @Bloopsie, if I've got the wrong end of the stick, but this part of your post is a little unclear. Are you actually suggesting that the RNLI are involved in human trafficking? And that the RN should use force against boats carrying asylum seekers?

It's been stated several times now, but some people don't seem to get it, so to take the last point first:

1. It is not illegal for asylum seekers to enter a country, any country, for the purpose of seeking asylum
2. Any action taken by the RN to hinder or prevent a boatload of people from reaching UK shores would be in breach of international law.
3. Ships have a duty to help other boats in distress. This applies to naval boats as well as merchant. Afaik, there is no exemption for inflatable craft in the English channel.
4. The RNLI's primary objective is "saving lives at sea". They will do their utmost to save those at risk, regardless of who they are and how they got there. They don't distinguish between a pissed up idiot on a paddleboard, a channel ferry that has got into difficulties or a fishing boat that has lost power and is drifting dangerously. They will do their utmost to save those lives, regardless of whose lives they are, even when it means endangering their own.

I live near the coast. I know lifeboatmen. I've been in meetings where a colleague's pager has gone off and and they've had to drop everything to get the boat out. I've been a volunteer in an exercise that involved being "evacuated" from a ferry.

They are among the bravest, committed and most humble men I've ever known. They continue to be a voluntary service because they know that much of what they do wouldn't be possible if they were employees. And if someone tried to tell them that they should treat one group of people in danger on the sea differently from any other, they would ignore it, and carry on regardless.

Your post reads as though you regard the RNLI as human traffickers. Give your head a shake.

And if that doesn't work, have a read of the inquiry report into the loss of the Solomon Browne, and see what the RNLI is really about.

This is completely correct. I wish some of the less informed on this thread would learn from those of us who work or volunteer in this field and know what we are talking about…

Saying they are more likely to be rapists or murderers than anyone else is just horribly racist. I haven’t had any refugees to live with me - no room -but have done countless hours of unpaid work to support them over the last few years and now am lucky to count some as my friends. How many humans - from anywhere - do you help and support?

Well quite. You'd think they would be so thankful after all that 'fleeing' that they would claim asylum in the first safe neutral country they arrive in. Rather than the 10th...

I sometimes think that people can be reluctant to learn the truth for fear of having their prejudices undermined.

Since May 2022, there has been a significant increase in the number of Albanians crossing the channel on small boats. From May to September 2022 Albanian nationals alone comprised 42% of small boat crossings, with 11,102 Albanians arriving by small boat in those five months. In contrast, over the whole of 2021 there were a total of 815 Albanian nationals who arrived by this method. In some weeks over the summer, more than half of small boat arrivals claimed to be Albanian.

Most Albanians crossing the Channel in small boats are male – for example, from 2018 to June 2022, 95% of Albanian small boat arrivals were male. This is a significantly different gender balance than those asylum cases concluded by the Asylum system at present, who in general will have been in the UK for some time. Over the same period (2018 to June 2022), only 35% of those Albanian nationals whose cases were decided and who were granted protection were male.

Not a single one fleeing war. And what nationality just happen to have the highest involvement in drugs, money laundering and are responsible for 70% of prostitution in London? Odd how the pro immigration lobby choose to ignore the more inconvenient facts.

This isn't asylum. It's organised crime.

That was the case. I think the permission to work after 12 months is a relatively new policy.

Well there are always a few criminals or criminals to be in any group of people whether British born, economic immigrant or asylum seeker. They do rigorous background checks on everyone coming here except for British born. So this is irrelevant paranoia.

They're not legally allowed to work. Often they are housed very remotely so even if they wanted to we are making it very difficult.

Also it's not the asylum seekers costing us £6m per day it is the home office's backlog and processes.