What's your thoughts on asylum seekers?

[Lynds778]

I'm all for offering asylum to those genuinely in need but I've seen a lot of negative media recently around 'fake' asylum seekers; people pretending to be from war-torn countries etc to gain entry to the country. Also videos of men giving advice for future asylum seekers on where to say you're from so that you can get in.

Also seen a lot of uproar from local communities about asylum seekers behaving anti-socially, most recently hanging around outside a primary school in Deanshanger and it's got me worried.
I'm also wondering why the large majority of asylum seekers are men and there are less women and children?

So, what's your opinion?

Also, this isn't a racist post. I would have the exact same concerns if these were white asylum seekers from Germany for example. The worry is the system is being abused by some and that we are a bit too lax when it comes to documentation and monitoring of asylum seekers.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14058597/Fake-asylum-seekers-conning-way-Britain-telling-Home-Office-war-torn-Eritrea-bragging-thousands-followers-TikTok.html

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14185169/amp/Four-asylum-seekers-costing-taxpayer-estimated-160-000-year-living-575-000-luxury-home-accused-faking-Afghan-nationalities-UK.html

@Tryingtoberreasonable , we are both asking how you accomplish the move?

Most liveable countries including the UK restrict immigration. What if neither you nor your spouse has residence rights anywhere else, nor a skill on the preferred list for a visa?

You are already living in a violent, misogynistic, homophobic country. VAWG is in epidemic proportions here, the vast majority coming from White, home grown offenders.

Not really.

An unmarried couple can easily rectify their law breaking and continue being themselves. Being unmarried is not an intrinsic part of their being, it is a lifestyle choice.

How would a gay person change their circumstance to abide by the law?

Unless you are suggesting being gay or actively gay is a lifestyle choice?

Again, being gay isn't a "lifestyle choice". Wearing rainbows every day is a lifestyle choice.

And there is already priority depending on your claim. Unfortunately, the biggest problem is lack of staff to manage the claims, so the claims take years to deal with. The system needs more resources to work properly.

Exactly. People need to go out and meet them properly, not judge them from afar. Speak to those 20 year olds on the street corner with nothing to do. Speak to the turkish barbar or nail bar owner (still dont get all that..). Or whoever it is that annoy people upthread. Hear their stories dont judge them. Its the Mails othering of asylum seekers that is the exact problem. Asylum seekers could be any of us, its an amazing lack of empathy on some of this thread. I hope trolling.

@poetryandwine @justteanbiscuits

sorry will try to address both in one post as they discuss the same sort of things.

regarding middle aged, chronic illness scenario, you are very much aware that this is a slightly different scenario than just seeking asylum due to being bisexual. However this would then mean taking on an individual that is going to add increased pressure on a health care system that is already stretched and unable to meet the demands of the current population?

My point is surrounding priorities, and personally a family who’s live is at risk of being bombed or being killed for whatever it may be, to me is a higher priority. So if there is 1 place and those are the two cases. In my personal opinion the place to seek asylum that is highest priority would be the family with their lives at risk.

But that is very much the same for you or I, if we were to want to move to Australia or America… that doesn’t mean that we then decide to seek asylum?

Is the daily mail not a genuine source, is what they post not real?

OMG, do you live under a ROCK? OF COURSE the DM is are not a reliable source, what they 'write' is largely inflammatory, divisive and hate-mongering bollocks. Designed to warp the mind of those who question nothing.

They have been leaders of demonisation of everyone since the get-go. Single mothers, benefits recipients, forriners, anyone who looks different.

Look at the BS this country has come through, most of it is manipulated or stoked by the DM. Brexit, Southport, you name it.

I will never forgive them for referring to the poor kids killed by Mick Philpot as sub-human and because they were bred by this filth they were in some way undeserving of sympathy or kindness.

STOP GETTING YOUR NEWS FROM THE DAILY MAIL! It's filth.

I think you’ve definitely raised really valid points in terms of how perhaps you and many others are feeling in terms of the asylum process.

All asylum claims in the Uk have to fit one of the categories as stated in the 1951 “refugee convention” and 1967 protocol (as the UK is a contributor and signatory of both)

That a person is seeking protection “owing to a well founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion” - if a person cannot prove they fit one of those criteria they would not meet the definition. - There’s also disqualifying factors

There are all also lower level status such as “Humanitarian protection” etc

But overall being poor is not a convention characteristic, therefore an economic migrant is different to a convention refugee, a person of course can both fit the refugee convention AND also be economically poor (and very often will be as those fleeing the above and economic hardship do often, but not always, go hand in hand)

The UK is bound to assess a claim in their jurisdiction and by UK’s own policy they decided that to make a claim you have to physically be in the UK to do so.

I guess a lot of question comes for the definition of safe countries as safe for who? I often am in one of the few big refugee generating countries but I’m totally safe there due to virtue of my not being from a “persecuted” community or having a certain characteristic.

As someone mentioned, is Tunisia safe for a member of the LGBTQIA+ community? This is where the determination process comes in

@okydokethen As a social worker the vast majority of false claimants, tax avoidant and work shy people I meet are British daily mail readers.

So you have time to document peoples' reading preferences?

It seems social workers definitely have too much time on their hands 🙄

It's not at all. Being unmarried is very easily fixed by getting married. That is available to you.

Being gay is punishable by death and there is no 'fix' for that, nor should there be.

@justteanbiscuits you're making it about the fact they are gay. But the WHOLE scenario was that it was against the law in that country, not that the persons life was at risk.

I have just said I don’t think it is a valid ground to seek asylum. And if I was gay and if I lived in a country that was homophobic, I wouldn’t want to live there. But I wouldn’t seek asylum, I would work, save and move to somewhere that accepted me.

@TY78910 but if you look at the original post that I responded to, the scenario given was not “punishable by death”. If that was the case yes, a persons life is at risk, they should stand good grounds to seek asylum…

My point was, that you are still missing, is that you can't just "decide to move to a different country". It's not that simple. It was easier before we left the EU but that has been removed from us.

I would be choosing to move for lifestyle reasons because (at the moment) I live in a liberal country and have no need to claim asylum anywhere.

But being gay is NOT a lifestyle choice.

You are very naive about other countries and peoples ability to "save up".

This.^

Its definitely all the white local addicts s***ing in the street around here and making me walk the long way around with my toddler.

@justteanbiscuits my dad is an immigrant from Zimbabwe, so please do not try to educate me on other countries and peoples “abilities” to freely move.

He did not agree or support Robert Mugabe’s leadership. He wanted to move to a different country so he did, he got a scholarship to get further education here and made the decision to move to a different country with very little money.

If you support the current asylum framework, which is essentially "there is a list of qualifying conditions; anyone who applies and meets at least one of the conditions is eligible for asylum or humanitarian protection"...

...do you believe that there should be any limits on the number of people accepted each year?

...do you believe that countries should be allowed to set limits which are based on their own ability to provide resources, rather than eligibility of the claimant?

"Asylum seekers should be housed in ordinary council housing."

And where would that be then? Have you any idea how dire the housing shortage is? There's a five year minimum wait in my city for council/HA housing.

I suspect a lot of posters on this thread don't live in social housing and are highly unlikely to be affected in any shape or form by asylum seekers.

@justteanbiscuits sorry just to continue he lived under a dictatorship, and regularly saw and heard about people who’s homes were raided and every single family member killed because they had vocalised they did not agree to Robert Mugabes leadership, or had voted against him.

@Tryingtoberreasonable Two points: that bisexual Iranian is risking their life, because practising gay sex is a capital crime. Uganda, Iran and Pakistan are the only three countries where this is true, and where (to my limited understanding) sexual orientation is therefore a compelling feature of an asylum claim. With the usual high standards.

Someone asked about a gay person from Tunisia claiming asylum. Because the maximum penalty for gay sex is only (!) 3 years in prison, I would guess that a claim based in sexual orientation is a lower priority.

Also I am not sure why you think we can just decide to go live in America or Australia. Well, I took American citizenship after moving there on a highly skilled visa, but the bar was very high. Australia is similar: basically you need a Skilled Worker Visa, a Partner Visa ir a Family Visa. For a Skilled Worker Visa, you cannot be more than 45 yo. The other visas require an Australian partner or family member

Again, perhaps we are not communicating clearly. I do not understand why, @Tryingtoberreasonable , you think we have freedom of movement beyond that granted to skilled workers, and why you think a gay person from Iran/Uganda/Pakistan would be likely to have skilled worker status.
I would like to understand.

Totally get both the point you and “Just” are making - but I think the key area is that you have an example that does not fall under the the reasons for asylum….. as your original example.

So the original that you mentioned “If I was gay and I lived in a country that was homophobic I would leave but I wouldn’t seek asylum”

If you were gay and could NOT prove that you faced a risk of persecution due your status as being a member of a social group “Gay individual” - you would not be eligible for asylum anyway so if you’d seek it or not is a bit of a moot point.

However what I think other posters are trying to highlight, people who are making asylum claims based on their characteristic of being Gay is BECUASE the county they are from they DO have a well founded fear they will be persecuted for being Gay, not just that their original country is a bit homophobic.

does that make sense?

Which organisations are these, other than the one already linked, which is biased. Who tracks the biases and credibility of these self appointed arbiters of truth?

Why was my post deleted?

I posted saying how daily mail is not a good source to read and the readers tend to be racist / xenophobic?

And I wrote how sick I felt when I read that poor boy of PPs neighbour from Afghanistan who was attacked with a hammer? Why was that deleted? @MNQH?

They have been leaders of demonisation of everyone since the get-go. Single mothers, benefits recipients, forriners, anyone who looks different

Yep. And they weren't keen on Jewish people either back in the 1930s.

Always been a scummy rag, always will be.

@poetryandwine
sorry I think it is you that is not understanding and I completely understand why… because you are lying words into my mouth that have not been said.

Did I mention anything about “skilled workers”…?
I actually worked with a man who was from Pakistans (he was not yet a UK citizen) he found a job here, and was granted permission to live here whilst he worked, as he was working and able to prove he could provide for himself, his wife as allowed to reside here too, they had two children and he’s working towards getting UK citizenship… he has not seeker asylum but instead has gone through a process many others do to emigrate to another country. His job was not called as being a “skilled worker” so I’m unsure where you have got this information from?