Why is the public directing their anger at the individual asylum seeker that arrives at the shore…

[AnotherNC12345]

… rather than the smuggling / trafficking gangs that are responsible for the journey?

I think it’s very extreme to put all of the blame and the anger at the individual that arrives, rather than the people responsible for orchestrating the whole process. These individuals are often ‘sold the dream’ and hooked in by organised crime groups who direct them to the UK. I’ve looked at sample routes from different parts of the world (screenshots may be pending) and these are complex and would need local people, as well as law enforcement, customs officers and other government officials to turn a blind eye involved in smuggling across multiple borders.

It’s no secret that these crossings likely cost a lot of money, and I think it would be safe to assume that refugees would often be in crippling debt to the OCGs who will put pressure on them to pay it back, by threatening them and their families and I would go as far as to say they could then be coerced in to further committing crimes when granted asylum in order to pay back their debt.

These OCGs are likely involved in other trafficking / crime, not just of asylum seekers but likely drugs, weapons and sex as they have the connections across those borders.

I think it’s very unlikely that an asylum seeker is sitting there looking at all the European government websites and shopping for a country with the best benefits package and approaching a trafficker with a brochure like they’re picking a Jet2 holiday. But this is the narrative that’s often put us and fuelled in the media.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have a better system and want to control our borders better on a whole, but this sheer anger and blame placed at the human in front of us seems very misplaced, when they were likely manipulated in to thinking they can have a better life in this particular country and not another, and the problem is way way bigger than an individual.

There's an argument for providing language interpretation services for asylum seekers/refugees for a limited amount of time, but not for economic migrants or those otherwise expected to support themselves - workers, students, tourists - which I assume those non-refugee deaf / deaf/blind users would fall under.

That may be so, but if it was my DH's issue/medication/operation/treatment under discussion I would want a fluent translator with me, rather than trusting to luck. Expecting translation service for free smacks of entitlement.

Possibly for tourists in resort towns, if only to get them on their way.

I think it more likely smacks of lack of funds.

I would pay for a translator if needed, I can afford one.

Many of the people we’re talking about are either newer arrivals without a job yet, or lower paid migrants who likely can’t afford one.

I’m sure those with higher paid jobs and the funds available either would pay for one, or wouldn’t need one.

I imagine AI will do away with need for physical interpreters within the NHS in the next few years anyway, already we have Google translate as a useful tool. It’ll save millions, but obviously translators will be out of a job.

As far as the anger directed at individual migrants outside hotels housing them and during organised marches, I agree it’s abhorrent and I shudder to see it in Britain. The rise of Reform is terrifying.
However like previous posters I do think we need to get a grip on migration both legal and illegal. How many undocumented, mainly, young men can the UK absorb peaceably from cultures that have very different attitudes and norms to our own.
It boggles the mind that we now have a situation where on calm temperate days in excess of 1000 migrants are arriving on small boats in one day - that’s the population of an average secondary school or a small village. Many have thrown their documents and phones into the sea and we have no way of knowing who we’re letting in. The arguments about who we accept and who we don’t seem largely moot given that once here few are actually deported (although I think this government is doing slightly better on that front) many launch appeal after appeal costing thousands in legal aid others slip into the black market and remain undocumented, our lack of ID cards and the large-scale nature of this shadow economy is frequently cited as a pull factor to the U.K.

Whilst probably having slightly different views, immigration does need to be handled - and seen to be handled. This gov’t goes about it on ways I don’t always agree with, but goes about it it does, whilst no one seems to realise they are doing a considerable amount, so the rise of Reform, possibly Advance - which are by any metric a terrifying prospect.
Re the black economy being attractive- I still have to be convinced otherwise that the gov’t, of any colour, doesn’t need this to an extent - never much done to break it.

Yes, I simply can’t fathom why so many shops say they are struggling to afford staff: most Saturday jobs are a thing of the past and the NI costs etc are punitive.

YET in my small town there are I now think SEVEN barbers, all with multiple men working there. And I don’t think the local quite old population has much hair! Ditto three or four car washes - masses of guys scrubbing away.

The authorities seem to turn a completely blind eye to why certain businesses can afford whole legions of staff…

I don’t know about barbers, but car washes always seem pretty busy - but then there are trafficking or forced labour concerns.
I do understand some people taking cash in hand jobs, though I know it’s a terrible crime on mn, and I’m not saying these are all illegitimate - but they can be an absolute sweat shop, which is worrying - but it really doesn’t seem to be clamped down on.
Though Neither do I see protests there - not that I’d want to, but seems even SYL followers are happy when something benefits them.

I blame neither the illegal economic migrant or the smuggling gang. The blame lies firmly at the door of the Government, the Labour Government. Who in their right mind would refuse free board, houses, food, health treatment, taxis, electronics, yoga lessons, wigs, dental treatment, and pocket money?

Mind you, I have an unfettered hatred for the illegals who come here and feel free to r&pe women and children.

Ah I see. It can get confusing with lots of people talking.

Disabled people are protected under the equality act, and are entitled by law to interpreters and intervenors and any other services they need in order to get the same treatment as everyone else.
the cost of interpreters when put into context against other costs to the tax payer.
£132m the MPs of this country cost us.
The royal family cost us 86m officially , though others argue that it’s closer to 50m when you factor in security and so forth.

@OwlBeThere do you honestly think that interpreter services are a better use of public money than MPs (the democratic process) or the royal family (our heritage)?

We may have a right shower currently but the alternative is what? A dictatorship? A republican dictatorship? But yay! With plenty of interpreters!

@OwlBeThere do you honestly think that interpreter services are a better use of public money than MPs (the democratic process) or the royal family (our heritage)?

We may have a right shower currently but the alternative is what? A dictatorship? A republican dictatorship? But yay! With plenty of interpreters!

@OwlBeThere do you honestly think that interpreter services are a better use of public money than MPs (the democratic process) or the royal family (our heritage)?

We may have a right shower currently but the alternative is what? A dictatorship? A republican dictatorship? But yay! With plenty of interpreters!

Whoops !!

I completely agree and think this is the most sensible post I've seen on this subject in ages. Sadly, it's probably human nature to get angry and then look round for the nearest person to blame..Although, weirdly, I do think there is a bit of a tendency in. this country for people to get on their high horse about things, or to be overly dramatic..Im sure qe used to be much more compassionate and sensible...

Thanks. It’s been really sad to see that the thread took a turn to just general immigrant discussion, away from the actual question asked. The content brought it back to feel like all the other asylum seeker threads already existing which wasn’t the intent.

Yeah. Things often go off in weird directions on MN.

Also the taxis. Have you heard about the amount of money that is being spent on taxis to appointments for them?

Yep. 600 quid for a GP visit will not win the hearts and minds of the locals:

www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2j3regpdno.amp

SpaceRaccoon · Today 13:01
Yep. 600 quid for a GP visit will not win the hearts and minds of the locals

Why can’t they have their medical records sent to a nearer doctor?

But this isn’t an issue with the asylum seeker. This is a process issue. Once again, placing the blame in the wrong place.

The article itself quotes that the reception desk use an automated system. No private taxi would charge you that amount if you pre-booked your own journey.

An example: my workplace booked me a train when I travelled on business (on a route I personally took often). The price on that ticket was £125. A ticket I’ve regularly been booking for £25 return.

1. why aren’t these appointments taking place within a 10 mile radius. If availability is an issue, why isn’t the government looking at placing the money in to expanding services in that area. Not just for asylum seekers, but for all?
2. find a more cost effective travel vendor

So disabled migrants with NRPF can still access public funds?

Do I think that interpreters who help ensure people get appropriate and timely medical care so they don’t potentially die Becuase they don’t understand the instructions, are a better use of public funds than Charles’s coronation or some MPs duck pond and chandeliers? Yes. Of course I do. I genuinely don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t think that.

Yes. Becuase the human rights act says everyone should have access to healthcare, and the NHS has a duty to treat all people equally.