Labour's new policies for asylum seekers

[frommyheadtomyfeet]

Are rumoured to follow Denmark's, which include the seizure of valuables from people arriving here to pay their accommodation costs.

Is anyone else disgusted by this?! How will it work, they can take people's jewellery, phones etc., and leave them with nothing? What sort of message does that send?

Oh no it wasn't.

Anything in particular?

Right. So nothing to see here, then. Sorry, no one is falling for this gaslighting anymore.

Immigration since Brexit, from outside the EU is largely made up of net takers, not net contributors. You are right about the measures not getting through parliament. The far left Labour majority will block it. Immigration will stay out of control and Reform are almost guaranteed to win the next election. This will be the result of the 30 year open borders project, which since 2021 has lost all sanity.

Ok. So if asylum claims took months instead of a year to complete would that not save 6 months of accommodation costs?

I mean you can disagree with that but simply to say its all nonsense is almost as bad as those who immediately leap to the racism accusation.

Because just because you can risk travelling somewhere briefly doesn’t mean you can safely live there, especially if you have kids.
It’s one thing to go back to a war zone during a lull to check on elderly parents who won’t leave and sort out your paperwork, and another to feel safe living there with 3 children under 5 in your city flat with no bomb shelter and no guarantee you’ll be able to get the kids out when the bombing starts again.
Obviously not the same for everyone but that’s not far from the situation for one family I know, and I have heard several times from people who haven’t engaged their brains that that somehow makes them not genuine refugees.

You are so naive.m, it’s unreal.

Well before now reducing the number of sectors that can recruit from abroad, restricting circumstances where migrants can bring family members into the UK, reducing the time foreign students can stay on after graduation, one in one out - I know this last one hasn’t yielded much in the way of results yet. In time these measures plus the new raft of measures will start to have an impact.

Re the OPs statement that refugees would have their assets seized, that is not at all true. What’s actually announced is that if asylum seekers have sufficient assets they will be asked to contribute to their accommodation costs. So what they receive from the state will be means tested. That seems fair. Some people that come here have significant wealth. Often it’s the rich ones who have the means to flee a regime while the poor ones have to stay.

According to data here (2023) 98,015 people born in Pakistan applied to the EU Settlement Scheme using EU freedom of movement rules: 36,968 EU citizens born in Pakistan plus 61,047 non-EEA family members.

(143,018 people born in India applied to the EU Settlement Scheme)

The United Kingdom is no longer a member of the European Union and no longer has freedom of movement. However, during the UK’s membership of the EU, freedom of movement was a major driver of immigration to the UK of people born outside of the EU.

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/diversity-eu-national-population-uk/

The fact that 85% on this thread support the new rules shows that Labour have finally opened their ears to public sentiment.
Now to see if they go through with it.
If Labour don’t out Reform Reform, they know they are toast.
However their policies are worthless if we keep getting 1000+ illegal immigrants a week being rescued in the channel by RNLI.

This Labour government tried to cut welfare and ended up increasing it.

The claimed to want to grow the economy, and are killing it instead.

They are supposedly trying to reduce illegal migration, guess what…..

Total clowns.

I thought they offered. But really it’s Labour with the large majority.

matresense
Prior to Brexit, the official statistics showed that EU migrants were on average net contributors

It's a pity that the official statistics didn't warn the Home Office that over 6 million people were going to apply to the EU Settlement Scheme - the Home Office were only expecting between 3.5 million and 4 million eligible applicants. The official statistics seem somewhat lacking to me.

What cruelty? Cutting £5b from a £1.5trillion welfare spend over 5 years? It’s peanuts.

It’s the same kind of hyperbole being spluttered everywhere about the jewellery thing. Illegal migrants who are housed, given healthcare, education, and everything else that those already here can’t always get, may have to give up their valuables to help pay for it. How cruel.

No one Whois serious believes that over 1000 people a day going into disability benefits are all needy and genuine.

Mental health is the new bad back.

If you make it a longer wait for right to remain it could mean more likelihood of criminals/ drug gangs/knife wielding crazies /disfunctional families being sent back as they have failed the rlequirements which would be great

I know a lot of actual refugees, which you obviously don’t.

There is evidence to counter the idea that the majority of migrants post Brexit are net takers. Hence my reference to HMRC data.

We don't have open borders. That's a rhetorical exaggeration. I suppose that sone people mistakenly thought "control" meant the same as reduce with respect to migration.

The OP was raising the issue of policy around asylum and this never seems to be discussed without bringing in the far larger numbers of legal migration over which we have complete control.

Labour have to listen to the country, I also think what is not discussed is the legal machine which is flogging our Courts and making a mockery of the justice system. We are inherently a kind tolerate country who welcomes genuine asylum seekers. We need to return all arrivals to their country and ask them to apply through legal routes.

This is a problem for France, not the UK. And the Guardian should read the room, FGS.

Afran, an Iranian asylum seeker, sits forlornly across the road from a Paris shelter, hemmed in between vast slabs of concrete and thundering trains above. He has been here before – seven weeks ago, to be precise. The second time, he says, is as terrifying as his first.

Afran – not his real name – hit the headlines when he became the first asylum seeker to return to the UK in a small boat after being removed to France under the controversial “one in, one out” scheme on 19 September. He was sent back to Paris for the second time on 5 November.

“France, UK, France, UK, France – it’s not my choice,” he says. “I went to UK twice because I felt I had no other option. The smugglers in northern France attacked me and threatened my life before I crossed to the UK for the first time on August 6. When the Home Office returned me here the first time I believed the smugglers were still searching for me. I continue to believe that. I am frightened every time I go outside the shelter. I am not safe here.”

Guardian

Having a different opinion and expressing it with some argument to back it up isn't gaslighting. What you mean is you disagree with my post and that I'm arguing in bad faith. Thanks (not).

To be clear, I dont think that there's nothing to see here, just a lot more nuance to it. So youre either misunderstanding what I'm posting or deliberately misrepresenting it in order to disagree with something I haven't said.

I think she means the general gaslighting that the UK population has been subject to over the last few decades about immigration being a good thing. Its a relief that most people have finally now woken up.