To be surprised that any 'failed' asylum seekers were not removed from the UK?

[DangerQuakeRhinoSnake]

Because surely by not being removed... they were not in fact failed asylum seekers, they were successful!

And why is the aim only to remove 'more' failed asylum seekers and not 'all' of them?

Is it just me not computing this?

The law doesn’t allow removal of anyone with a live claim. Keeping a claim live can drag on for years with appeals and swapping into various categories- human rights, modern slavery, family reunion. The change to a single appeal and updates to modern slavery legislation that are being proposed are significant.
Failed asylum seekers don’t have any legal status so can’t work, rent etc in the legitimate economy. A lot of the ‘new arrivals’ in every country in Europe will be people who’ve failed in one country and are starting claims again in another. Asylum shopping.

Thank you, that makes sense. Appreciate your reply. I wish the rolling news would include this info.

I think when I'm persecuted for my religion or ethnicity, driven away from my home and job, rounded up by military/militia forces, forcibly conscripted or facing criminal charges for being gay, I will go "asylum shopping". Especially to countries where I can speak about of the language or I have a few contacts of people from my culture or ethnicity, to help point me in the right direction. And to counties that have a reputation for being both democratic and entrepreneurial, that might have a historical connection with the place I'm from, and that might have broadcast their shortages of labour or particular skills. I might be able to start again! Earn money, be safe, live a normal life.

Because basically we have more in common as human beings than that which despots, activists and oligarchs say divides us.

?

Many many asylum seekers try their luck in Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany before ending up here.

The language isn't the pull factor.

According to data it’s because most asylum seekers / failed visa extenders simply ‘vanish’ while their claim is processed. They might not even do it deliberately - all it takes is a spelling mistake on their ID, or their documents being processed on multiple files, or even just that they might have returned to a non-EU ‘safe’ country voluntarily before their claim is processed (this happens a lot with muslims who cross Turkey). The mandatory digital ID should sort this out.

It's a bloody scandal @pottylolly but I really don't think digital ID is the solution.

But are they being persecuted though? Asylum shoppers should be auto refused after the second country especially if they are changing their tune to fit criteria

Some of the difficulties with removing failed asylum seekers of other overstayers on visas include that they have gone “underground” (stopped reporting to the HO, moved addresses etc.). Another very big difficulty (if one sees it like that re removing failed asylum seekers) is that many countries won’t cooperate with issuing emergency travel documents or there are problems documenting who the person “really” is.
That’s always a difficult area for the UK because poor diplomatic relations or there being no embassy in that country, no biometric information etc can effectively halt the removal.
Also terrible for the people involved in the sense they are on the run in the UK (figuratively) as they can’t work legally or claim public funds.
The HO has always had voluntary removals and various assisted returns programmes (but they varied country to country),

I think it’s going to be tough for the HO to remove families because all it takes is something like passing a child to another family so the authorities don’t know where the child is and then they can’t remove the family and so on.
It’s just more tough talk at this point because none of the big obstacles like documentation can just be fixed by UK policy alone.

That all sounds very nice, but actually we don't have a labour shortage. We have almost a million NEETS, rising unemployment and AI coming down the line.

Accommodating large numbers of people from other countries is becoming unsustainable especially as the negative impact falls hardest on the less well off.

Either this government sorts it or somebody else will. That's where we're heading and that goes for the rest of W. Europe too.

There is also the issue of where to send many failed asylum seekers to.

Some countries will not take them back. This was also in the news the past few days, with the Government saying they might not grant visas to folk from some countries.

Link to that news here:

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood threatens Trump-style visa ban on three countries as part of radical asylum reforms | UK News | Sky News

Angola, Namibia and the Democratic Republic of Congo are mentioned, they won't take people back, so what to do ?

The Government need to find another country to take them.

And there is a bit of a paradox in this I think. For some nations, the three above for example, it seems, the act of applying for asylum in another nation renders the applicant as "unwanted" in their own country.

But other countries such as China and the DPRK, might demand their nationals back because they want to punish them for claiming asylum. And that might actually add a fair bit of weight to their asylum claim.

It makes my head spin just thinking about it.

Many asylum seekers find religion or a different sexuality when shopping for asylum .

The headline is about families so I'm guessing they are finding ways to legally deport children while not leaving international agreements and treaties. Maybe at present, because the process has taken so long and children have been born, those pesky kids make removal legally far more difficult. (I'm not making any judgement on whether this is a good or bad thing).

I read somewhere that about half of asylum seekers arrive in boats while the other half have arrived legally (work, visit or study visa) and subsequently claim asylum. Seems more likely that it's this latter group who would contain more families.

As for asylum shopping, this is a strong case for international co-operation so that refugees only get to have a go in one country; not necessarily the first one. (They are finger printed on arrival so sharing this would mean we could spot those who had applied already elsewhere).

That all sounds very nice, but actually we don't have a labour shortage

Over 1,000,000 work Visas issued in the past 5 years. Either that's the reason we don't have a labour shortage, or it's evidence we quite clearly do or would otherwise.

Anyone fleeing anything ....will do that kind of behaviour

This is a scandal that's been going on for ages so I am surprised that you don't know but the issue seems to be newish to quite a lot of people

The amount of incompetence going on is staggering...though I'm not convinced it it's incompetence. I think they just really don't care. Or they want everyone to be allowed to stay, but they don't feel able to say that.

I still think in the end, they will just do an amnesty.

I know the boats are all over the news and I don't know the stats... but anecdotally I know three people whose visa (1 tourist and 2 student) were running out and the suggestion from the lawyer was to go for asylum.

I have all sympathy for anyone escaping for their lives but I think there is an awful lot of gaming the system going on. Depending on how much money one has to spend and personal circumstances (education level etc) the route is different but it's still gaming a system. Similar in a way to the wedding for visa scams.

Our economy is addicted to the crack cocaine of cheap labour imported from abroad (to quote Jacob Rees-Mogg).

The result is skyrocketing rents, pressure on our green space and other resources.

It's time to stop paying people in the UK to sit on their arses doing nothing and get them into the jobs that need doing (difficult but needs to be done, for the sake of those people too).

Do you know if they actually went down this route? I would imagine they would have to subsist on asylum support for a year and couch self? Although they're likely to have some money saved up.

And maybe people in this situation become one of the 700-900k who are here illegally and not claiming asylum. 🤔

How are you going about convincing the industries exploiting that cheap, ready-qualified foreign labour to put their hands in their pockets and pay for the training of UK replacements?

Are you legislating to prevent them paying pittance salaries which require being topped up by government to even come close to a living wage?

The current situation is encouraged by government because they will not stand up to exploitative business practice, on the contrary, they enable it. If you simply replace foreign labour with UK labour and change nothing else, all you are doing is changing who, precisely, is being exploited.

OK, let's carry on as we are. Let's do nothing and continue to import thousands of migrants from abroad while thousands of our own people fester on the dole.

Then sit back and watch the safety, stability and community cohesion of our country unravel.

@OneDearWasp as I said I don't know stats but I was shocked at the almost flippant way it was being suggested as something which would push the problem down a few years.
One definitely didn't go down that route. The other two disappeared so I don't know for sure what they did. Maybe here illegally as you say.

The boat crossings are different because these will be people who wouldn't get a visa anyway but it is still payment made to people smugglers to take one to a particular country. I have no idea what proportion are actually fleeing for their lives.

I think neither of the emotive options are the rights ones - "stop the boats/send everyone back" Vs "they are all fleeing for their lives, we let them all in".

Statistics to June 2025 show that only 39% of NEETs then were seeking employment; 61% were classed as economically inactive.

That 39% is important but the 61% is the bigger problem. And in some categories, such as farm labourers and fishermen, jobs are going unfilled.

AI is a double edged sword. The CEO of Google did an interview with the BBC shown last night warning that it could go belly up at any moment. I realise it seems that low level tasks relegated to AI seem least likely to be affected, but depending on the malfunction there could be a domino effect

Digital ID is efficacious for border control and employment control. It is an easy way to track inwards and outwards legal migration and to encourage employer compliance with the law.

It is very difficult to control others without giving up some of your own freedoms

@poetryandwine do you mean he said AI could go wrong at any moment?

Arguably, that's always the case!