Ashamed to be British ....

[twiglett]

message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

well spotted hmb!

I can't remember where I read that germany accepts more asylum seekers than we do, so that may be innaccurate or out of date.

Agree that the government threatening to take failed asylum seekers' children away is political posturing. It cannot work. I couldn't vote for a goverment that allowed this.

I am going to ask an extremely naive question, I know, but has the goverment ever formally asked asylum seekers organisations - asylum seekers themselves - what they think should happen to failed asylum seekers and their families?

If the Govt. asks Asylum seekers (or voters) what they want, they get accused of lacking leadership. If they don't ask, they get accused of being out of touch with ordinary people. They can't win!!

This is not an excuse for poor treatment of assylum seekers or anyone else, but I believe that a problem Britain has that much of the rest of EUrope (the world?) doesn't have is the DENSITY of population. I believe this affects many, many things such as transport, health etc. ANyone any thoughts (or facts) on this?

UK population density is exceptionally high which is causing problems for provision of housing and so on (becaise we're much more attached to houses than our European counterparts).

I honestly think that this is a very xenophobic country.

I think genuine asylum seekers should be given all the help they need when they come here. I think they can play a valuable part in our society and I want my children to have exposure to other cultures from early on in their lives. The world is getting smaller and if we get to know other nationalities we can't be "frightened" of them. I have a simple view of a huge problem, I know.

Zebra, I think if you scratch the surface of any country there will always be a deeply xenophobic streak. When we were in Sicily DD's godfather amazed us, he is in his early 30s, a clinical psychologist who has lived worked and studied in many countries; one of the many immigrants who work the beaches approached us and stopped to stroke DD's hair (being very blonde she has novelty value). Il Padrino was absolutely horrified and asked us why we allowed this before launching into an ataack that would have made a Sun reader proud...

IME every country is prejudiced (as a generalisation) against outsiders.

This wasn't about genuine asylum seekers. This was about people whose applications had failed. ie the powers that be had decided for whatever reason that they did not have a case to stay in the UK. Those people are told to leave and refuse. This idea of threatening to take away the children as I understand it was a bluff to say " we've told you to go, now get out". Under our laws we cannot deny social security benefits to families with children, so remove the children & you no longer have to support them.

I still have a problem with the fact that these people can refuse. If they have been found through the proper procedures not to have a case, they should be forcibly removed before they disappear into the black economy, WITH their children.

Incidentally it costs Kent County Council £50 million a year in services to asylum seekers. Compare that to the £14 million a year in special needs provision in the county & that suggests rather an imbalance. (official figures released by KCC under "where does your council tax go?". I wonder how much the rest of the UK pays towards the asylum bill?

What is really needed is for genuine asylum seekers to be fast-tracked so they can start their life in this country, get a job, a home etc. Those who come here as illegal immigrants should be thrown out immediately, and that is where the confusion arises.
Those who really need our help should not be treated the same as those who are obviously not genuine.
I know it is hard and difficult to decide but consider this. The anger comes about when people, who have no real understanding about what people are fleeing from, see asylum seekers "take" their homes. Even though the areas are deprived, again causing problems as locals see asylum seekers getting x,y,z.
There are 10,000 homeless children in Scotland. Maybe it would be a good idea for homes to be found for those families as well as asylum seekers.

And I should add, I know I'll be called a racist for saying that but I do believe charity begins at home.

Interesting thing to think about - I did a search on the cost of asylum seekers and found this quote:

"And, according to a recent Home Office study, migrants - including asylum seekers and refugees - are far from being a burden on UK tax payers. In 1999-2000, migrants in the UK made a net contribution of approximately £2.5 billion, worth a penny off income tax."

(from Wigan Council - Asylum Seekers The Facts - a nice little FAQ with some interesting info in there)

Hm, maybe it's worth ignoring the tabloids on this one when we start getting worried about costs...

Another myth site, this time from the Lib Dems

Asylum Myths

Georgina, did you read my posts? My figures came from KCCs own leaflets explaining where Kent's Council tax goes, not from tabloid headlines. Wigan is obviously very lucky if their council tax is not used for this purpose- ours is.

Paula, I agree with everything you said. The genuine ones need help to get work & start a new life & the bogus ones need to be ejected immediately.

I think Kent is one place where there is a real problem paying for asylum seekers. It needs to be centrally funded.