Were you offended?

Unfortunately too many of them are deported before they have had a chance to go to court. They have even been sent back to die in their country of origin. Teresa May has got into lots of trouble with her denial of human rights.

fullfact.org/immigration/enforcement_foreign_national_immigrants_border-42123

That a benefit is beneficial is a fact. Somewhere to live and enough money to feed oneself are benefits by that normal use of a word definition. I think that's why one keep hearing the oft quoted line about people coming here for benefits. Ordinary people see housing and subsistence assistance as beneficial, which it is.

It is definitely splitting hairs, putting it politely, to say asylum seekers do not receive benefits. They do. Just differently defined ones from UK nationals.

Aren't failed asylum seekers deported?

Not my hair-splitting, bags. It was a quote from the fullfacts article, who hairsplit intentionally just to get the facts right.

So now they are going to stop the £36 paid to failed asylum seekers, suppose starving them to death will save the tax payer

My post was to AB

That is why I posted both sets of statistics!

Duh!

I would call all this list you gave: "accommodation, a subsistence allowance, or both. As the National Audit Office put it, the accommodation provided is “typically a flat or shared house in which the asylum seeker is provided with bedding and basic kitchen equipment as well as basic furniture and access to cooking and washing facilities. Cash support to asylum seekers is limited to £36.95 per week for a single person aged 18 or over" beneficial even if it isn't 'ordinary' benefits. Bit of hair-splitting going on there, I think dj.

Which is not to say that I think people want to come here for benefits, ordinary or otherwise.

Non nationals include Americans, refugees and asylum seekers do not , so wrong to pass off the number of non nationals as such

Agreed, Anniebach.

The number of non-nationals living in EU member states is different from asylum seekers and refugee, whether economic or not. In my family I have three EU non-nationals and 2 non EU non-nationals living in the UK. They are all working hard and not living off the state.

I do not believe people want to come to this country to receive benefits , Daily Mail speak in my opinion. How come they are here to live off benefits and at the same time take British jobs off British workers

If I lived in Syria and was being bombed by America and the UK I would want out too

"Asylum seekers are people whose claims for refugee status haven’t been decided yet. While they’re waiting, they aren’t eligible for ordinary benefits.

Instead, asylum seekers can apply for government support if they are, or are likely to become, “destitute”. This can be accommodation, a subsistence allowance, or both.

As the National Audit Office put it, the accommodation provided is “typically a flat or shared house in which the asylum seeker is provided with bedding and basic kitchen equipment as well as basic furniture and access to cooking and washing facilities”, usually outside London and the South East.

Cash support to asylum seekers is limited to £36.95 per week for a single person aged 18 or over.

It’s only after being recognised as a refugee that a person claiming humanitarian protection can claim benefits along the same lines as British citizens."

fullfact.org/factcheck/immigration/migrants_calais-46882

After three months, migrants are eligible for Job Seekers Allowance, if they have passed a test.

fullfact.org/immigration/welfare_benefits-44747

Assylum is different to migrants.

Gracesgran's post is about assylum seekers not migrants who want a better life. And are likely to be looking for money. And will have heard of our benefit system.
Not sure how much they will get. Off to google.

Around three quarters had no knowledge of welfare benefits and support before coming to the UK – most had no expectation they would be given financial support

But that doesnt tie in with petra's post about the telephone.

-Over two thirds did not choose to come to the UK

In which case, perhaps they leave when they get here.

Couldn't "tolerance fatigue" only "brew" if some tolerance had been shown in the first place nigglynellie?

Well, who knows?! I just feel so sorry for everyone caught up in this nightmare. As for relatives persuading family members to come to Britain, poor souls as it may not be all it's cracked up to be including the awful weather!! They may well wish they had never come here like the situation in Germany as judging from other media outlets there seems to be a lot of tolerance fatigue brewing.

I should think very little is to do with benefits nigglynellie. Surely if that was the case they would all be trying to come here which is far from the truth.

The highest number of positive asylum decisions (first instance and final decisions) in 2014 was recorded in Germany (48 thousand), followed by Sweden (33 thousand), France and Italy (both 21 thousand), the United Kingdom (14 thousand) and the Netherlands (13 thousand). Altogether, these six Member States accounted for 81 % of the total number of positive decisions issued in the EU-28. *
*This article here

My guess would be that they go to the countries where they can speak the language and/or where they already have family.

This article is also useful and shows that many of the people coming here have little choice.

In-depth interviews with asylum seekers and refugees revealed that:
-Over two thirds did not choose to come to the UK.
-Most only discovered they were going to the UK after leaving their country of origin.
-The primary objective for all those interviewed was reaching a place of safety.
-Around three quarters had no knowledge of welfare benefits and support before coming to the UK – most had no expectation they would be given financial support.
-90% were working in their country of origin and very few were aware they would not be allowed to work when they arrived in the UK.

Jumping to conclusions has never been the best way of finding out the facts.

Soontobe. "I wonder what they have been told. And by whom"
They have been told by friends/relatives who are already here. How? By a thing called a telephone.

I agree with your post nigglynellie.
I wonder what they have been told. And by whom.
And how much it has all been embellished.

There are not even rules[as far as I know] saying that anyone has to read any posts that anyone has written, before writing something, even if a thread has majorly changed during that time.

I did leave.
I have been out for a few hours.

I am really refering to Elegran's posts about insects.

The rules on gransnet are very loose.
There is nothing saying that you cant refer to a post several hours or even days ago.

Silly me! I should have been able to work that out for myself! Trouble is that we are an overcrowded island with facilities at breaking point and not the paradise as portrayed by the smugglers who have robbed and duped these poor people who will sadly discover this when they finally reach these shores. This situation now seems to be about how awful D.C. is, how awful this country is not to open its borders to anyone and everyone en masse, regardless of who or what they are, no checks of course in case of human rights violations. But nobody seems to raise a voice against the wicked cruel people who are behind all this misery, affecting both the migrants, the traveling public, including freight and the good people of Kent, whose lives and businesses are being trashed. Unbelievable!