Immigration and migrants

Primrose
There is more I could say about this but last week got a real dressing down from someone who said I should not share “tittle tattle” from a person I know who works for Border Force.

Don’t let that bother you. Ignore them, I do. Don’t allow them to dictate what you post.

petra

Cossy
Which part was horrifying the amount of money paid or the corruption at Calais. I’ve known about Calais for years through a harbour master at Dover.
Of course I’ve never said anything because it wouldn’t be believed especially on GN. But now it’s out there. It’s the same at Zeebrugge.

Frankly all of it! Awful and the only good thing is the amount of effort made to catch the corrupt people smugglers, the Calais officials should be identified and sent to prison. It makes even more of a mockery of us sending them vast sums of money.

Its only use is to highlight multiple cases of applications for asylum. It stores, for a limited period, only fingerprints and gender - no names, no photos. I don’t know how you think that would be of use to the UK.

Eurodac does an awful lot more than that Germanshepherdsmum, but if you feel it’s a waste of UK effort to get involved with it, please feel free to say so.
www.eulisa.europa.eu/Publications/Information%20Material/Leaflet%20EU-LISA_Eurodac_EN.pdf

You will only have details of family if they are on a DNA database. Eurodac only contains fingerprints and gender of people known to have entered a country illegally, no names or photographs, and the details are automatically deleted after 18 months. There fore I don’t see how it could help the UK to identify asylum seekers if we still had access to it.

Germanshepherdsmum

Casdon

growstuff

Callistemon21

Yes, I wondered about using DNA but that again throws up questions about individuals' rights, whether or not the DNA would be kept on a database etc.
Can it prove exact country of origin too?

No, it can't.

I believe the theory is that the more DNA samples there are, the closer it’s possible to link individuals to families. It can prove exact country of origin if there are very close matches already on the system, ie family members, but only then. However, as part of the information gathering process when people first enter Europe they are more likely to have documentation, and to volunteer personal information, so it’s all recorded,

If close family members were born in country A, it’s entirely possible that the person being tested was born and lived elsewhere. So DNA cannot conclusively prove an individual’s country of origin.

It can’t, but once you know the details of family members, particularly parents and full siblings it makes it easier to identify people. I presume you don’t disagree that access to Eurodac would be very helpful in identifying who people are?

maddyone they are advised by the people smugglers to get rid of all forms of personal identification they have when they leave their home countries.

GSM, I suppose you are right, but other countries ask for it and it takes time to be accepted, learning the language and our laws and practises of their. adored country means they really want to be here. To say you’re one religion to escape persecution is gaining entry by false pretences and they should be sent back as it denying genuine claimants. It’s so frustrating. We are just so complacent.

Allsorts

Asylum seekers, those seeking protection from harm would just go to first country. Migrants come here because were an easy touch, what country would put up with gangs of them causing mayhem about their living conditions in a hotel,. We’ve become a dumping ground, someone ie., those working their socks off have to fund it, people are fed up. Those that do claim asylum should be on temporary visas allowed to work for 5 years and pledge allegiance to this country, if not back to where their allegiance is, also no illegal activity, drugs, violence etc, we don’t know who we’ve here now. I do think that’s too simple for any government though , like stopping the boats in the first place.

Pledging allegiance to this country would be as meaningless as the sham baptisms.

Casdon

growstuff

Callistemon21

Yes, I wondered about using DNA but that again throws up questions about individuals' rights, whether or not the DNA would be kept on a database etc.
Can it prove exact country of origin too?

No, it can't.

I believe the theory is that the more DNA samples there are, the closer it’s possible to link individuals to families. It can prove exact country of origin if there are very close matches already on the system, ie family members, but only then. However, as part of the information gathering process when people first enter Europe they are more likely to have documentation, and to volunteer personal information, so it’s all recorded,

If close family members were born in country A, it’s entirely possible that the person being tested was born and lived elsewhere. So DNA cannot conclusively prove an individual’s country of origin.

Asylum seekers, those seeking protection from harm would just go to first country. Migrants come here because were an easy touch, what country would put up with gangs of them causing mayhem about their living conditions in a hotel,. We’ve become a dumping ground, someone ie., those working their socks off have to fund it, people are fed up. Those that do claim asylum should be on temporary visas allowed to work for 5 years and pledge allegiance to this country, if not back to where their allegiance is, also no illegal activity, drugs, violence etc, we don’t know who we’ve here now. I do think that’s too simple for any government though , like stopping the boats in the first place.

What am I not understanding here? It’s being said that when asylum seekers enter Europe, they have documentation but by the time they enter Britain they don’t have documentation. I’m confused.

growstuff

Callistemon21

Yes, I wondered about using DNA but that again throws up questions about individuals' rights, whether or not the DNA would be kept on a database etc.
Can it prove exact country of origin too?

No, it can't.

I believe the theory is that the more DNA samples there are, the closer it’s possible to link individuals to families. It can prove exact country of origin if there are very close matches already on the system, ie family members, but only then. However, as part of the information gathering process when people first enter Europe they are more likely to have documentation, and to volunteer personal information, so it’s all recorded,

Callistemon21

Yes, I wondered about using DNA but that again throws up questions about individuals' rights, whether or not the DNA would be kept on a database etc.
Can it prove exact country of origin too?

No, it can't.

Yes, I wondered about using DNA but that again throws up questions about individuals' rights, whether or not the DNA would be kept on a database etc.
Can it prove exact country of origin too?

It is estimated that Germany needs a net migration of 400,000 people a year until 2035 to maintain the Labour volume.

www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2023RP03/#hd-d35124e474

They can’t change their DNA profile Callistemon21, so EU countries use the Eurodac database to get a very close match to identify which country their origins are, it’s building all the time. If we were part of that again we would be in a much stronger position to return failed asylum seekers.

Who is an asylum seeker?
An asylum seeker is a person who has left their country and is seeking protection from persecution and serious human rights violations in another country, but who hasn’t yet been legally recognized as a refugee and is waiting to receive a decision on their asylum claim.
www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/refugees-asylum-seekers-and-migrants/#:~:text=Who%20is%20an%20asylum%20seeker,decision%20on%20their%20asylum%20claim.

I think everyone has said they think the asylum procedure should be speeded up and then those granted leave to stay can work; others should be deported quickly. As you say is happening in Germany.
Obviously Belgium and Sweden are not managing to do so as was evidenced by the recent tragic case.

The problem is, if they have destroyed their papers, then where to?

Wyllow3

I think there is a "down" on any suggestions

because of the abysmal processing system we have in the UK.

Because we fail so badly, and Rwanda has been such an expensive mess, people demonise and ate encouraged to demonise in an "they're all the same" way

Not only that, but there is a deliberate government narrative over the last year when all asylum seekers are painted intrinsically bad, untrustworthy, dangerous, cannot work. Example of the "Bad" are constantly brought out not the many who want to work and live like anyone else. Suggestions of supervision needed s here sound more like prison.

A narrative of hate and blame instead of constructive working on ideas and possible small but valuable initiatives.

I had a look across at Germany, which still has more seekers than the UK

In Germany "The processing of asylum applications in Germany has become slightly faster – on average, people now have to wait around six months for a decision. That's despite a substantial increase in the number of applications.

Figures released by the German interior ministry show that in the first half of 2023, the average asylum procedure took 6.6 months, one month less than in 2022." If you are accepted then you are allowed to apply for jobs."

If you are rejected you are returned to your country of origin.

Unless people have qualifications work typically taken is actually the same as suggestions made here (construction, agriculture, hospitality etc).

Refugees are allowed to do voluntary work in the UK, this of course is organised and led as refugees have not been granted asylum.

I wonder how many asylum seekers in Germany have destroyed their papers?

Wyllow3

I think there is a "down" on any suggestions

because of the abysmal processing system we have in the UK.

Because we fail so badly, and Rwanda has been such an expensive mess, people demonise and ate encouraged to demonise in an "they're all the same" way

Not only that, but there is a deliberate government narrative over the last year when all asylum seekers are painted intrinsically bad, untrustworthy, dangerous, cannot work. Example of the "Bad" are constantly brought out not the many who want to work and live like anyone else. Suggestions of supervision needed s here sound more like prison.

A narrative of hate and blame instead of constructive working on ideas and possible small but valuable initiatives.

I had a look across at Germany, which still has more seekers than the UK

In Germany "The processing of asylum applications in Germany has become slightly faster – on average, people now have to wait around six months for a decision. That's despite a substantial increase in the number of applications.

Figures released by the German interior ministry show that in the first half of 2023, the average asylum procedure took 6.6 months, one month less than in 2022." If you are accepted then you are allowed to apply for jobs."

If you are rejected you are returned to your country of origin.

Unless people have qualifications work typically taken is actually the same as suggestions made here (construction, agriculture, hospitality etc).

Refugees are allowed to do voluntary work in the UK, this of course is organised and led as refugees have not been granted asylum.

Your last sentence is misleading, when they come across they are seeking 'asylum'.
The definition of an asylum seeker is someone who has arrived in a country and asked for asylum. Until they receive a decision as to whether or not they are a refugee, they are known as an asylum seeker. In the UK, this means they do not have the same rights as a refugee or a British citizen would.

petra

Callistemon
I hate to be the one to burst your id bubble, but, 😁 for this to work we need more coppers on the beat, and that isn’t going to happen anytime soon.
Added to that, some scallywag will find a way to counterfeit them, sorry 🤷‍♀️

Works in Germany. Only once have they been asked by police to see it. You have to have one for health insurance, can't get treated without, to be able to have a bank account, to have housing, to claim benefits, proof of address. So a legal form of identity. Works in France for same reasons, that's why they come here, no proof of who they are, so can easily dissappear.

Oreo

I really don’t think there’s been a government narrative, deliberate or otherwise to paint illegal migrants as ‘bad’ tho some of the media does.However if there weren’t so many cases of any refugees/ asylum seekers/ economic migrants involved in criminal cases in the UK the papers wouldn’t be able to print it.Where people arrive here that we know zilch about there will always be genuine concerns.

The media are highly selective in what they publish.

Has anybody read/heard about the asylum seekers in Wethersfield, who have had to be moved out and back into hotels?

The media doesn't print "good news" stories tho, do they? Often watching or reading the news you'd think there was little good in the world or people with generosity/cooperation and community in mind (which do come out of our local refugee centre, but are small stories)

There is a tendency to publish the shock horror element especially in some papers.

Yes of course we need a larger and more efficient service than we have now, whatever it costs it needs to be done.

I really don’t think there’s been a government narrative, deliberate or otherwise to paint illegal migrants as ‘bad’ tho some of the media does.However if there weren’t so many cases of any refugees/ asylum seekers/ economic migrants involved in criminal cases in the UK the papers wouldn’t be able to print it.Where people arrive here that we know zilch about there will always be genuine concerns.

I honestly don't see a lot of alternatives Oreo for speedier processing, than a better and larger service than we have. Given how much we spend on numbers arriving,

will it actually be more expensive?

I cant help thinking "how could we have spent the Rwandan money on this".