Immigration and migrants

Locally our Refugee Centre works amongst other things with the volunteer Centre as refugees are allowed to do supervised voluntary work.

Example (I chose another city from mine for privacy but its very similar)
mrsn.org.uk/volunteering/

Germanshepherdsmum

How many appeal decisions have you read?

Are you addressing your comment to me? GSM?

Namsnanny

It’s one thing to disagree with someone, that’s your right.

There’s no need to be so rude. I’d be more than happy to for you to post any links you have to your research, it maybe something I’ve not read or know about.

How many appeal decisions have you read?

Summerlove
FYI saying virtue signalling is not slander nor is typing the words libel.

And more facts.
Humanitarian Protection status can be awarded, meaning that the person does not qualify as a refugee, but does need protection and this can be up to 5 years.

Discretionary Leave to Remain this falls under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, respect for private and family life and is usually for 30 months without recourse to public funds, meaning that the individual cannot access any Government funding including benefits, tax credits or housing assistance.
In most cases initially, the case is refused requiring the individual to appeal. Over one third of appeals are successful. This must mean the Home Office are either getting decisions wrong or prefer to defer the decision to the courts.

The number of people currently being granted protection has worryingly being falling and it echoes what Price, the Public affairs officer at Asylum Aid has observed, the Home Office are consistently refusing applications unfairly and
making the wrong decisions (Price, 2018)

A claim having failed, the asylum seeker can submit fresh evidence either to support their claim or to make a fresh claim. For example they may possibly be able to get documents that back up the evidence that they gave at interview or they be able to provide medical evidence of torture. Since 2010 and the hostile environment the claimant has had to travel to the Home Office’s Further Submissions Unit in Liverpool to submit new evidence which must be done in person only.

oreo

“ Am sure that working with individuals who are refugees gives an insight into their past, presuming it’s an honest tale.For some it will be, for others not so much.
Being filled with the milk of human kindness and wishing all who jump on boats to get here could stay just isn’t reasonable tho.Not saying that you want that but some do.
I would have preferred the money spent on the Rwanda project to be spent on training lots of immigration officers to deal with applications within the HO.Quick processing of claims and followed by faster deportations.”

No one on here, including me, has said ever that every single person rocking up here should be granted leave to remain. Of course there have to be robust systems in place.

I absolutely agree with with you that both the Rwanda funding, and that given to France, would have been far better spent bringing in temp immigration officers to quickly process and make decisions, and if needs be deport people “playing the system”

Germanshepherdsmum

I tar all lawyers acting for asylum seekers with the same brush. And remember they are paid by the taxpayer to make up fairy stories and advise their clients to get baptised. They are laughing all the way to the bank. Despicable people.

What about the “genuine” asylum seekers, and the “honest” human rights lawyers? No one is denying that not everyone who comes across here is a genuine asylum seeker, not than there are some “questionable” lawyers, but surely even you can see that sometimes there is a need for an asylum seeker to honestly appeal? I think we all know the Home Office are overstretched and don’t always get it right?

More facts.
Decisions are made by Civil Servants in the Home Office or by immigration judges. The decision will be one of the following:
Leave to Remain - legal permission to stay in the UK ,normally for five years.
Limited leave to remain - normally for 2.5 years with reapplication every 2.5 years up to 10 years in total. Fees for application are currently £601 per individual with a £200 health levy each time. There is no access to legal aid
and penalties are imposed for even minor law infringements, for example, detention or removal.

Oreo

Legal migration is one thing and illegal migration is another.
Stop mixing them up.
Calling other points of view other than your own ignorance and bigotry shows how intransigent you are.

Yet it’s ok to use “virtue signaling” as a slander to other posters?

Only one side is allowed to ‘name call’?

foxie48

I've worked with refugees and found it a very positive experience. Many had terribly sad stories, missed their homeland and way of life. None of them were responsible for the situation they found themselves in that compelled them to leave but humans are survivors. I think what I find upsetting in some posts is the de-humanising of refugees, that inability to try to understand what it must be like to be in their shoes, the willingness to see people as criminals or out to "milk" our benefit system. No doubt someone will see my post as "naive" or "virtue signalling" or that I am "saintly". I'm none of those things but I do have experience which has informed my views.

Am sure that working with individuals who are refugees gives an insight into their past, presuming it’s an honest tale.For some it will be, for others not so much.
Being filled with the milk of human kindness and wishing all who jump on boats to get here could stay just isn’t reasonable tho.Not saying that you want that but some do.
I would have preferred the money spent on the Rwanda project to be spent on training lots of immigration officers to deal with applications within the HO.Quick processing of claims and followed by faster deportations.

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m afraid Cossy’s opening post came across as a lecture or a sermon. It’s her manner of putting forward her view, and putting down those who disagree, which has resulted in the accusations of virtue signalling. There was no need to start this thread. It was naive to believe that it would only attract comments from like-minded people saying nice things. We are all entitled to our opinions and to put them forward within guidelines.

I think that’s a little unfair GSM, it’s a subject which many of us feel very strongly about and I think you’ve seen enough of my posts to know me slightly better than “putting down those who disagree”. I’ve no issue whatsoever with people with different experiences and different opinions and views.

What I completely object to though, is when posters simply repeat what they’ve read or heard third hand and claim that they are factual.

I respect and celebrate the fact that we live in a country where we are all free and entitled express our own views, beliefs and opinions. However views and opinions and beliefs are not facts are they?

Sorry you feel “there was no need to start this thread”, there’s no need to start any thread nor to read or comment.

I was making a point I believed (& still believe) is valid and it’s entirely up to other GNs as to whether they agree or disagree. I’m don’t lead such a sad life that I need to have total strangers saying “nice things”. I totally accept we are made up from a very diverse cohort of people, some will agree and some will not. I respect this, provided their posts don’t smack of labelling any one group as “bad”.

Oreo

Casdon

What it boils down to is that if you present reason and facts you are virtue signalling. However if you comment on the basis of rumour, biased reporting and supposition you have seen the light Cossy. There are plenty of us with you, Virtue Signallers United if that is how others wish to portray it.

A poor comment from you, am surprised.
Facts and stats, nobody is denying, but wanting it to stop as the numbers will keep on growing as the weeks months and years go by is reasonable.
It’s a growing problem throughout Europe, just that a few countries are more efficient in deporting and refusing asylum.
The present government have been inept in this situation.

People are denying the facts though Oreo. For example, the percentage of people who arrive on boats who have a legitimate asylum claim, the distribution of asylum seekers across the whole of the UK, the reported numbers being exacerbated by the processing delays encouraged by the government - I could go on. If we don’t all agree with the received wisdom of the loud shouters and dare to point out their arguments are not evidence based, we are classed as virtue signallers.

Report from the
Refugee Council to see other POV than the negative

www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/information/refugee-asylum-facts/the-truth-about-asylum/

Perhaps, if you don’t want to undergo all that, don’t come here.

Read some facts at swvg-refugees.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Claiming-Asylum-in-the-UK-1.pdf

If you came in a nasty little boat (assuming it didn't sink on the way and drown you) you would undergo a compulsory asylum interview, where are asked to fully explain how you have been persecuted in your home country and why you are afraid to return and any evidence they you have will need to be presented.

The interpreters available may not speak in the same dialect as you, you may be extremely frightened and from a country where the death penalty is often applied. Fear of those in authority may have instilled a reluctance to be open meaning that this information. Evidence is rarely clear-cut as being caught in your home country with the “wrong set of papers” may also result in death or imprisonment.

To further exacerbate the stress, you may very likely have undergone an extremely long journey in very difficult conditions, often in the back of a lorry having fled from violence and torture, witnessed family or friends being murdered.

Once the interview has been completed, you would wait for a decision. This may be months but can also be years. Meanwhile, you would be housed in accommodation provided by the Home Office. This will not be luxurious!!

If you are judged destitute and entitled to accommodation, you will also receive a small living allowance in cash or vouchers of £37.75 per week (or £5.40) a day. Don't blue it all on having three meals a day for the first day-and-a-half.

Failure to report on a regular basis to one of 15 centres across the UK will result in your claim being dismissed. As an asylum seeker you are not allowed to work, drive, rent housing or hold a bank account.

NotSpaghetti

I may be wrong but I saw this thread, Namsnanny as a way to balance the rather unpleasant thread loosely on the same subject.

I think Cossy was trying to start with a clean slate and encourage informed chat/debate rather than the hostility that permeates the other thread. Sorry if I have misinterpreted this.

Unfortunately it seems to have started to spill over here too.

I was grateful for a new place to talk.

Just saying.

Dont be sorry NotSpaghetti you're just voicing your oponion👍
I dont agree though🤣

The op was authoritarian, finger wagging, know all-ish, holier-than-thou and virtue signalling (shall I go on?😄)

How does she know I havent already researched the situation and come up with a more informed opinion than hers?

No, she was using gn as a lectern at the pulpit (qualifier, imo).

I've worked with refugees and found it a very positive experience. Many had terribly sad stories, missed their homeland and way of life. None of them were responsible for the situation they found themselves in that compelled them to leave but humans are survivors. I think what I find upsetting in some posts is the de-humanising of refugees, that inability to try to understand what it must be like to be in their shoes, the willingness to see people as criminals or out to "milk" our benefit system. No doubt someone will see my post as "naive" or "virtue signalling" or that I am "saintly". I'm none of those things but I do have experience which has informed my views.

I tar all lawyers acting for asylum seekers with the same brush. And remember they are paid by the taxpayer to make up fairy stories and advise their clients to get baptised. They are laughing all the way to the bank. Despicable people.

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m afraid Cossy’s opening post came across as a lecture or a sermon. It’s her manner of putting forward her view, and putting down those who disagree, which has resulted in the accusations of virtue signalling. There was no need to start this thread. It was naive to believe that it would only attract comments from like-minded people saying nice things. We are all entitled to our opinions and to put them forward within guidelines.

That’s it in a nutshell.
There’s a tendency by posters to sometimes regard a thread that they start as a personal thing, when it really isn’t.

Casdon

What it boils down to is that if you present reason and facts you are virtue signalling. However if you comment on the basis of rumour, biased reporting and supposition you have seen the light Cossy. There are plenty of us with you, Virtue Signallers United if that is how others wish to portray it.

A poor comment from you, am surprised.
Facts and stats, nobody is denying, but wanting it to stop as the numbers will keep on growing as the weeks months and years go by is reasonable.
It’s a growing problem throughout Europe, just that a few countries are more efficient in deporting and refusing asylum.
The present government have been inept in this situation.

I’m afraid Cossy’s opening post came across as a lecture or a sermon. It’s her manner of putting forward her view, and putting down those who disagree, which has resulted in the accusations of virtue signalling. There was no need to start this thread. It was naive to believe that it would only attract comments from like-minded people saying nice things. We are all entitled to our opinions and to put them forward within guidelines.

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m not talking only about the Clapham attacker, but of the growing trend to be baptised purely in order to be granted asylum. It is a disgraceful practice and makes a mockery of the Christian religion.

I absolutely agree. Just as I agree that SOME human rights lawyers might give somewhat contentious advice.

What I don’t do is tar all asylum seekers (or lawyers) with the same brush.

GSM, stop on as usual.

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m not talking only about the Clapham attacker, but of the growing trend to be baptised purely in order to be granted asylum. It is a disgraceful practice and makes a mockery of the Christian religion.

Apparently a group of Christian clerics were asked to attend a meeting by government, to try and address this crazy practise.
In their eagerness to be of use to these migrants and get brownie points with so many baptisms they have made a mockery of their religion and themselves.Useful idiots I think the term is.