GNHQ have commented on this thread. Read here.
This is a thread in answer to a question on a thread totally unrelated to the crossings.
This isn’t about the rights and wrongs of it, or why Asylum Seekers don’t seek Asylum in the first safe country they come across, though if you do wish to know more click on this link!
www.unhcr.org/uk/refugees#:~:text=They%20provide%20the%20universal%20definition,freedom%20would%20be%20at%20risk.
For reasons why people seek asylum here in the UK:-
www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/information/refugee-asylum-facts/understanding-channel-crossings/
www.redcross.org.uk/stories/migration-and-displacement/refugees-and-asylum-seekers/5-reasons-people-cross-the-channel
theconversation.com/ive-spent-time-with-refugees-in-french-coastal-camps-and-they-told-me-the-governments-rwanda-plan-is-not-putting-them-off-coming-to-the-uk-221798
Enough info here (I hope) to both explain and to be balanced.
Oreo
Cadeby
"The thousands I’ve seen disembarking"
What fuels this nonsense? Its beyond me , really.Why nonsense? If you live near a port it’s quite feasible that you would see thousands over the course of a couple of years.
Wouldn't you be too busy at work, socialising, being with family ,to be obsessing over how many people arrive?
Chestnut
Hooray! Another six boats of doctors and dentists have arrived.
Thats just horrible really.
That was me mollygo. You still haven't said what your facts and statistics are.
It’s a relief to catch up with this thread and see the disgusting comments about asylum seekers being challenged by posters who have first hand knowledge.
FWIW I know 3 border force workers very well, one of them now aged 40, since she was 11. They find their work demoralising because they recognise the majority seeking asylum meet the criteria that means that’s what they’ll,get. Demoralised, nit because we meet our legal responsibilities but because so many here don’t understand the law or the circumstances that lead to these people seeking sanctuary
Cadeby
Oreo
Cadeby
"The thousands I’ve seen disembarking"
What fuels this nonsense? Its beyond me , really.Why nonsense? If you live near a port it’s quite feasible that you would see thousands over the course of a couple of years.
Wouldn't you be too busy at work, socialising, being with family ,to be obsessing over how many people arrive?
Give it a rest Cadeby please. You seem to be the one who is obsessed actually. The figures are on TV and Internet every day so you can hardly miss them.
I watch news tv but the number of asylum seekers has not been mentioned for ages.
silverlining48 do you remember roughly when it stopped being mentioned? Just after the election I am guessing?
It’s no longer news, it’s been happening since 2018. In the last year, it’s only mentioned when some poor unfortunates lose their lives.
Casdon I think Nigel Farage was pretty vocal about asylum seekers about six months ago. NF was filmed on a boat checking out the numbers just pre election.
I didn’t see that ronib, but it’s certainly not been a daily news item for several years, only when something specific has happened.
silverlining48
I watch news tv but the number of asylum seekers has not been mentioned for ages.
It was on the news several times yesterday that 500 people crossed the Chanel in small boats yesterday.
growstuff
Oreo
They were safe from persecution and execution in France.I don’t think that excuse washes to be frank.
If they actively prefer to be in the UK that’s a different matter.They clearly do want to be here but may think it will be better than it really is.Or our benefits and treatment of Asylum seekers may be genuinely a good deal better than staying in France.Why do you think they should stay in France? Why not Italy or Spain or Greece or wherever they first landed on European soil? There is absolutely no reason in international law why asylum seekers should choose France over the UK.
Putting myself in their shoes I wouldn’t stay in any of those countries but would choose Germany or France.
I certainly wouldn’t choose the UK however good I thought any benefits or life would be like when it meant getting into a dinghy filled to bursting and trying to cross the Channel.
Hang International Law when you could easily drown.
petra
silverlining48
I watch news tv but the number of asylum seekers has not been mentioned for ages.
It was on the news several times yesterday that 500 people crossed the Chanel in small boats yesterday.
500! In just one day?😲
The logistics of looking after them all is mind boggling.
BevSec
Dr Max Pemberton in the Daly Mail today reports treating a convicted rapist who was indignant about being convicted because the woman he raped was not wearing a hijab so was ok to rape!
💯shock
silverlining48
I watch news tv but the number of asylum seekers has not been mentioned for ages.
Well it’s mentioned plenty on GB news
Casdon
It’s no longer news, it’s been happening since 2018. In the last year, it’s only mentioned when some poor unfortunates lose their lives.
It’s mentioned most days on GB news
Primrose53
Cadeby
Oreo
Cadeby
"The thousands I’ve seen disembarking"
What fuels this nonsense? Its beyond me , really.Why nonsense? If you live near a port it’s quite feasible that you would see thousands over the course of a couple of years.
Wouldn't you be too busy at work, socialising, being with family ,to be obsessing over how many people arrive?
Give it a rest Cadeby please. You seem to be the one who is obsessed actually. The figures are on TV and Internet every day so you can hardly miss them.
I've never seen them on TV.
Oreo
petra
silverlining48
I watch news tv but the number of asylum seekers has not been mentioned for ages.
It was on the news several times yesterday that 500 people crossed the Chanel in small boats yesterday.
500! In just one day?😲
Many posters seem to think the processing of new arrivals should be speeded up. How can you possibly process 500 people per day?
Thank you, Cossy, for the links. I think it is really important to keep putting out accurate information about migration, refugees and asylum seekers. One of the things many people seem to believe is that there are safe and legal routes for people who need to claim asylum to get here - when there are no such thing. Many other countries take many more refugees than we do. We didn’t even manage to take proper care of people in Afghanistan at risk from the Taliban because of having worked for the British army.
Chestnut
Oreo
petra
silverlining48
I watch news tv but the number of asylum seekers has not been mentioned for ages.
It was on the news several times yesterday that 500 people crossed the Chanel in small boats yesterday.
500! In just one day?😲
Many posters seem to think the processing of new arrivals should be speeded up. How can you possibly process 500 people per day?
How many was the average for the week?
Just in case you don't have the figures to hand, the total for the week up to 18 August was 746, which works ot to just less than 107 a day.
www.gov.uk/government/publications/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/5cede69b-a408-47eb-8933-31fb2813ab77
*to (not ot)
One of the differences between the UK and some other countries is that we don’t allow people to work while they wait for claims to be processed. Obviously if people could work they could pay rent, tax, buy food etc etc rather than having to sit around in awful accommodation without being able to afford decent food and having no occupation, social contact and so on. Yes, there are things we should be doing like providing medical treatment for people who have been tortured, but in the main people want to ‘look after’ themselves. Refugees are also some of the people who give most help, through voluntary activity, to other refugees.
Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.
