Andy Burnham says wealthy areas must house more migrants after leafy village revolts over 1,250 asylum seekers

Around 10/11 years ago I saw the tail-end of a snippet from a news bulletin - a journalist interviewed a migrant emerging from one of Germany's mandatory Integration Courses.

Germany's Integration Act has legally mandated these courses. "Refusing to attend or failing to accept core constitutional principles (like women's rights and religious freedom) resulted in cutbacks to social benefits and the denial of permanent residency."

"Footage of newcomers rejecting gender equality became central to political campaigns. It directly fueled the rise of the right-wing populist party, Alternative for Germany (AfD), and forced mainstream political parties to adopt much tougher stances on border control and cultural assimilation."

The 'student'/migrant I saw being interviewed was a young male from an obvious Patriarchal society (not sure exactly where he was from because I missed that initial part of the interview).

He quite clearly did not accept the authority or autonomy of women in society. He continually shook his head, "No, no" he said when asked if he would acknowledge this principle. How this would play out if he was granted leave to remain in Germany - remains to be seen.

Of course, he's just one migrant among thousands of others who may well feel quite differently, tho' there might be those who would pretend to accept Western democracy's core tenets when it became obvious that their future in Germany depended on it.

This is what people are referring to when they talk about cultural differences. Personally, I think it is essential that this aspect of immigration is not dismissed nor brushed under the carpet. It's really a question of scale/numbers, but you cannot, on the one hand, actively campaign against the Patriarchy, as the Left tend to do (and I say this as a Left-leaning person), and on the other hand ignore, or refuse to debate, the effect of how-ever-many numbers of young men with such Conservative Patriarchal beliefs will have on their community for fear of being seen as bigoted.

Sociologists and politicians have been debating this for over a decade. They acknowledge the tension exists, but are polarised about the solution. One conclusion is that a refusal to accept women's autonomy results in isolated, parallel societies, and worse. This is not multi-culturalism, it's not a recognition of respect for different faiths or cultures.

Just how widespread this is, I've no idea. My own (limited), anecdotal, experience with those individuals from different cultures has been positive. But that's not the case for everyone. And it only takes one horrendous assault for the issue to raise further questions.

My point is that it has to be acknowledged that there will be numbers (unknown) of young males holding cultural values instilled from birth that are in direct opposition to our own. This is, I believe, what people are concerned about when they talk about hundreds of young male asylum seekers wandering aimlessly around their town or village (leafy or otherwise) with nothing to do. It would be abnormal for any demographic, regardless of where they are from.

(quoted text is from Google AI)

I'm almost sure that a Head Teacher or teacher has no power to move unwanted people hanging outside the school gates on. In my experience you can only deal with removing people from inside the gates on school property.

Meandrogrog

Cossy

Doodledog

As I said upthread, a sudden influx of people into any community changes it, and people who chose to live there for its quietness or whatever will find it difficult, although I’m not sure who buys a house near a barracks and expects a traditional rural lifestyle.

But that’s not what the OP was about. First, it blamed Andy Burnham. Then it talked about wealthy areas as opposed to less wealthy ones, and mentioned that the village in question is ‘leafy’ despite the large barracks (which was not mentioned).

Then there was the ‘working hard’ trope, as though people who live in non/leafy areas must be idle, and nobody buying property in ‘nice’ places has inherited money or had well-paid but non-strenuous employment.

Then there was the rant about asylum seekers not paying for their asylum, as though we didn’t have a problem with the welfare bill that pays for Brits who don’t pay a penny into the system.

All of this cloaked in sarcasm about how ‘wonderful’ and Utopian it all is. Let’s not pretend that this started as a genuine debate about where to house people - the OP was far from that.

Well said. I won’t take further part now in any threads about migrants, where the sole purpose of posting is to make nasty, not so covert, goady digs.

Frankly there’s some posters here whose entire raison d’etre for posting is simply to be divisive.

These people, are all humans, most of them will have appalling backstories, however much you wish to pretend they don’t.

Some on here speak from a place of compassion, of knowledge, have worked or volunteered with Aslyum Seekers, others parrot what our right wing media posts and the likes of Farage, Lowe et al spout.

Like it or not, Brexit has affected this situation, like it or not International Asylum Law and Maritime Law gives these humans rights, you might not like, you don’t have to like it, but is factual.

Yes, I too want the boats to stop, I also want those here processed quickly, those very few committing heinous crimes deported and those not meeting the criteria deported.

Far far more of our British born citizens are affected by poverty, unemployment, mental health issues, etc etc than they ever will be by the Asylum Seekers.

Please put things in perspective.

But the issue isnt that they have appalling back stories, I dont doubt that.

The issue is that they are in the UK illegally.

How many are you personally happy to see settle here, all of the contents of their countries?

What are 'the contents of their countries'? Genuine question - I don't know what you are asking.

I have said more than once that I understand why people in small communities don't like them suddenly becoming larger. As I explained, it's happened to me in the small town I've loved for years. The difference here is that the 'incomers' are largely white and middle class, but they still change the look and feel of the town, and push long-term residents out of our comfort zones - even the white middle class long-term residents.

We all recognise that if our children are to have homes of their own we need to build more of them, though; and whilst it may not be our children buying on the new estates, ours will be living in someone else's town, and changing the dynamic there. It's life. Things change, and we have to live with that. We will have changed things in our own way, too.

No, most people won't want men hanging about outside of schools, but it's up to the Head Teacher and the police to move them on, and make it very clear that it is not acceptable behaviour.

Where that happens, it is not Islam that drives it though. I don't personally know any Muslims who see women as inferior. I do know British men who see women as 'her indoors' however. Someone who might have a 'little job' but is otherwise dependent on his income for support, and who is expected to do all the washing, cleaning and so on. I even know couples who both have professional roles who look at life like that, and are surprised when Mr Dog runs a hoover round and irons his own shirts.

Sexism, exploitation of women and disrespect are not solely Muslim traits. There are boors in all walks of life.

This thread is looking at things backwards. Yes, we have an increase in the populations of various areas. Yes, that can be discombobulating for those living there.

But we also have an ageing population, and need younger people to do the jobs necessary to keep our way of life afloat. On top of that we have a housing shortage, so more need to be built and they have to go somewhere. That will inevitably mean that small towns will get larger, and lifestyles will change.

I don't believe that it should be only those in non-leafy, not-'nice' areas who should shoulder all of this. I admit I don't like it at home, but I do understand why it's happening, and that it is probably necessary if the British system is to continue, even if it won't do so in the way I thought it would.

Exactly but who cares about pesky facts on yet another migrant bashing thread

Tuliptree

They don’t ’all want to come here.’ That’s misinformation, Other European countries have asylum seekers as well.

Many many of them!!

Fallingstar

I think it would be much better if asylum seekers are not just housed in deprived areas where resentments are already pretty high due to a lack of opportunities/jobs, neither of which are linked to asylum seekers but failed government policies over many decades.
These areas should not bear the brunt of it, nor should asylum seekers.
Housing them in less deprived areas will put less of a burden on an already struggling infrastructure and integration will probably be easier without facing the growing resentments of a hostile community looking for a scapegoat.

👏👏👏👏👏👏

Cossy

Doodledog

As I said upthread, a sudden influx of people into any community changes it, and people who chose to live there for its quietness or whatever will find it difficult, although I’m not sure who buys a house near a barracks and expects a traditional rural lifestyle.

But that’s not what the OP was about. First, it blamed Andy Burnham. Then it talked about wealthy areas as opposed to less wealthy ones, and mentioned that the village in question is ‘leafy’ despite the large barracks (which was not mentioned).

Then there was the ‘working hard’ trope, as though people who live in non/leafy areas must be idle, and nobody buying property in ‘nice’ places has inherited money or had well-paid but non-strenuous employment.

Then there was the rant about asylum seekers not paying for their asylum, as though we didn’t have a problem with the welfare bill that pays for Brits who don’t pay a penny into the system.

All of this cloaked in sarcasm about how ‘wonderful’ and Utopian it all is. Let’s not pretend that this started as a genuine debate about where to house people - the OP was far from that.

Well said. I won’t take further part now in any threads about migrants, where the sole purpose of posting is to make nasty, not so covert, goady digs.

Frankly there’s some posters here whose entire raison d’etre for posting is simply to be divisive.

These people, are all humans, most of them will have appalling backstories, however much you wish to pretend they don’t.

Some on here speak from a place of compassion, of knowledge, have worked or volunteered with Aslyum Seekers, others parrot what our right wing media posts and the likes of Farage, Lowe et al spout.

Like it or not, Brexit has affected this situation, like it or not International Asylum Law and Maritime Law gives these humans rights, you might not like, you don’t have to like it, but is factual.

Yes, I too want the boats to stop, I also want those here processed quickly, those very few committing heinous crimes deported and those not meeting the criteria deported.

Far far more of our British born citizens are affected by poverty, unemployment, mental health issues, etc etc than they ever will be by the Asylum Seekers.

Please put things in perspective.

But the issue isnt that they have appalling back stories, I dont doubt that.

The issue is that they are in the UK illegally.

How many are you personally happy to see settle here, all of the contents of their countries?

Perhaps they could put one of the Number 10's to good use! And choose posh or not as posh.

Cossy

Btw. In my darling new grandson’s neonatal Unit, there’s barely one white face.

Consultants are black, his named nurses are Asian, midwives are also black!

Some of them probably originate from third world countries, their parents might even have been Asylum Seekers!

Thank bloody goodness they are here, every hour they care for our darling Henry is a gift to us and his parents! 💙

Thank goodness indeed, Cossy. When DH was in hospital twice, the staff were from all over and of all colours. We are eternally grateful to them all for their care.

I hope baby Henry is doing well.

if that was the case hospitals and IT tech companies would be recruiting them from abroad they wouldn't have to pay people smugglers to get here.
Now, that's a thought. Bring all those asylum seekers in by the coach load, fast track their papers, then close the door to any others who turn up through other channels. A bit like, quota full for the foreseeable future. Then review the situation and bring in more.

Sunshinegirls

10:46yanda

I live in the NW but that was not my point, Andy Burnham said we all have to take our share but Andy Burnham Unelected PM with no mandate we don't want them full stop.

Oh dear - do I have to explain the British Constitution again. There is no such thing as an unelected PM - sigh

10:46yanda

I live in the NW but that was not my point, Andy Burnham said we all have to take our share but Andy Burnham Unelected PM with no mandate we don't want them full stop.

Allowing 1,250 migrants to move to Piddington with its population of 370 would be three times the population of that small village. This cannot be right. It would transform the population balance of a very small rural community almost overnight.

It is sheer madness.

10:35Cossy

I think it's me wasting my breath if you think the ones on the dinghies are bringing skills with them, if that was the case hospitals and IT tech companies would be recruiting them from abroad they wouldn't have to pay people smugglers to get here. Good grief.

Yeah I agree with the PM. Send the AS anywhere apart from the NW and NE of England. We have had more than our fair share. By the way I'm also hard working and want to live in a nice area just like you do .

Tuliptree

The problem is that for asylum seekers/refugees there is no approved manner now is there? That’s part of the debate isn’t it as to if there were, would it stop people coming on the boats ? I’d assume not

Don’t waste your breath, there’s a refusal to understand that many of these countries these people arrive from don’t allow exit visas and that even if they did, we in the UK don’t have an entry visa called “Seeking Asylum”

Btw AI tells us this;

Many asylum seekers and refugees arrive in the UK with professional skills, higher education degrees, and extensive work experience from their home countries.

Studies and data regarding displaced populations show that a significant portion possess valuable qualifications across critical sectors.

Professional Backgrounds and SkillsHigher Education:

Research indicates that roughly 23% of arriving refugees hold a degree-level qualification or higher (such as undergraduate, master's, or doctoral degrees).

Skilled Occupations: Arrivals frequently include individuals with backgrounds as engineers, IT professionals, software developers, architects, teachers, and scientists.Healthcare Expertise: A notable number have trained and worked as medical doctors, nurses, dentists, and pharmacists in their countries of origin.Management and Trades:

Others bring experience as senior managers, administrators, or in specialized construction and skilled technical trades.“

Casdon

It’s a choice between former military bases, other suitable multi occupancy premises and hotels. A year ago everybody was screaming for military bases to be used. Now they are being, and locals object. It’s a no win situation.

Just don’t let any of them set foot on British soil.

Sunshinegirls

21:16Cossy

Did the doctors and nurses you post about arrive on a dingy or the new mega dinghies I don't think so, do you? I think people must be naive if they still think the ones coming over on the dinghies are doctors nurses and engineers.

That isn’t what I posted , please read properly.

Doodledog

As I said upthread, a sudden influx of people into any community changes it, and people who chose to live there for its quietness or whatever will find it difficult, although I’m not sure who buys a house near a barracks and expects a traditional rural lifestyle.

But that’s not what the OP was about. First, it blamed Andy Burnham. Then it talked about wealthy areas as opposed to less wealthy ones, and mentioned that the village in question is ‘leafy’ despite the large barracks (which was not mentioned).

Then there was the ‘working hard’ trope, as though people who live in non/leafy areas must be idle, and nobody buying property in ‘nice’ places has inherited money or had well-paid but non-strenuous employment.

Then there was the rant about asylum seekers not paying for their asylum, as though we didn’t have a problem with the welfare bill that pays for Brits who don’t pay a penny into the system.

All of this cloaked in sarcasm about how ‘wonderful’ and Utopian it all is. Let’s not pretend that this started as a genuine debate about where to house people - the OP was far from that.

Well said. I won’t take further part now in any threads about migrants, where the sole purpose of posting is to make nasty, not so covert, goady digs.

Frankly there’s some posters here whose entire raison d’etre for posting is simply to be divisive.

These people, are all humans, most of them will have appalling backstories, however much you wish to pretend they don’t.

Some on here speak from a place of compassion, of knowledge, have worked or volunteered with Aslyum Seekers, others parrot what our right wing media posts and the likes of Farage, Lowe et al spout.

Like it or not, Brexit has affected this situation, like it or not International Asylum Law and Maritime Law gives these humans rights, you might not like, you don’t have to like it, but is factual.

Yes, I too want the boats to stop, I also want those here processed quickly, those very few committing heinous crimes deported and those not meeting the criteria deported.

Far far more of our British born citizens are affected by poverty, unemployment, mental health issues, etc etc than they ever will be by the Asylum Seekers.

Please put things in perspective.

Tuliptree

25Avalon

Ok Tuliptree I agree about misinformation so let me correct. Thetford is indeed a small town, not a village and although it is in Norfolk part of its boundary is in Suffolk. Yes the recent protests were physically against HMOs housing migrants in the town. However in June it was proposed that the nearby Burnham Camp be used to house up to 3,750 migrants and this has precipitated several protests and no doubt imo played a part in the attack on the HMOs.

And nothing excuses the attacks on the HMOs and the police does it? But I guess many of those involved in that are being stirred up by lies on social media, the Tommy Robinson band and so on.

Attacks are not excused any more than I excuse the pulling down of Colston’s statue in Bristol but sometimes when people feel strongly about something they take action. Barnham Camp is one such catalyst. But you guess it’s down to lies on social media and Tommy Robinson. That’s trying to push a subjective viewpoint in an emotive way.

To be practical, there will be a mixture of "camps/barracks" and spread out local housing.

My impression is that "camps/barracks are for newcomers, who have to be rapidly assessed, hard to do when spread out, and for quick return of some.
We do not know yet whether people placed in these camps/barracks will actually be allowed to go out beyond bounds, which is what is being assumed in the discussion above.
Someone who has really suffered abroad will tolerate this, freedom from whatever they fled. God knows, I would. Lots of physical activities on site. We have high levels of unemployment for 20 somethings to pay who can get a good game of footie going, they need basketball courts and similar, and preferably something to do that is of use.

Not beyond one's imagination.

It’s a choice between former military bases, other suitable multi occupancy premises and hotels. A year ago everybody was screaming for military bases to be used. Now they are being, and locals object. It’s a no win situation.

25Avalon

I think it’s Thetford in Norfolk where the protest has happened. Apparently they are a very harmonious village who see nothing but disharmony occurring if so many migrants with totally different cultures being placed in their midst and I must admit I agree.

Why don’t they stay in France? Why do they all want to come here? Ask yourself that. It couldn’t be to do with all the freebies could it?

Regarding black and Asian doctors and nurses these are legal migrants that we do need who put into their midst economy not take out of it.

I agree.

Regarding your final paragraph I couldn’t see what Cossy means either about black and foreign staff in hospitals either.

Surely they are all here legally so I don’t have a problem with that at all. Unfortunately our family has spent most of the past 18 months in various hospitals for life saving surgery, chemo etc so I do appreciate that many staff come from overseas.

As I said upthread, a sudden influx of people into any community changes it, and people who chose to live there for its quietness or whatever will find it difficult, although I’m not sure who buys a house near a barracks and expects a traditional rural lifestyle.

But that’s not what the OP was about. First, it blamed Andy Burnham. Then it talked about wealthy areas as opposed to less wealthy ones, and mentioned that the village in question is ‘leafy’ despite the large barracks (which was not mentioned).

Then there was the ‘working hard’ trope, as though people who live in non/leafy areas must be idle, and nobody buying property in ‘nice’ places has inherited money or had well-paid but non-strenuous employment.

Then there was the rant about asylum seekers not paying for their asylum, as though we didn’t have a problem with the welfare bill that pays for Brits who don’t pay a penny into the system.

All of this cloaked in sarcasm about how ‘wonderful’ and Utopian it all is. Let’s not pretend that this started as a genuine debate about where to house people - the OP was far from that.

Genuine question here - with little money and not allowed to work, what is there for these people to do when housed in towns and cities? Does it really make much difference from that point of view whether they are there or in/near smaller towns and villages?

Yes, I admit that I would not be happy if they were going to be housed near my tiny rural village, too, but I suspect I might also feel the same wherever I lived, because like most people, I fear 'the unknown' and 'change'.

I'm fairly sure that none of us want this type of accommodation anywhere near us, but as it has to exist - if only while these people go through whatever process is required to decide their fate - they have to be housed sonewhere. And within reason, I don't think any areas, however 'wealthy' should be exempt from housing them unless it is for genuine practical reasons.

Share the responsibility (or the 'problem') around.
I reckon that might lead to a more rounded approach to the whole issue.