Why the moral panic?

Casdon

The dots aren’t being joined. Asylum seekers will get to the country they want to be by whatever means they can. They haven’t all got to the port by spending weeks or months in France, France is not the first European country they have travelled through, and they aren’t all coming to the UK from France. France has no more liability for these people than the UK does, it’s a totally fatuous argument to suggest they do.

It’s only by working together throughout Europe that the impact on migrant numbers can be achieved, so let’s quit the blame culture and step up to our national responsibilities.

Not just Europe, countries outside Europe can and do take Asylum Seekers.

I’ve stated so many times before, all information regards national and international legislation is online for us all to peruse at our leisure.

Also online, from credible proven statistical sources, are figures clearly showing numbers of AS coming here are falling in numbers, and show the UK is not even in the top five countries where AS arrive.

Information which clearly shows ALL European countries, including the UK, having similar payments and housing schemes for arriving AS.

What needs to happen is a huge joined up approach, internationally, to 1) help prevent displaced citizens, and 2) where possible have agreed quotas and a consistent approach to processing claims.

My understanding is that the criteria for assessing AS is pretty similar in all Western Countries.

Put some perspective into this entire situations.

Be bloody grateful that by a simple accident of birth you were not born into a family living in Iran, Ukraine, Gaza, parts of Africa, Syria and all the other world countries affected by war, famine, corrupt governments.

Just for one tiny moment, have some empathy, these are human beings, in the main, no different to you and I.

No, I’m not counting the very small percentage of vile criminal sadly spread across this world, including ours.

LemonJam

I agree 100% Casdon 14.23. I do not understand why some posters feel the UK can choose not to process the asylum seekers seeking asylum in the UK and force other countries to take them instead. We do not currently take asylum seekers in the UK who wish to claim asylum in other countries.

Blame culture solves nothing- the UK does have national responsibilities as set out in law.

👍👍👍

I ask the same question as WWM2 Chestnut.

Does the early release prison scheme differentiate between prisoners who were born foreign nationals Chestnut? I wasn't aware that it did.

Is it your view that should be criteria under consideration and if so why?

LemonJam

I ask the same question as WWM2 Chestnut.

Does the early release prison scheme differentiate between prisoners who were born foreign nationals Chestnut? I wasn't aware that it did.

Is it your view that should be criteria under consideration and if so why?

This is my understanding. This group are properly called Foreign National Offenders and are a specific category in the prison system. Those serving sentences of over a year can be deported . They do not have British citizenship .Every year around 5k of them are deported. Of the approx 10k in the prisons, roughly one third are on remand. This is quite high I think snd it must partly be explained by their being a flight risk . This category hsve been mentioned by some wrt the early release scheme. I’m guessing to see if we can speed up their deportation. In fact the government is apparently doing a pretty good job with them as it is and it’s unclear to me if the number could be increased by much. We can’t deport those on remand because you know boring boring rule of law due process rubbish. The nationalities of FNOs make for interesting reading

Tuliptree - I agree the government does a pretty good job of deporting foreign nationals that do not have British citizenship.

But foreign born nationals who now have British citizenship is a different category. As I understand it, they are treated in the same way as all British born nationals in context of the early release scheme. I wasn't what Chestnut was saying specifically hence why WWM2 and myself sought clarification.

LemonJam

Tuliptree - I agree the government does a pretty good job of deporting foreign nationals that do not have British citizenship.

But foreign born nationals who now have British citizenship is a different category. As I understand it, they are treated in the same way as all British born nationals in context of the early release scheme. I wasn't what Chestnut was saying specifically hence why WWM2 and myself sought clarification.

It's only FNOs that are relevant in this context. As you say those with British citizenships are treated as British citizens ( apart from the vexed issue of course of removing citizenship) The early release legislation also added that FNOs whose sentence was over a year but suspended would also be in the scheme and any FNO sentenced to under a year can be considered for deportation. Reading the legislation shows exactly how much effort and planning'has gone into what is a very complex scheme ( not just the FNOs ) and how unfair and easy it is for people to criticise it without their bothering to try and gain the minimum understanding of it.

LemonJam

Tuliptree - I agree the government does a pretty good job of deporting foreign nationals that do not have British citizenship.

But foreign born nationals who now have British citizenship is a different category. As I understand it, they are treated in the same way as all British born nationals in context of the early release scheme. I wasn't what Chestnut was saying specifically hence why WWM2 and myself sought clarification.

Exactly so

Chestnut was completely wrong in using the phrase foreign born nationals. Her statistics referred to FNOs. I think if someone wants to discuss this issue, they should first of all understand the correct terminology because you know facts ad facts actual matter.

I agree- plus the government is active in deportations of foreign nationals from prisons. This undermines the claims that the government is not doing anything.....

Some people just want it to be true that the government is doing nothing ergo it must be true.

Yes,

Aveline

Migrants that are either directly recruited by eg NHS or who come here via legal channels are welcome. These boatloads of young men with no paperwork are not.

Just this.

Blossoming

Aveline

Migrants that are either directly recruited by eg NHS or who come here via legal channels are welcome. These boatloads of young men with no paperwork are not.

Just this.

The law says that they are welcome, or at least entitled to have their case considered.

Oreo

I don’t know about moral panic, but the sheer amount year on year for a long time now of mainly young men coming over on small/ big boats is a very real worry and a drain on the nation’s finances.
As others say, it’s not like legal migration at all, it’s not knowing anything about them, do they have any real skills, do they have criminal records? Coming quite often from very different cultures especially where women, girls and dress are concerned.

Yes!!

Asylum seekers travel to many, many countries in the world seeking asylum and they are different to those making an immigration applications thorough regular channels I agree. The number of asylum seekers compared to immigration applications is much smaller in the Uk.

All countries have varying, different cultures. There is no doubt a resource implication as there are for all countries processing asylum seeker applications in all countries the Uk can not easily escape that.

Tuliptree

Some people just want it to be true that the government is doing nothing ergo it must be true.

👍👍👏👏

If it was a given that new arrivals were part of a robust process, which would monitor, remove, allow people to claim asylum, then perhaps it would bebe better recieved.
As it is, I've heard of people who were "on a watch list" who have intended to commit crime.

Lots of crimes/accidents involving immigrants then reveal that they were here illegally.
By immigrant, I mean people who have travelled here - no more, no less, by the way.

People that make a regular an immigration claim have or accepted or otherwise before they arrive in the Uk.

That is not possible for asylum seekers- they must arrive here first and then make their asylum claim via border force.
One they ate here they are processed and then removed if not granted as you indicate.

Thanks.
I don't know too much about the procedures people have to go through.
I need to find out more.

MissAdventure

If it was a given that new arrivals were part of a robust process, which would monitor, remove, allow people to claim asylum, then perhaps it would bebe better recieved.
As it is, I've heard of people who were "on a watch list" who have intended to commit crime.

Lots of crimes/accidents involving immigrants then reveal that they were here illegally.
By immigrant, I mean people who have travelled here - no more, no less, by the way.

Useful facts:

“Immigrant” is not synonymous with “illegal immigrant.” Someone can have travelled to the UK legally for work, study, family, tourism, etc., or can have entered irregularly and then claimed asylum. In fact, Home Office figures show that in the year ending March 2026, 39% of people claiming asylum had previously entered the UK with a visa or other leave.

Claiming asylum isn't itself evidence that someone is illegally residing in Britain. The asylum system exists precisely to assess protection claims. The Home Office recorded 94,000 asylum claims in the year ending March 2026, and made 128,000 initial decisions in that period. The grant rate at initial decision was 39%.

There are immigration/security checks and enforcement mechanisms, but that doesn't mean the system catches everyone who might subsequently offend. The Home Office publishes separate statistics covering detention, returns, illegal entry and immigration crime, so “there is no process” would be inaccurate.

Foreign national offenders absolutely exist, and it is reasonable to discuss them. But that is different from establishing that immigrants generally are disproportionately criminal. The Home Office reported 5,858 foreign national offender returns in the year ending March 2026.

Perhaps the most important factual correction: there isn't currently an official UK crime dataset that allows you to say “immigrants commit X% of crime.” The ONS explicitly says it does not hold crime statistics broken down by asylum-seeker or migrant status.

Thank you.
I don't thonk you're actually correcting me, though, because it's all info I'm aware of, vaguely, and I'm not prone to comments saying "all immigrants...."
As you say, crime statistics don't specify asylum status.
Crime reports in the media often do, though.

Thonk. Ffs!!

The issue of foreign aid is rarely discussed on her but when it is there is often an argument that we should look after our own people rather than give aid to foreign countries. The UK has cut foreign aid, so have many European countries and the US has slashed it meaning that many countries that are experiencing famine are not getting the help that the rest of the world would have given. It's estimated that the value in cuts from 2023 by the UK will save £6.5 billion by 2027 and it should be remembered that some of the remaining foreign aid budget is being used to support asylum seekers in the UK. IMO cutting aid to starving populations fuels the need for migration and if you look at where the most small boat migrants are travelling from there is a high correlation with those countries suffering drought and severe food shortages.

I think we have had an absolute prime example of moral panic this last week or two, and it has resulted in a young man taking his life.

But you could equally say there was moral panic about the unwise decision to appoint Mandelson to a top job too… sometimes unwise appointments have consequences and things can’t be whitewashed so that someone can save face.