Rwanda Flights

All these migrants living in the same area. You can't move in Cawthorne and Hoylandswaine for immigrants. Oh no, wait, it's not in those areas, it's the streets behind Morrison's isn't it and other areas in the centre where house prices are at a minimum. Why don't they spread out, intigrate? Well, read this thread, we expect them to take the low paid menial jobs that no one here wants which means the only place they can afford to live are areas already ghettoised, liitered with houses of multiple occupancy.

 

Whilst I agree the policy panders to the far right, anti-immigration elements, I don't see a logical the connection between integration issues and rejected asylum claims. Unless you harbour racist views, or mistakenly believe accepting any migrants is damaging to the economy, you can see if a migrant, be they economic migrants, asylum seekers, failed or successful, in the interim period become integrated by being employed and productive, then that should override, or at the very least be factored in to decisions over their claim. Yes a tiny minority become a burden on society with little intent to work and an even smaller minority carry out criminal activity (it can be argued current system leads some down that path through desperation). Also the same can be said of some people UK born and bred. (Perhaps they could deports some of those too)

It should still be possible to remove 'failed' asylum seekers if they fail to meet normal immigration criteria. For example, when we came to Italy, even when we were in the EU, you had to apply for a Permesso di Soggiorno. This did not grant you the automatic right to reside permanently in the country and was only valid for 5 years. You had to prove you had means to support yourself, minimum household income, Healthcare cover etc. and it was only valid for 5 years. After that you had to apply for permanent residency and various criteria had to be met, it was NOT an automatic right to stay. Of course, it is always easier if you have bought property, have income etc. but the point is , even if you have arrived armed to the teeth with the correct documents, it is not a given that you can remain. The stupidity in the UK case is, as someone has so eloquently stated on here, the Catch22 where you have to have documents to enter the country but have to enter teh country to get the documents

 

You've entirely missed the point.

The reason the current system exists is to prevent integration. If integration occurs it is much more difficult to reject an asylum claim, as you will have employers, co workers and friends testifying on behalf of the asylum seeker. The government don't want that. They want to easily refuse all claims and send people back. They isolate assylum seekers for a reason.

I believe, exactly like you, that asylum seekers should be allowed to work. And enjoy all other benefits of our society like freedom and social interaction while their claim is being assessed. I simply stated that this won't happen because we are run by people who want to stop assylum seekers not help them.

 

You would be surprised at how locals' attitudes change (at least those here in rural Italy) when the migrants who have been shipped here and staying en mass in hotels get refugee status and manage to get jobs . Their work ethic goes down well with the Contadini many of whom have had it tough (and some still do). There was a lot of resentment post Earthquake 2016 with displaced Italians unable to use the hotels and lived in tents and wooden huts due to migrants filling the hotel rooms but that was more aimed at the authorities and the overall situation than the migrants themselves. Many have now become part of the landscape and some have got jobs albeit menial working for the council and some have unused various qualifications .

 

Richard Tice wow, but we shouldn't be surprised at his opinion should we?



This guy gave a much better insight.....

 

The reason the current system exists is to prevent integration. If integration occurs it is much more difficult to reject an asylum claim, as you will have employers, co workers and friends testifying on behalf of the asylum seeker. The government don't want that. They want to easily refuse all claims and send people back. They isolate assylum seekers for a reason.

I believe, exactly like you, that asylum seekers should be allowed to work. And enjoy all other benefits of our society like freedom and social interaction while their claim is being assessed. I simply stated that this won't happen because we are run by people who want to stop assylum seekers not help them.[/QUOTE]

No I did not miss the point at all. I agree with you and actually said it is currently designed to pander to the people within Govt and those members of the public who want no immigrants. There is a disconnect between policy and logic.

Mass uncontrolled immigration IS a problem but only because authorities and Governments lack the nous to be able to handle it efficiently so rather than embracing it, they try to stop it.

 

No I did not miss the point at all. I agree with you and actually said it is currently designed to pander to the people within Govt and those members of the public who want no immigrants. There is a disconnect between policy and logic.

Mass uncontrolled immigration IS a problem but only because authorities and Governments lack the nous to be able to handle it efficiently so rather than embracing it, they try to stop it.[/QUOTE]
Apologies if I read your post incorrectly

 

Apologies if I read your post incorrectly[/QUOTE]
Bizarre... #107 Your post appears as mine and vice versa- Tekyytyke says (your post) and my response appears as your post!! ??

 

Downing Street is now refusing to rule out a withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights. Christ.

 

Raab wants to scrap the Human Rights Act, and i think they've actually got their bill to "reform" it at consultation phase, so leaving the ECHR would be little surprise. Especially for this weakened leader desperate to get a stay of execution so willing to do literally anything to cling on.

 

So we d never take refugees then?

 

Given we're even earning rebukes from UNHCR, I wonder how long it will be before we start waging imaginary conflict with the UN?

 

Sadly probably all of them, apart from maybe marriage.

 

Brilliant!

 

Just to add, and not sure if anyone noticed this today. The person masquerading as our Prime Minister.... that person who even lies about his first name... well, in Prime Ministers Lies at midday today, he accused Starmer of supporting people traffickers.

The speaker said nothing at the time, but after the session, the deputy speaker, Rosie Winterton, mentioned that it wasn't perhaps the best of things to say. Some rebuke that, DePfeffel must be quivering ahead of his next emergence.

 

Not sure if you realised but I made an observation about the complete lack of tolerance and vile comments towards alternative views, which challenge the majority mandate on this board and not the content of the thread! Ironically, the thread was about tolerance and your response showed little of it - in fact it just assumed a lot! Not unusual on here! But of course, the next time I give my opinion on any subject feel free to resort to use derogatory and derisive language - but please make sure your argument has substance and credibility, as every knows - that makes for a good debate!