I hope the government is busy building more houses, more schools, more hospitals, improving public transport, hiring more doctors and nurses, recruiting more police etc while they’re at it.
You and me both, but if you pay attention to the news, they have already started doing many of those things.
To reiterate what you’ve already been told, they do not disappear unless they’ve been trafficked. And many of them do have things to offer, and one of the biggest complaints is that they’re stuck in limbo, unable to rebuild their lives. Skills that could be used here, with quite a few doctors too.
Process them in a timely manner, and they will be able to get onto the labour market faster. Refuse to do so, and then you have a backlog that starts to build up to the point where you’re spending £8m a day on hotels run by your crony buddies to house them.
But you’ve already been told this.
If you keep ignoring it when people point out the factual inaccuracies underlying the premises of your arguments, then why do you complain that you get talked down to in a condescending manner?
1 Like
Stop wasting your breath mate.
You’re arguing with the type of people who will console their hungry, homeless, jobless grandkids by telling them its all ok, we did the right thing.
2 Likes
Yes all good of those things will be due to asylum seekers/refugees (0.6% of the population). Nothing at all to do with Tory austerity/brexit and facilitating the richest 1% in UK to own the same amount of wealth as 80% of the population 
4 Likes
I’ll just remind you that the ‘right thing’ me and and few others advocate is
- set up legal routes so people aren’t forced into the hands of people traffickers and forced into the kinds of suffering you can’t imagine.
- Process applications swiftly, and allow those meeting the criteria to stay, work and contribute to society.
- Deport those that don’t.
What a bunch of bleeding heart liberal nutters we are, proposing something that is both humane, and makes complete economic sense.
5 Likes
- set up legal routes so people aren’t forced into the hands of people traffickers and forced into the kinds of suffering you can’t imagine.
- Process applications swiftly, and allow those meeting the criteria to stay, work and contribute to society.
- Deport those that don’t.
These are exactly the right things that @jaffod (and me) have alluded to being perfectly ok, yet sarcastic responses and veiled insinuations of racism have followed
1 Like
No they don’t enter they job market. They are unable to do that, as it’s been government policy to place them in ‘temporary’ accommodation, deny them the ability to contribute anything to society, and hold them in an endless queue awaiting processing, while encouraging people like you to blame them for everything that is shit about their life.
Erm, you’ve just told me what I’ve been saying all along. I already know it’s costing £8 million a day to house them etc. That’s my fucking point.
I’m not arsed if it’s the Tory’s fault or if it’s been a coalition of Timmy fucking Mallett and Mr Blobby, that’s the situation.
Until the backlog is cleared it’s absolute lunacy to accept any more.
To be fair I’ve only made thinly veiled accusations of racism at the thinly veiled racism.
Yeah, I’m looking forward to all the cry-arsing from the hand-wringers on Thursday after the budget.
None of this says what claim you were saying.
Refusing to accept asylum seekers would require withdrawal from the 1951 Refugee Convention.
Ok
If you genuinely thought that racist comments were being made (however thinly veiled), and your fellow mods wouldn’t laugh you out of your secret room for highlighting them, warnings would have been issued, no?
Oh yeah, I remember now, being called a racist for suggesting we look after our own countrymen first.
Yes, because that’s entirely the fault of the asylum seekers, not the political choices of the previous government.
Long term we both want a functioning system. I’ve no argument with that. That isn’t the disagreement.
It’s the quoted part that is the problem, and I hate to say it but three or four people have tried to explain it to you and you just don’t seem to get it.
It isn’t a matter of ‘accepting’ Asylum Seekers. There are no legal routes for most asylum seekers. They arrive on small boats and the back of lorries. We don’t have much control of this. In accordance with international law we have to grant them leave to remain until their asylum claim is heard.
You imagined a situation where Asylum Seekers get here and choose to go off into criminal gangs, or a lavished with benefits and access to services. They don’t. They get put in squalid hotels and the ones that disappear are trafficked.
The reason why the backlog is so great is that the Tories simply stopped processing claims. We can’t just stop people coming.
Your proposal is we stop ‘accepting them’. What should we do? Break international law? Call in the navy, sink the dingies and watch them drown?
2 Likes
Sexist as well. Dear me.
Not in this thread. I expect it will get closed again soon though, so we’ll done on that.
Where then?