Turn on thread page Beta

The old 'deportation of asylum seekers' debate watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm glad to hear the governement will take action to deport some of the failed Iraqi aslyum seeker; it's not enough but in least its a start.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4156466.stm

    The country does not these people who are a burden on our economy and sponge off our [generous] benefits system (also applies to British nationals as well). I'm all for positive immigration like they hav in Oz becuase the UK definitely needs more doctors and teachers etc.

    And like i said before, there well maybe some genuine refugees entering this country, i don't deny that, but if you were fleeing from war then you would logically stop at the first safe country (spain, germany, Italy???) - why do they have to come to the end of the line which is the uk? eh?

    For all those people who say its against their human rights to be deported becuase it is unsafe in their country, i don't care. Send them to Antarctica - thats pretty safe. I understand it as they are not genuine refurgees so shouldn't be in this country anyway.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I must say that I agree with you on these points.
    *ducks as various projectiles are hurled at him*
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SolInvincitus)
    I must say that I agree with you on these points.
    *ducks as various projectiles are hurled at him*
    Well, you're obviously just a big fat smelly racist. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    The only realistic solution for asylum seekers is unfortunately to be held at detention centres, and either deported immediately if failed or allowed out if passed. It's ludicrous that we can fail somebody and then let them go so that they can hide from the state. Detention centres should speed up the asylum process-I think realistically two weeks could sort the wheat from the chaff. Is two weeks detention a real hardship if you will get to escape whatever you're seeking asylum for?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I am sure there is a European directive that says a Asylum Seeker has to claim Asylum in the first European State they enter, or first country that offers Asylum. If anyone knows plse care to elaborate.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ads.)
    I'm glad to hear the governement will take action to deport some of the failed Iraqi aslyum seeker; it's not enough but in least its a start.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4156466.stm

    The country does not these people who are a burden on our economy and sponge off our [generous] benefits system (also applies to British nationals as well). I'm all for positive immigration like they hav in Oz becuase the UK definitely needs more doctors and teachers etc.

    And like i said before, there well maybe some genuine refugees entering this country, i don't deny that, but if you were fleeing from war then you would logically stop at the first safe country (spain, germany, Italy???) - why do they have to come to the end of the line which is the uk? eh?

    For all those people who say its against their human rights to be deported becuase it is unsafe in their country, i don't care. Send them to Antarctica - thats pretty safe. I understand it as they are not genuine refurgees so shouldn't be in this country anyway.
    how many more times does it need to be said that we are £2.5 billion better off with immigration.that is their profit,they are not an economic burden.****.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't really understand the furore surrounding asylum seekers.

    These are people fleeing from one country to another, because they are being persecuted. If someone is genuinely fleeing from torture or oppression in another country, then its immoral to send them back, IMO.

    Also, I don't understand the "economic burden" they'll empose. Asylum seekers would contribute to the economy just like everyone else. They'd spend money in the shops, buying necessities like food, clothing, etc.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zooropa)
    I don't really understand the furore surrounding asylum seekers.

    These are people fleeing from one country to another, because they are being persecuted. If someone is genuinely fleeing from torture or oppression in another country, then its immoral to send them back, IMO.

    Also, I don't understand the "economic burden" they'll empose. Asylum seekers would contribute to the economy just like everyone else. They'd spend money in the shops, buying necessities like food, clothing, etc.
    People have three problems:

    -asylum seekers cannot work because they haven't got work permits. This means the council must pay to put them up and give them money to live on. They get ****** houses and a pittance, but people believe they get more. Asylum seekers take without giving, and people have a problem with that, seeking that as an economic burden. In reality I think what they take is negligible.

    -those whose applications for asylum fail rarely leave the country, often disappearing from the radar and working illegally. This means they get rubbish pay, live in squalid conditions and sometimes commit crime to make ends meet. The government should do more to deport people before they disappear.

    My solution is detention centres for asylum seekers. I reckon an application should be processed within two weeks, and if you're a genuine asylum seeker whats two weeks detention compared to what you suffered at home?

    The problem is people's misconception. Asylum seekers don't cost alot to the tax payer, but the process of granting asylum (or not) should be sped up and certainly can be much more efficient. Those granted asylum can work and are beneficial to the economy. The problem is those who fail, because by and large they work for criminal gangs and commit crime.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Carl)
    My solution is detention centres for asylum seekers. I reckon an application should be processed within two weeks, and if you're a genuine asylum seeker whats two weeks detention compared to what you suffered at home?

    The problem is people's misconception. Asylum seekers don't cost alot to the tax payer, but the process of granting asylum (or not) should be sped up and certainly can be much more efficient. Those granted asylum can work and are beneficial to the economy. The problem is those who fail, because by and large they work for criminal gangs and commit crime.
    is your figure of two weeks based on anything apart from wishful thinking?

    your right about people having a misconception of asylum seekers but then you seem to have entirely the same misconceptions, how to you know that failed asylum seekers by and large work for criminal gangs?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    how many more times does it need to be said that we are £2.5 billion better off with immigration.that is their profit,they are not an economic burden.****.
    Immigration isn't the issue here. Positive immigration brings in a great deal more than 2.5 billion, but unsavoury and negative elements that immigrate suck so much out that the net contribution is reduced. Common sense here... encourage good hard-working people to come here, and kick out welfare leaches.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by junkscience)
    is your figure of two weeks based on anything apart from wishful thinking?
    If they are in detention centres, and the application is assessed in the same place I don't understand what takes so long....

    your right about people having a misconception of asylum seekers but then you seem to have entirely the same misconceptions, how to you know that failed asylum seekers by and large work for criminal gangs?
    Well they can't work legally.......
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zooropa)
    I don't really understand the furore surrounding asylum seekers.

    These are people fleeing from one country to another, because they are being persecuted. If someone is genuinely fleeing from torture or oppression in another country, then its immoral to send them back, IMO.

    Also, I don't understand the "economic burden" they'll empose. Asylum seekers would contribute to the economy just like everyone else. They'd spend money in the shops, buying necessities like food, clothing, etc.
    taking benefits and then spending them in a shop doesnt make you an economic contributor.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    how many more times does it need to be said that we are £2.5 billion better off with immigration.that is their profit,they are not an economic burden.****.
    Where did you get the £2.5 billion figure from?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If an asylum seeker is fleeing from a country for real reasons, i have no problem with them picking the uk. They are choosing a country which they feel can give them a better life. We were born with this standard of life, why shouldn't others who have been mistreated be allowed that same standard.

    prejudice towards asylum seekers is caused by propaganda and common misconceptions. While your argument is well structured, i personally consider it nothing less than racist.

    kate
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kate29987)
    If an asylum seeker is fleeing from a country for real reasons, i have no problem with them picking the uk. They are choosing a country which they feel can give them a better life. We were born with this standard of life, why shouldn't others who have been mistreated be allowed that same standard.

    prejudice towards asylum seekers is caused by propaganda and common misconceptions. While your argument is well structured, i personally consider it nothing less than racist.

    kate
    Who are you addressing?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    sorry, i was addressing Ads. Though the idea of detention centres bring Nazi Germany to mind, even though you didn't mean it that way, i don't agree with general deportation, only the deportation of individuals when necessary.

    sorry, next time I'll point my finger.

    kate
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kate29987)
    prejudice towards asylum seekers is caused by propaganda and common misconceptions. While your argument is well structured, i personally consider it nothing less than racist.
    Personally i don't feel what I'm saying is racist becuase:
    1. I don't care what colour your skin is. If you are good at the job you do (be it teacher, nurse, doctor - whatever), contribuate money into the economy and are a law abiding citizen, I have no problems with foreigners coming into this country. I advocate it

    2. My thoughts regarding families who are 'economic burdens' apply to British nationals as well. Recently there was an article about a woman who has 15 (yes 15!) children, yet cannot work, and sponges off the state £45,000 a year. There is absolutely no need to have 15 children and by giving them money it encourages them to exploit the British Government. (Indeed the eldest son has already got his teenage girlfriend pregnant)

    unfortuanely the world is not happy place and wars happen. Yet that should not mean that out country should have to host every fleeing person, especially those exploit the government.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    how many more times does it need to be said that we are £2.5 billion better off with immigration.that is their profit,they are not an economic burden.****.
    Its not all about money you know, we don't NEED immigrants. I think genuine refugees should stop in their first country thats safe. so unless they arrive by plane thats not going to be the uk. If anyone can explain why they should be allowed to enter the country i'd like to hear it. Seeing as they are perfectly safe in france.

    A positive immigration system like australia is the only way.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    if you were fleeing from war then you would logically stop at the first safe country (spain, germany, Italy???) - why do they have to come to the end of the line which is the uk? eh?
    Ok, so you don't mind asylum seekers getting help, as long as it's far enough away, and not in your own country. Ads, this country is not overrun by asylum seekers, they are not sponging off the economy, that's right wing propaganda influencing you.
    A couple of years ago The Sun editior actually admitted to campaigning against Asylum seekers. And i cringe eveytime I read the mail it is that noticable.
    If anything, the only precaution that should be taken, is to make sure asylum seekers are fleeing from hardship, to sift out economic immigrants .
    As for British citizens on benefits, I read that article and I agree with you, but would you send them to Baghdad for being lazy.

    And remember, don't believe everything you read in the paper.

    kate
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    The problem with asylum is that it is so undefined. Anyone weems to be able to claim asylum in the UK, whereas in the US there is a list of regions and conflicts in order to limit those that can enter as refugees. For example, Cubans can enter the country because of Castro's oppresive government, but someone from Iceland would not be ablt to. I really dont think the UK has a need to take in any refugees/asylum seekers, but it is the decent thing to do. The system needs to be more difficult, and immigration more tight in order to prevent the wrong elements from entering Britain.
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.