Keir Starmer

[Pedronicus]

When Starmer promised us Change, we didn't realise he meant his staff and, probably, the cabinet!

 

[Chris152]

You are the victim of asylum myths in your belief that they 'instantly take advantage of our benefits system'.

If you aren't interested in the facts, just file this under 'burn before reading'.

The UK is not the most generous country - far from it.

In Austria, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and the Nordic countries, social benefits are higher for immigrants than for natives.

And the UK is way down the list of the number of arrivals.

Here's what asylum seekers in Britain actually get. (It doesn’t include house or a car):

Quote:

Somewhere to live, a cash allowance or both.

Housing:

You’ll be given somewhere to live if you need it. This could be in a flat, house, hostel or bed and breakfast, [or will be ‘warehoused’ in the Bibby Barge]. You cannot choose where you live. It’s unlikely you’ll get to live in London or south-east England.

Cash support:

You’ll get £49.18 per week for each person in your household. This will help you pay for things you need like food, clothing and toiletries. Your allowance will be loaded onto a debit card (ASPEN card) each week. You’ll be able to use the card to get cash from a cash machine.

So, that's just £7.00 a day for food, clothing, and such things as hygiene and sanitary products.

Extra money for mothers and young children:

You’ll get extra money to buy healthy food if you’re pregnant or a mother of a child under 3. The amount you get will depend on your situation.

Your situation	Extra payment per week
Pregnant mother	£5.25
Baby under 1 year old	£9.50
Child aged 1 to 3	£5.25

Hardly enough to 'live the life of Riley'.

Why aren't they put to work?

They're not allowed to. [Albeit some unscrupulous employers exploit them to work illegally for slave wages in menial jobs]. This is to deter 'Economic Migrants' from coming here, (usually from Eastern Europe, such as Albania, who are not in danger and who are indeed 'illegal'). Asylum seekers can only apply for permission to work if they have waited over 12 months for an initial decision on their asylum claim or for a response to a further submission for asylum; and they are not considered responsible for the delay in decision-making. (They can do voluntary unpaid work).

If an asylum seeker's application is upheld, they become a 'refugee' with indefinite leave to remain. Refugees are allowed to work in any role consistent with their skill level. The quicker the applications are processed, the sooner they can seek employment and pay taxes, or if refused, can be be returned. (63% of asylum claims were granted in UK in 2023).

As of the end of June 2024, the UK's asylum backlog was 85,839 applications, which is a 36% decrease from the previous year.

However, the total number of cases in the asylum system was 4% higher than in June 2023, due to a large number of cases being refused and going to appeal. The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 (NABA) separated asylum cases into "legacy" and "flow" cases, with the goal of prioritizing cases that had been waiting a long time for a decision. The legacy backlog decreased by 97% between December 2022 and March 2024, but the flow caseload increased by 92%. Factors that have contributed to the UK's asylum backlog include: Declining caseworker productivity, Administrative problems, High staff turnover, new rules on inadmissibility, and suspension of the 'Detained Fast Track' process.

If their application for asylum is refused, in a long drawn-out process, they're returned to their country of origin. if they overstay, only then do they become an ‘illegal immigrant’. If they are granted asylum, most will become productive citizens, and will pay their taxes, as will their children.

When you consider the perils they put themselves through, it's facile to assert that they lack the work ethic and want loaf around on welfare benefits.

The broad term often used by hard-of-thinking racists to describe asylum seekers as 'illegals'. They’re not, and there’s no such thing as a ‘bogus’ asylum seeker. Because the government doesn't wish to use the term 'asylum seekers' and can’t refer to them as ‘illegals’, they refer to them as ‘irregular arrivals’

It won't make any difference to those with a racist mindset, but anyone washed up on these shores who claims asylum is not an 'illegal immigrant' - they're an 'asylum seeker'. Most are from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, and have made a perilous journey, the least dangerous part of which is sailing across the busiest shipping lane in the world in an overloaded inflatable. (In 2019, 68% of the world’s refugees came from just five countries: Syria, Venezuela, Afghanistan, South Sudan and Myanmar). 45% of separated children applying for asylum in the UK in the year up to June 2020 were from Iran, Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Most of those arrive here uninvited, but thousands of Afghans were invited here after the collapse of Afghanistan because they'd worked as interpreters etc for the British Government and their lives are in danger). It was Tory Blair who took the UK into Iraq based on a pack of lies, which has destabilised the whole of the Middle East, and who took us into Afghanistan - both unwinnable wars propagated by the USA, which have made the world a far more dangerous place.

And no - we don't take more refugees than other European countries. In proportion to its population, the year ending Dec 2021 UK ranks 18th in Europe for asylum applications. The country with the highest numbers of refugees in the European Union is Germany. It hosts some 1.2 million refugees, 243,200 asylum seekers, and 26,700 stateless persons.

Here are some statistics on asylum seekers in Europe by country:

• UK
  In the year ending June 2024, there were 75,658 asylum applications in the UK, which is 8% fewer than the previous year. In 2023, the UK received 67,337 asylum applications, which was 8% of the total asylum applications in the EU+ and UK combined.
  
  
• EU+
  In the year ending September 2023, there were 1.14 million asylum applications in the EU+, which is a 29% increase from the previous year. Germany received the most asylum applications in the EU+ (341,300), followed by France (167,230) and Spain (156,180).
  
  
• Italy
  In 2023, Italy hosted 298,000 refugees. In 2022, the number of asylum applications in Italy was 84,000.
  
  The number of asylum applications in the UK has fluctuated over the years:
• 2002: The number of asylum applications peaked at 84,132
• 2010: The number of asylum applications reached a low point of 17,916
• 2015: The number of asylum applications rose to 32,733
• 2020: The number of asylum applications dipped during the first year of the pandemic
• 2022: The number of asylum applications rose to 81,130, the highest number since 2002

In the year ending March 2024, there were 38,546 'irregular arrivals', 28% fewer than in the year ending March 2023. 81% of these arrived by small boats. In the year ending March 2024, 31,079 people arrived by small boats, 31% fewer than in the year ending March 2023 (45,019), and 32% fewer than the peak of 45,774 in 2022.

Source of information:

Asylum support - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Working in the UK while an asylum case is considered - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Can Refugees work in the UK? See:

https://sonacircle.com/are-refugees-and-asylum-seekers-allowed-to-work-in-the-uk/

Irregular migration to the UK, year to March 2024:

https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...ar-migration-to-the-uk-year-ending-march-2024

Refugee & Asylum facts:

https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/information/refugee-asylum-facts/top-10-facts-about-refugees-and-people-seeking-asylum/#:~:text=There were 67,337 asylum applications,, India, Pakistan and Turkey

Sensible balanced debate on this topic is impossible - it's highly polarised and generates more heat than light.

Meanwhile, work-shy Brits who – when we were in the EU, used to bemoan Eastern Europeans for 'stealing our jobs' - but post Brexit, workshy Brits no longer have that excuse, but still don't want to get off their backsides to pick fruit and veg for £60k a year:

Fancy picking vegetables? It could earn you £62,000 a year (thelondoneconomic.com)

https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...ny-people-do-we-grant-asylum-or-protection-to

https://www.unhcr.org/uk/asylum-uk#:~:text=According to UNHCR statistics, as of November 2022,drove a large increase from the previous year

https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/

But Labour say they'll succeed where the Tories failed, and will sort it all out. Starmer and Yvette Cooper have a plan:

They're are going to 'Smash the Gangs' and stop the boats, so will solve the problem.

Don't hold your breath.

Good post - very clear and helpful.

 

[Fergie 307]

Except that at least the Oxford’s Compas Migration Centre says that is untrue:

The research – published on Monday and compiled by 18 institutions including Oxford University’s Compas centre – estimated the number of illegal migrants in the UK was between 594,000 and 745,000, ahead of Germany (up to 700,000), France (300,000), Italy (458,000) and Spain (469,000).
source: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...-most-illegal-migrants-in-europe-study-finds/

Have you got a link to the Compas findings. Looked all over their site and can't find any mention of it.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

As for Farage's Reform party they took 14.3% share of the election vote compared to the Lib-Dems which took only 12.2% giving them 72 seats to Reform's 5 seats.
There's nothing populist about a party that comes third in a general election. There again it depends upon what one defines as populist!

Voting in the GE was wholly tactical - anyone but Tory. Seats where LD previously did well got disaffected Tory votes. Likewise Reform - allowed Tories to register a protest where the alternative was Labour. Whiter that white Labour cleaned up on the basis of a split Tory under the FPTP system - not through popular support.

0% to 14.3% is a testament to the Farage presentational skill set - not necessarily the policies.

it's not difficult to see why the people are sick and tired of our governments doing nothing while our welfare system is being milked by fake asylum seekers. We're not talking about genuine refugees fleeing persecution, they deserve our help.
We are talking about the thousands of perfectly healthy young men paying criminals to get them across the Channel in small boats supposedly leaving their families behind in war torn regions while seeking asylum here in the UK.

The Rwanda deal was a complex and expensive exercise to circumvent the legal niceties. It was the result of successive government failures:

• extended asylum claim lead times,
• no clear rules defining who can/cannot stay having passed through entirely safe countries
• demonstrable inability to deport those not wanted (repeated appeals, ECHR)
• no sign of any improvement with the new government

An "economic" migrant with the determination to undertake a dangerous journey, possibly across 2 continents, just to get to to the UK may have talents the country can use. This is politically dangerous territory - but sitting on a fence and doing nothing is not political leadership!

If I lived in such an area then I'd stay and fight to protect my family not flee leaving behind my family to whatever fate awaits them. Sorry but most are not true asylum seekers, they're arguably either cowards or economic migrants doing or saying anything they can to get into this country.

They are economic migrants - they may have skill and talent of real benefit to their ultimate hosts.

Cowardice is not a fair assertion - other bits of the globe are not like the UK - police brutality is often the norm, "gay bashing" approved behaviour, religious bigotry encouraged. Were I confronted by such I doubt I would have the courage to stay and fight.

 

[Chris152]

If I lived in such an area then I'd stay and fight to protect my family not flee leaving behind my family to whatever fate awaits them. Sorry but most are not true asylum seekers, they're arguably either cowards or economic migrants doing or saying anything they can to get into this country.

I missed this one. Goodness me, Tony, what a claim! On a scale of 1 - 10, how confident are you that what you've written is true?

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Just for a bit of clarification.
Asylum seekers are not held by any international law to claim asylum in any country other than the one of their choosing. So they may want to come to the UK for a host of reasons. Family already settled here, or born here. They might have a better command of English than any other European
language

True, but not necessarily right! However in assessing applications, appropriate regard should be had for the choice not to seek asylum earlier in their journey. A clear set of criteria is required (language, family, etc) to justify a positive decision. No government has published such.

They might be choosing Britain because in some European countries they're facing far more racism and bigotry.

A condition of EU membership is that countries must achieve stability in human rights, protection of minorities etc.. This cannot be an acceptable reason for continuing to the UK.

The other point, and this is a biggie, and one that those who think Farage is their savior and listened to the lies he's been preaching is THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT

They are illegal until they claim asylum. It is illegal to seek entry to the UK without appropriate visas and passport. Asylum cannot be claimed outside the UK - they are de facto illegal immigrants.

A major improvement to process would be the capacity to apply outside the UK - I suspect that many/most asylum seekers have access to or own smart phone.

BTW I am not remotely convinced by Farage. However UK management of the asylum process, both illegal and legal, is woeful. There are difficult and controversial choices to be made. They require clear political leadership. No party has done other than the wholly ineffectual - Labour have only just started but I have little confidence.

 

[ey_tony]

yes it is a coincidence.
It has been deliberate government policy to underfund public services, since 1979. It's the right-wing ideology of `'austerity" supported by Reagan, Thatcher and others. Still on going under Starmer - hoping for "growth" and forcing people into work when there are no jobs..
The "idea" is that the free market will fill the gaps in some natural organic sort of way.
It's really childish to blame immigrants and rising population, but it's always been that way - blaming the underdog, the ones least responsible for the state of current affairs. They were doing it in the 19th century and punishing the unemployed with workhouses. They've always been doing it throughout history.

No one is blaming the underdog but logically if there isn't enough growth in the economy to fund the infrastructure/social policies needed to service the increase in the population due to migration then the more the population numbers rise, the more demand there will be on existing services and infrastructure which means either higher taxes or poorer quality services/social policies. There is no getting away from that irrespective of which side of the political divide one sits.
Economics ultimately trump everything and the sooner it is recognised the better.

If as you say there aren't enough jobs to go around which I'd agree then it's absolutely futile to keep allowing migration numbers to rise as it only serves to reduce the quality of life for those already living here.
Migration should be seriously curtailed until there is a definite increase in economic growth and then migration matched to demand for their labour.
The people of the UK simply can't afford to allow migrants to continue to access our social benefits system as they have been doing if they don't actually bring with them the essential skills which the UK needs.

I've just read about an Oxford University study which estimates that there could be as many as 745,000 illegal migrants already living here. If that is true then where are they getting their funds on which to live? They must be working illegally for dishonest employers who are undercutting honest employers/businesses or they are resorting to crime to fund their stay here. It has to be one or the other. They can't legally claim benefits etc so how are they sustaining themselves?
We don't know their criminal history or backgrounds and statistically migrants represent disproportionate numbers of inmates in the UK's jails. According to figures I've read they are up to are eight times more likely to receive a custodial sentence than white British which says something.
It can't all be prejudice by the courts toward migrants....

 

[Croolis]

Got to page 4 before the asylum seekers came out.

 

[flying haggis]

You are the victim of asylum myths in your belief that they 'instantly take advantage of our benefits system'.

If you aren't interested in the facts, just file this under 'burn before reading'.

The UK is not the most generous country - far from it.

In Austria, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and the Nordic countries, social benefits are higher for immigrants than for natives.

And the UK is way down the list of the number of arrivals.

Here's what asylum seekers in Britain actually get. (It doesn’t include house or a car):

Quote:

Somewhere to live, a cash allowance or both.

Housing:

You’ll be given somewhere to live if you need it. This could be in a flat, house, hostel or bed and breakfast, [or will be ‘warehoused’ in the Bibby Barge]. You cannot choose where you live. It’s unlikely you’ll get to live in London or south-east England.

Cash support:

You’ll get £49.18 per week for each person in your household. This will help you pay for things you need like food, clothing and toiletries. Your allowance will be loaded onto a debit card (ASPEN card) each week. You’ll be able to use the card to get cash from a cash machine.

So, that's just £7.00 a day for food, clothing, and such things as hygiene and sanitary products.

Extra money for mothers and young children:

You’ll get extra money to buy healthy food if you’re pregnant or a mother of a child under 3. The amount you get will depend on your situation.

Your situation	Extra payment per week
Pregnant mother	£5.25
Baby under 1 year old	£9.50
Child aged 1 to 3	£5.25

Hardly enough to 'live the life of Riley'.

Why aren't they put to work?

They're not allowed to. [Albeit some unscrupulous employers exploit them to work illegally for slave wages in menial jobs]. This is to deter 'Economic Migrants' from coming here, (usually from Eastern Europe, such as Albania, who are not in danger and who are indeed 'illegal'). Asylum seekers can only apply for permission to work if they have waited over 12 months for an initial decision on their asylum claim or for a response to a further submission for asylum; and they are not considered responsible for the delay in decision-making. (They can do voluntary unpaid work).

If an asylum seeker's application is upheld, they become a 'refugee' with indefinite leave to remain. Refugees are allowed to work in any role consistent with their skill level. The quicker the applications are processed, the sooner they can seek employment and pay taxes, or if refused, can be be returned. (63% of asylum claims were granted in UK in 2023).

As of the end of June 2024, the UK's asylum backlog was 85,839 applications, which is a 36% decrease from the previous year.

However, the total number of cases in the asylum system was 4% higher than in June 2023, due to a large number of cases being refused and going to appeal. The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 (NABA) separated asylum cases into "legacy" and "flow" cases, with the goal of prioritizing cases that had been waiting a long time for a decision. The legacy backlog decreased by 97% between December 2022 and March 2024, but the flow caseload increased by 92%. Factors that have contributed to the UK's asylum backlog include: Declining caseworker productivity, Administrative problems, High staff turnover, new rules on inadmissibility, and suspension of the 'Detained Fast Track' process.

If their application for asylum is refused, in a long drawn-out process, they're returned to their country of origin. if they overstay, only then do they become an ‘illegal immigrant’. If they are granted asylum, most will become productive citizens, and will pay their taxes, as will their children.

When you consider the perils they put themselves through, it's facile to assert that they lack the work ethic and want loaf around on welfare benefits.

The broad term often used by hard-of-thinking racists to describe asylum seekers as 'illegals'. They’re not, and there’s no such thing as a ‘bogus’ asylum seeker. Because the government doesn't wish to use the term 'asylum seekers' and can’t refer to them as ‘illegals’, they refer to them as ‘irregular arrivals’

It won't make any difference to those with a racist mindset, but anyone washed up on these shores who claims asylum is not an 'illegal immigrant' - they're an 'asylum seeker'. Most are from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, and have made a perilous journey, the least dangerous part of which is sailing across the busiest shipping lane in the world in an overloaded inflatable. (In 2019, 68% of the world’s refugees came from just five countries: Syria, Venezuela, Afghanistan, South Sudan and Myanmar). 45% of separated children applying for asylum in the UK in the year up to June 2020 were from Iran, Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Most of those arrive here uninvited, but thousands of Afghans were invited here after the collapse of Afghanistan because they'd worked as interpreters etc for the British Government and their lives are in danger). It was Tory Blair who took the UK into Iraq based on a pack of lies, which has destabilised the whole of the Middle East, and who took us into Afghanistan - both unwinnable wars propagated by the USA, which have made the world a far more dangerous place.

And no - we don't take more refugees than other European countries. In proportion to its population, the year ending Dec 2021 UK ranks 18th in Europe for asylum applications. The country with the highest numbers of refugees in the European Union is Germany. It hosts some 1.2 million refugees, 243,200 asylum seekers, and 26,700 stateless persons.

Here are some statistics on asylum seekers in Europe by country:

• UK
  In the year ending June 2024, there were 75,658 asylum applications in the UK, which is 8% fewer than the previous year. In 2023, the UK received 67,337 asylum applications, which was 8% of the total asylum applications in the EU+ and UK combined.
  
  
• EU+
  In the year ending September 2023, there were 1.14 million asylum applications in the EU+, which is a 29% increase from the previous year. Germany received the most asylum applications in the EU+ (341,300), followed by France (167,230) and Spain (156,180).
  
  
• Italy
  In 2023, Italy hosted 298,000 refugees. In 2022, the number of asylum applications in Italy was 84,000.
  
  The number of asylum applications in the UK has fluctuated over the years:
• 2002: The number of asylum applications peaked at 84,132
• 2010: The number of asylum applications reached a low point of 17,916
• 2015: The number of asylum applications rose to 32,733
• 2020: The number of asylum applications dipped during the first year of the pandemic
• 2022: The number of asylum applications rose to 81,130, the highest number since 2002

In the year ending March 2024, there were 38,546 'irregular arrivals', 28% fewer than in the year ending March 2023. 81% of these arrived by small boats. In the year ending March 2024, 31,079 people arrived by small boats, 31% fewer than in the year ending March 2023 (45,019), and 32% fewer than the peak of 45,774 in 2022.

Source of information:

Asylum support - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Working in the UK while an asylum case is considered - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Can Refugees work in the UK? See:

https://sonacircle.com/are-refugees-and-asylum-seekers-allowed-to-work-in-the-uk/

Irregular migration to the UK, year to March 2024:

https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...ar-migration-to-the-uk-year-ending-march-2024

Refugee & Asylum facts:

https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/information/refugee-asylum-facts/top-10-facts-about-refugees-and-people-seeking-asylum/#:~:text=There were 67,337 asylum applications,, India, Pakistan and Turkey

Sensible balanced debate on this topic is impossible - it's highly polarised and generates more heat than light.

Meanwhile, work-shy Brits who – when we were in the EU, used to bemoan Eastern Europeans for 'stealing our jobs' - but post Brexit, workshy Brits no longer have that excuse, but still don't want to get off their backsides to pick fruit and veg for £60k a year:

Fancy picking vegetables? It could earn you £62,000 a year (thelondoneconomic.com)

https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...ny-people-do-we-grant-asylum-or-protection-to

https://www.unhcr.org/uk/asylum-uk#:~:text=According to UNHCR statistics, as of November 2022,drove a large increase from the previous year

https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/

But Labour say they'll succeed where the Tories failed, and will sort it all out. Starmer and Yvette Cooper have a plan:

They're are going to 'Smash the Gangs' and stop the boats, so will solve the problem.

Don't hold your breath.

OK then explain how all these "poor" refugees have financed a journey from hundreds or thousands of miles away then can pay thousands to get on a dinghy and cross the channel.
Surely if they were genuine they could afford a plane ticket and arrive in britain legally with documents but they all seem to arrive having "conviently" lost their passpoet so cant be sent back to their homeland or france. Quite why we have to spend millions a dat to look after them I dont know as they obviously had money to start with.

 

[TRITON]

Got to page 4 before the asylum seekers came out.

It's a form of Godwin's law.

Another example of that is when somebody posts up about buying a tablesaw.
Before too long someone will bring up tracksaws.

 

[Blackswanwood]

It's a form of Godwin's law.

Another example of that is when somebody posts up about buying a tablesaw.
Before too long someone will bring up tracksaws.

Yes, but the track saw has been usurped by someone getting angry about Sawstop

 

[Yorkieguy]

We don't know their criminal history or backgrounds and statistically migrants represent disproportionate numbers of inmates in the UK's jails. According to figures I've read they are up to are eight times more likely to receive a custodial sentence than white British which says something.
It can't all be prejudice by the courts toward migrants....

To the best of my knowledge and belief, there are no statistics on the proportion of immigrants (in terms of asylum seekers & refugees) in the prison population, but there are statistics on the ethic background, religion, of the population, and and country of origin of immigrants and foreign nationals.

Immigrants and foreign nationals:

76,869 British nationals were recorded in the prison population at the end of the first quarter of 2024, with10,422 foreign nationals, making up 11.9% of the total population, with an additional 578 having no nationality recorded.

You will se in the table at the link below, the proportion of White British, Black or Black British, Asian or Asian British, and other ethnic backgrounds, compared to the proportion of those categories in the population of Britain as a whole, with some explanation about the figures. No doubt you will draw your own conclusions, which may differ:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_prison_population

 

[niemeyjt]

Have you got a link to the Compas findings. Looked all over their site and can't find any mention of it.

It seems they were contributors to a broader study:

https://irregularmigration.eu/wp-co...Irregular-Migrant-Population-in-Europe-v1.pdf

 

[Delaney]

I want my elected representatives to come from the best available talents, often (not always) evidenced by their earning capacity. I want them to be intellectually and socially adept, capable of manging complex relationships, balancing priorities, presentational and debating skills etc etc etc.

Mr or Mrs Average, however decent they are as human beings, are not close to this standard.

Asserting that an average salary will suffice will consign the UK to far, far less than average outcomes - only the inadequate, incompetent, or self obsessed egotistical will be attracted to political leadership. They would be very quickly emasculated by those around them.

You’re making quite a mistake there.

People who have borderline personality disorders are often more intelligent and successful.
They might be good in business but should be no where near government.

Government woukd be far more successful with the average man being given the final call.
Belgium had no government for a year. They had higher growth than the annual average and the deficit shrunk.

People make the country work. Government has long passed its usefulness, after filling a few basic requirements. Now it just sits around getting in the way and regulating out lives merely to give it something to do.

And if course to top it off, it’s been overwhelmed by narcissistic types anyway. What could be better for someone who seeks to control and manipulate others, whilst enriching themselves?

 

[TRITON]

Now it just sits around filling their pockets via the public purse

FIFY