|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Aug 1, 2023 14:47:34 GMT
£9 per week - shocking luxury Dan. Surely they could get by on £8.50..... The package as a whole must look very appealing if you're currently living in cardboard box somewhere on the Channel coast or in a leaky tent under the viaduct at the Gare du Nord, waiting for the French to come through with their promise of temporary accommodation.
The last I read there's a three-four month wait, sometimes as much as a year or more, which would cause your typical High Court judge to blow a gasket at the injustice of it all.
No wonder they can't wait to get in a dinghy for the Promised Land.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 1, 2023 14:53:26 GMT
£9 per week - shocking luxury Dan. Surely they could get by on £8.50..... The package as a whole must look very appealing if you're currently living in cardboard box somewhere on the Channel coast or in a leaky tent under the viaduct at the Gare du Nord, waiting for the French to come through with their promise of temporary accommodation.
The last I read there's a three-four month wait, sometimes as much as a year or more, which would cause your typical High Court judge to blow a gasket at the injustice of it all.
No wonder they can't wait to get in a dinghy for the Promised Land.
The land of milk and honey is turning into curdled milk and sour grapes. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 1, 2023 15:01:28 GMT
Is this a good time to remind you Dan that far more people apply for asylum in France than in the UK. Perhaps £9 per week is not so exciting for the majority.....
Lets be realistic for a while. Once people have been forced to flee their homes, there will be many factors determining which country they seek asylum in. Language may be a factor, extended family often is but realistically £9 per week waiting for a stupidly long time in limbo for our useless government to make a decision is hardly likely to be one of them.
You were right to highlight earlier the graph of our backlog. Its utterly crazy and bad both for UK, the asylum seeker and people in poor countries deprived of funds for development. the only gainer is hatred peddling politicians.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 1, 2023 15:03:02 GMT
Is this a good time to remind you Dan that far more people apply for asylum in France than in the UK. Perhaps £9 per week is not so exciting for the majority..... Lets be realistic for a while. Once people have been forced to flee their homes, there will be many factors determining which country they seek asylum in. Language may be a factor, extended family often is but realistically £9 per week waiting for a stupidly long time in limbo for our useless government to make a decision is hardly likely to be one of them. You were right to highlight earlier the graph of our backlog. Its utterly crazy and bad both for UK, the asylum seeker and people in poor countries deprived of funds for development. the only gainer is hatred peddling politicians. They apply to France for the simple reason the UK is no longer part of the Freedom of Movement law, so they apply to France and then illegally hop on to a dinghy over to the UK that no longer legally accepts FOM. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 1, 2023 15:11:21 GMT
Asylum seekers were never subject to freedom of movement to the UK.
Very few people travelling to the UK to claim asylum have previously claimed asylum in France.
If you dont understand basic facts, opinions about those facts become worthless.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 1, 2023 15:20:32 GMT
Asylum seekers were never subject to freedom of movement to the UK. Very few people travelling to the UK to claim asylum have previously claimed asylum in France. If you dont understand basic facts, opinions about those facts become worthless.Don't you understand what you are saying?
'very few people travelling to the UK claim asylum have previously claimed asylum in France'
They don't have to claim asylum in France under the FOM, they have a legitimate legal right to be in France under the FOM act.
It is YOU who does not understand the basic facts, migrants/asylum seekers/refugees call them what you like they are crossing EU border after border to get to their final destination ..... ** UK **, they are abusing the FOM law to get to France to jump in to a dinghy.
**You are proper stupid, aren't you.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 1, 2023 15:24:37 GMT
Freedom of Movement only applies to EU (and affiliated) citizens.
Understand the facts and you wouldn't sound so silly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 1, 2023 15:36:22 GMT
Freedom of Movement only applies to EU (and affiliated) citizens. Understand the facts and you wouldn't sound so silly. OMW you really don't get.
Freedom of Movement means they can cross EU border to border until they find a place to call home and claim asylum.
FOM is no longer legal under Brexit, so they can't claim asylum under the FOM, so instead they jump in a dinghy in France, cross illegally, and then claim asylum here in the UK.
Are you getting it yet?
I very much doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 1, 2023 15:47:06 GMT
No I understand it very well. Its plain that you do not.
Freedom of movement only applies to EU citizens (and affiliates). It does not and never did apply to say Syrian citizens seeking to apply for asylum in France or the UK.
Are you con fusing FOM with Schengen - two different things entirely? But then Schengen never applied to the UK either and of course there is no land Schengen route from Turkey or Greece to France so that wouldn't make sense either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Aug 1, 2023 15:47:23 GMT
Dappy appears to have developed a fixation about the £9 a week 'pocket money' asylum seekers are given, which isn't something I could be accused of.
I'd just note, however, that even this supposedly picayune amount that dappy scoffs at soon adds up to serious money. If there are 50,000 in hotels and other full-board accommodation, that amounts to £450,000 a week. Over the course of a year it will have cost taxpayers over £23 million.
That may not seem like real money in dappyland, but it is where the rest of us live, I'm sure we could all think of better things to spend it on than asylum seekers' weekly pocket money.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 1, 2023 15:51:41 GMT
You raised the £9 a week not I Dan. You seemed to think it represented bounteous luxury......
Not sure why we are arguing tbh. We both agree that the UK backlog for determining asylum cases is utterly ridiculous - remember that graph you posted earlier - and the fact that Government has allowed (encouraged) that backlog to grow is responsible for a pretty miserable existence for asylum seekers waiting in limbo for years, additional cost while they are in limbo and hence (as the cost comes from the aid budget) reduced much needed spending in poor countries.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 1, 2023 16:03:22 GMT
You raised the £9 a week not I Dan. You seemed to think it represented bounteous luxury...... Not sure why we are arguing tbh. We both agree that the UK backlog for determining asylum cases is utterly ridiculous - remember that graph you posted earlier - and the fact that Government has allowed (encouraged) that backlog to grow is responsible for a pretty miserable existence for asylum seekers waiting in limbo for years, additional cost while they are in limbo and hence (as the cost comes from the aid budget) reduced much needed spending in poor countries. It's costing tax payers £6 million A DAY, to house these illegal asylum seekers, my solution would be to pay the likes of Albania where most of them are coming from, a substantial amount of money even if it was £2 million a day to take them back, and invest the money that is needed in their poor country, if that happened they might no be so desperate to leave in the first place, instead of 'dead money', at least it would go to better use. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 1, 2023 16:10:30 GMT
I presume as you have now dropped it that you now realise you were talking nonsense about FOM. With respect given that you seem unable after all this time to have grasped basic facts, who would we take any notice of your nonsensical "solutions"
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Aug 1, 2023 16:15:45 GMT
I just included as part of the support package that asylum seekers benefit from, it's you who is making a song and dance about it dappy.
Nevertheless I'm not sure about you but it certainly seems to me that the solicitous care that the government shows for asylum seekers and their welfare certainly seems to put their concerns about our indigenous homeless in the shade.
Or even some of our OAPs. I always remember the classic poster from the BNP released at the time they published the Home Office's supposedly confidential requirements for contractors providing housing for asylum seekers, to include full furnishings, equipped kitchen, colour TV plus license, full central heating etc etc. It shows a dingy kitchen in which an elderly lady is sitting on a kitchen chair warming her hands in the oven. "I was I could have been an asylum seeker", she laments. Classic!
If you've got a spare few billion cash rattling around in the exchequer what would your priority be? Asylum seekers, homeless, OAPs? Cancer research? Or what?
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 1, 2023 16:21:42 GMT
As I say you raised the £9 not I Dan. The rest of the package seems to be a roof, basic meals and a drink.
As I think we agree, it would be far better for all parties to speed up decision making so that asylum seekers can get on with their lives (here or elsewhere) and UK taxpayer money can be spent on much needed aid projects in say Africa rather than unnecessary accommodation costs due to Home Office incompetence/deliberate Government delay tactics.
Would you mind taking over educating Fairsociety on the basics of the issue please. Poor old boy embarrassing himself.
|
|
