morecambegeek wrote:[Edit] Please don't quote attention seeking children, it makes tidying up take longer.
Keith wrote:Basically, some of you don't want any refugees in the UK, under any circumstances. UK can destabilise countries, but never take any responsibility for the people we bomb.
keith wrote:A few quick facts:
1. There is no legal requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country.
keith wrote:2. The UK has a very poor record with regards to taking asylum seekers or refugees. According to the UK government statistics, when taken as 'per head of population', the UK ranks 18th in Europe for taking asylum seekers. (Year ending Dec 2021)
keith wrote:. 86% of asylum applications are upheld (72% on initial application and a further 14% on appeal). The majority of the refused applications were on the basis of the UK not being the correct country to 'hear' the appeal, under the 'Dublin Agreement', whereby refugees are removed to another EU country. Obviously, we're no longer party to the Dublin Agreement.
keith wrote:At least there's no problem with billionaires avoiding tax and filling their pockets, eh?
mrpotatohead wrote:Most people that dont like asylum seekers coming to their countries are ignorant or racist.
mrpotatohead wrote:Most people that dont like asylum seekers coming to their countries are ignorant or racist.
Scouseport_Shrimp wrote:Keith wrote:Basically, some of you don't want any refugees in the UK, under any circumstances. UK can destabilise countries, but never take any responsibility for the people we bomb.
Is it that simple? I don't quite understand your 2nd sentence, please explain.
keith wrote:A few quick facts:
1. There is no legal requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country.
Scouseport_Shrimp wrote:Go on then. What is the legal requirement, and which body has set that requirement?
keith wrote:2. The UK has a very poor record with regards to taking asylum seekers or refugees. According to the UK government statistics, when taken as 'per head of population', the UK ranks 18th in Europe for taking asylum seekers. (Year ending Dec 2021)
Scouseport_Shrimp wrote:Facts please. What would you say to the people of Linton-on-Ouse, and Cottingham for example?
keith wrote:. 86% of asylum applications are upheld (72% on initial application and a further 14% on appeal). The majority of the refused applications were on the basis of the UK not being the correct country to 'hear' the appeal, under the 'Dublin Agreement', whereby refugees are removed to another EU country. Obviously, we're no longer party to the Dublin Agreement.
Scouseport_Shrimp wrote:I reckon a fair %, particularly those that pose a possible threat to the security of this country, aren't included in those percentages.
Scouseport_Shrimp wrote:In fact they won't be included in any figures because nobody knows how many or where they are.
keith wrote:At least there's no problem with billionaires avoiding tax and filling their pockets, eh?
Scouseport_Shrimp wrote:I don't think that includes most of the normal folk who make up much this country.
redrobo wrote:I think what a lot have objections to is the way that some asylum seekers get a lot of freebies ie Mobile Phones with automatic free call plans and in some cases free Mountain Bikes...
redrobo wrote:...whilst the general population suffer with poor housing and in some cases have to rely on Food Banks.....
Freez wrote:Some fans on here eh!
Lovely people. All I commented on was use of the word “illegal” and all of a sudden it’s a political argument.
Sorry folks, I shall not comment in future if my right thinking brethren get upset.
Up the Shrimps.
redrobo wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-63952492
Superb news BUT maybe once.....just once.....Labour could find it within itself to congratulate all concerned rather than the usual sniping of their spokesperson.
Read the very last paragraph in the entire BBC article.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 30 guests