Difficult question for Suella Braverman

[Super Sonic]

Tim Laughton asked Suella Braverman how an African boy fleeing a war zone could apply for asylum in the UK. Suella said if he got to UK ha could apply.

[biggbn]

This was comedy gold. Worth watching the clip.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2022/no...

[Super Sonic]

biggbn said:

This was comedy gold. Worth watching the clip.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2022/no...

Thanks for posting :-)

[pork911]

https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum

[valiant]

pork911 said:

https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum

From your link.

‘You should apply when you arrive in the UK’

Yeah, you can spot the problem, can’t you…

Edited by valiant on Wednesday 23 November 19:07

[saaby93]

valiant said:

pork911 said:

https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum

From your link.

‘You should apply when you arrive in the UK’

Yeah, you can spot the problem, can’t you…

Isnt the idea that asylum should be claimed in the first country reached?

[hyperblue]

saaby93 said:

valiant said:

pork911 said:

https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum

From your link.

‘You should apply when you arrive in the UK’

Yeah, you can spot the problem, can’t you…

Isnt the idea that asylum should be claimed in the first country reached?

Where do you get that idea from?

[valiant]

saaby93 said:

Isnt the idea that asylum should be claimed in the first country reached?

Is that the rule?

You may want to read up on that.

[Ashfordian]

Super Sonic said:

Tim Laughton asked Suella Braverman how an African boy fleeing a war zone could apply for asylum in the UK. Suella said if he got to UK ha could apply.

At some point the answer will have to be that why is the UK the destination of choice and why should seem to be the only country responsible?

The answer is the English language and the opportunities from speaking English, is why the UK is a destination of choice. Similar can be seen with the USA from the South American continent.

What should happen in the above case is the 16yo boy is given safe refuge in a neighbouring country so he can return home when conditions allow. This safe refuge should be supported by the world, not just a few countries like the UK.

The UK needs to push back and let other nations step-up, as it has done more than enough over the decades on migration because of our colonial and Commonweath history. We are no longer in the position we once were to provide refuge to millions of people and we need to accept this.

[Randy Winkman]

Ashfordian said:

Super Sonic said:

Tim Laughton asked Suella Braverman how an African boy fleeing a war zone could apply for asylum in the UK. Suella said if he got to UK ha could apply.

At some point the answer will have to be that why is the UK the destination of choice and why should seem to be the only country responsible?

The answer is the English language and the opportunities from speaking English, is why the UK is a destination of choice. Similar can be seen with the USA from the South American continent.

What should happen in the above case is the 16yo boy is given safe refuge in a neighbouring country so he can return home when conditions allow. This safe refuge should be supported by the world, not just a few countries like the UK.

The UK needs to push back and let other nations step-up, as it has done more than enough over the decades on migration because of our colonial and Commonweath history. We are no longer in the position we once were to provide refuge to millions of people and we need to accept this.

Step up? Haven't we seen figures on PH recently that show that lots of EU countries are stepping up much more than the UK is?

[valiant]

Randy Winkman said:

Ashfordian said:

Super Sonic said:

Tim Laughton asked Suella Braverman how an African boy fleeing a war zone could apply for asylum in the UK. Suella said if he got to UK ha could apply.

At some point the answer will have to be that why is the UK the destination of choice and why should seem to be the only country responsible?

The answer is the English language and the opportunities from speaking English, is why the UK is a destination of choice. Similar can be seen with the USA from the South American continent.

What should happen in the above case is the 16yo boy is given safe refuge in a neighbouring country so he can return home when conditions allow. This safe refuge should be supported by the world, not just a few countries like the UK.

The UK needs to push back and let other nations step-up, as it has done more than enough over the decades on migration because of our colonial and Commonweath history. We are no longer in the position we once were to provide refuge to millions of people and we need to accept this.

Step up? Haven't we seen figures on PH recently that show that lots of EU countries are stepping up much more than the UK is?

Per capita, the UK is 19th out of 20 European countries in terms of asylum seekers.

Main destination for asylum seekers entering Europe is France, Germany and Spain.

If anything, we’re not doing enough.

[Ashfordian]

Randy Winkman said:

Step up? Haven't we seen figures on PH recently that show that lots of EU countries are stepping up much more than the UK is?

Lots or a few?

It is about time others in the West took the lead in this, and those in the UK cease bleating about it! We need to focus on and fix our internal problems like homelessness, poor housing, poor adult care, etc, etc

[Electro1980]

Ashfordian said:

Lots or a few?

Almost all of them. But too many people are utterly ignorant of this and make up their own narrative based on nothing at all.

[Ashfordian]

Electro1980 said:

Ashfordian said:

Lots or a few?

Almost all of them. But too many people are utterly ignorant of this and make up their own narrative based on nothing at all.

What on a per capita basis? How hard did someone have to torture the statistics to come up with the metric? The use of that shouts of desperation to me.

[Super Sonic]

Ashfordian said:

We need to focus on and fix our internal problems like homelessness, poor housing, poor adult care, etc, etc

That's austerity for you. Blaming immigrants is deflection.

[saaby93]

hyperblue said:

saaby93 said:

valiant said:

pork911 said:

https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum

From your link.

‘You should apply when you arrive in the UK’

Yeah, you can spot the problem, can’t you…

Isnt the idea that asylum should be claimed in the first country reached?

Where do you get that idea from?

When asylum was invented was the scale of the number of claimants anticipated?

[Dingu]

Ashfordian said:

What on a per capita basis? How hard did someone have to torture the statistics to come up with the metric? The use of that shouts of desperation to me.

Not very hard, it’s basic maths.

[2xChevrons]

valiant said:

saaby93 said:

Isnt the idea that asylum should be claimed in the first country reached?

Is that the rule?

You may want to read up on that.

That's not the rule or the norm. It's amazing how often this has to be pointed out.

There's also the fact that if "claim asylum in the first country reached" did become the rule, it (conveniently for those advocating it) would mean that the UK, as an archipelago off the north-west coast of Europe, would essentially be under no obligation to take any refugees or asylum seekers whatsoever, since we would be the last country by distance from any real potential source of future refugees and migrants. It would also often lead to countries least able to deal with large influxes of refugees being the ones to shoulder most of the responsibility.

Making asylum claims required to be made in the first safe country is only remotely fair and ethical if it's teamed with some sort of international 'pooling' agreement where claims are made in the first safe country but successful applicants are then distributed between signatories. And that in itself is fraught with pitfalls - are the asylum seekers simply split evenly? by population of the receiving state? By population density of the receiving state? By some 'means testing' of the states' public services and infrastructure? Do other factors count - e.g. should the UK take asylum seekers from countries with British historical influence where English is commonly spoken, France take them from Francophone Africa and so on?

In most of those cases it would probably result in the UK being obligated to take far more refugees than we currently do, simply because we are being so shirking and hostile about it in comparison to most of our peers.

[Ashfordian]

Super Sonic said:

Ashfordian said:

We need to focus on and fix our internal problems like homelessness, poor housing, poor adult care, etc, etc

That's austerity for you. Blaming immigrants is deflection.

If you are unhappy with austerity, HMRC will not decline any voluntary contributions

There is no blame on the immigrants. (Apart from those who are willing to risk their lives leaving the safe country of France. And those in the UK that support them making this crossing. They have the blood on their hands of those who die trying to attempt this crossing.)

[Vanden Saab]

Super Sonic said:

Tim Laughton asked Suella Braverman how an African boy fleeing a war zone could apply for asylum in the UK. Suella said if he got to UK ha could apply.

How would he apply in virtually every other country in the world?