UK Attitudes: asylum seekers...

Hello everyone,

For the moment I will keep the question short and simple, though I am certain that I could go into much more detail about what I am asking.

It has been my observation that the British Attitude regarding Asylum seekers is a very negative one. Without specifying names I have a British friend who is of Asian (Desi-Indian) ancestry and what continously surprises me is how resentful he is of these individuals. Though his parents immigrated to England several years ago.

Without doing much core research yet, is my understanding that shelter and many social immenities is given to those granted asylum? Is this the reason for resentment? What have been your experiences and observations?

As I am currently studying International Human rights law at my University this would be a valuable discussion.

thank you,

Samantha***

Ok... this is my own personally opinion.  And it is based merely on hearsay, as I refuse to watch the news.

From what I understand, asylum seekers are given a home and an allowance, but aren't allowed to work, right?

This is what I'm having problems with.  I TOTALLY understand letting them in, giving them adequate housing  (but I'm talking, apartments/flats here) and getting them on their feet.  I can't imagine coming from a country from which I would NEED asylum, I'm sure it's terrible. And I think as human beings, we need to look out for each other.  The part I have problems with is the allowance and no work.  Why not make these people work for their living?  Even if it's disproportionate to their income.  

For instance... Family of 8 come over -- but them in a 4 bedroom flat  (one room for parents, and the six kids can double up on bunk beds in three rooms)  Have the dad do SOMETHING... clean up trash on the motorway... do translation work... or even help out a soup kitchen or shelter.  But then pay him £200 a week.  Sure... the pay is HIGH for that kind of job, but at least he's having to EARN it.

I guess I just get a bit frustrated when my husband and I can't even afford to get a mortgage for a house because of our salaries vs. house prices -- yet other people are handed one on a plate.  I'm here... I'm working, I'm paying my taxes, and I just want to be a productive member of society.

So (assuming that what I've heard is right) I guess I have a bit of an attitude about this situation.  

Now if I'm wrong -- if they're not given a home and an allowance and are allowed to work, then I retract what I've said.

Ok... this is my own personally opinion.  And it is based merely on hearsay, as I refuse to watch the news.

From what I understand, asylum seekers are given a home and an allowance, but aren't allowed to work, right?

This is what I'm having problems with.  I TOTALLY understand letting them in, giving them adequate housing  (but I'm talking, apartments/flats here) and getting them on their feet.  I can't imagine coming from a country from which I would NEED asylum, I'm sure it's terrible. And I think as human beings, we need to look out for each other.  The part I have problems with is the allowance and no work.  Why not make these people work for their living?  Even if it's disproportionate to their income.  

For instance... Family of 8 come over -- but them in a 4 bedroom flat  (one room for parents, and the six kids can double up on bunk beds in three rooms)  Have the dad do SOMETHING... clean up trash on the motorway... do translation work... or even help out a soup kitchen or shelter.  But then pay him £200 a week.  Sure... the pay is HIGH for that kind of job, but at least he's having to EARN it.

I guess I just get a bit frustrated when my husband and I can't even afford to get a mortgage for a house because of our salaries vs. house prices -- yet other people are handed one on a plate.  I'm here... I'm working, I'm paying my taxes, and I just want to be a productive member of society.

So (assuming that what I've heard is right) I guess I have a bit of an attitude about this situation.  

Now if I'm wrong -- if they're not given a home and an allowance and are allowed to work, then I retract what I've said.

Hi,

Unfortunally for now my opinion is also based on hersay too. Whatever the case, like you, I definately believe that the UK should allow refugee/foreign national status to, a select number of individuals and families seeking asylum. Especially, given the English involvement in the "war" with Iraq.

I definately do not understand why a job is not provided for at least one member of an asylum household either! It's as if the British government wants these newcommers to become dependents (Perhaps, for use as social problem scapegoats...a lot of my English counterparts like to blame petty crime on asylum youth.) In addition to a job, young children and adults could also be incorporated into their local school system. After all education (Not assimilation--as an indigenous tribal person that is a very problematic word for me!) would make these individuals productive members of English society.

Obviously I am being very vague here...there is/would be a lot of red tape with this.

I can also understand the personal issues you mentioned too. I am from a very working class family that just lost its house because of economic issues (The economy here is really bad right now!) luckily for their social conscience my parents have not made connections to their situation in regards to immigration.

peace,

Samantha***

I think the main problem is that most of these 'asylum seekers' are in fact economic migrants. If you watch the news you'll see thousands of young men trying every night to cross over from France. Now, if they were genuine refuges, fleeing from persecution, would they really leave their wives and children behind? And why not seek refuge in France? Or any of the other numerous countries whose borders they have crossed in their goal to get the the UK? In fact, I think most are just young men who fancy a better future in Britain.
While I don't disagree with helping genuine asylum seekers, the fact is that we cannot afford for every person from a poorer country to just up sticks and move here. For starters, the NHS just couldn't cope. How many would come here if we had open borders? We have many poor and disabled people here in the UK that we have to pay benefits to. We can't possibly help everyone in the world. At the moment I feel that we are taking much more than our fair share. Those that come from countries deemed safe or who have deliberately destroyed all their paperwork so they cannot prove they come from a dangerous regime should be deported immediately.

Hi Squirrel,

Your perception sounds very similar to the one held by a lot of my English friends. I am off to go analyse the British Immigration Authority page. I'll get  back to you about what I think...

peace,

Samantha***

Hello everyone,

For the moment I will keep the question short and simple, though I am certain that I could go into much more detail about what I am asking.

It has been my observation that the British Attitude regarding Asylum seekers is a very negative one. Without specifying names I have a British friend who is of Asian (Desi-Indian) ancestry and what continously surprises me is how resentful he is of these individuals. Though his parents immigrated to England several years ago.

Without doing much core research yet, is my understanding that shelter and many social immenities is given to those granted asylum? Is this the reason for resentment? What have been your experiences and observations?

As I am currently studying International Human rights law at my University this would be a valuable discussion.

thank you,

Samantha***

I think a lot of the resentment comes from the fact that a lot of these immigrants actually make a good life for themselves doing things that the British won't condescend to do...work late on weeknights, work all through the weekends, do the donkey work that they think they're too good for...and they continue to dress in native dress, refuse to stop speaking their native languages at home, and enrich the culinary experience in the UK with their native dishes.  In short, they're not British.  Traditionally, the British have been rather xenophobic, so their attitude towards dark-skinned foreigners is unsurprising.  It's distressing, but unsurprising.

Some of my colleagues have said some pretty sick things to me.  One of the receptionists said that she hated immigrants.  When I reminded her that I was an immigrant, she said, "Oh, not you, dear.  You're not an immigrant...you're white."

In a word: speechless.

This is what I got off the Immigration authority website. I think you will be rather humoured by it.....


The United Kingdom has a proud tradition of providing a safe haven for genuine refugees. The UK Government is determined to ensure that genuine refugees are properly protected and that there is no incentive for people who wish to migrate for other reasons to misuse asylum procedures.

The UK is a signatory to 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. All applications for asylum made at UK ports of entry or within the country are considered in accordance with the obligations under the Convention. The Convention states that a refugee is a person who 'owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country'.

The Government issued its White Paper Secure Borders, Safe Haven: Integration with Diversity in Modern Britain on 7 February 2002. It sets out the key challenges in nationality, immigration and asylum policy and the measures being taken to produce a coherent strategy. The White Paper explains that reform of the asylum system is based on the principle that we should have a humanitarian process, which honours our obligations to those fleeing persecution while deterring those who have no right to asylum from travelling here.

The asylum reforms, which are set out in the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill currently proceeding through Parliament, include introducing a managed process of induction, accommodation, reporting and removal centres to support and track asylum seekers through the system, leading to fast-track removal or integration. Application Registration Cards (ARCs) are now being issued to asylum seekers to provide more secure evidence of identity and better protection against forgery.

The appeals system will be streamlined to minimise delay and cut down barriers to removal. A strategy will be developed to increase the number of removals of people who have no claim to stay in this country.

The proposals also include the development of a resettlement programme with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to establish gateways for those most in need of protection to come to the United Kingdom legally.

There's a WORLD of difference between "asylum seekers" and actual immigrants.

And therein lies the rub peedal, thats one of the problems I have with the press and the media in general. They stir the masses and conveniently fail to differentiate between the two, thus leading everyone (or the easily led anyway) to cast aspersions towards those from different cultures. Instead of encouraging tolerance they encourage seperatism.

Some of my colleagues have said some pretty sick things to me.  One of the receptionists said that she hated immigrants.  When I reminded her that I was an immigrant, she said, "Oh, not you, dear.  You're not an immigrant...you're white."

Stacey-

I think that is a very important quote, to get down to the "guts" of the issue, Racism and colourism is probably the vertebrae behind dislike of asylum seekers. In fact we can be certain it is (economic displacement a ready made PC excuse.)

To get personal, I cannot wait until I immigrate to the UK. However, one major cultural issue I am sure to encounter (beyond just being classified as "American.") is the negotiation I will have to make between being Native American and being just another individual on the street. This is nothing new.

It has been my experience in the United States that because I am educated, "talk white" and was specifically city-raised and Biracial the general public tends to classify me as white; though my family has intense ties to the reservation, indigenous ideologies and ways of life--not to mention indigenous is how I identify.

What I am getting at is that somehow, in their eyes, my traits somehow make me "good" or "one of us." Rather like what your coworker said right? They think they are complimenting you, but in reality it's one hell of an insult!

Though I obviously will not be moving to the UK as an asylum seeker, I feel a commonality with such individuals given my strong ties to the South Asian communities and more importantly individual struggle to manage two very strong cultures without becoming an isolationalist or falling for the false promises of uncompromising assimilation.

Easier said than done.  I only hope I can find a way to maintain a tribal identity in a society where the tribe isn't just marginal---it doesn't exist! :-/

Samantha***

And therein lies the rub peedal, thats one of the problems I have with the press and the media in general. They stir the masses and conveniently fail to differentiate between the two, thus leading everyone (or the easily led anyway) to cast aspersions towards those from different cultures. Instead of encouraging tolerance they encourage seperatism.
/

Is that to say you identify with an asylum seeker in terms of being an immigrant too?

Samantha***

Is that to say you identify with an asylum seeker in terms of being an immigrant too?

Samantha***

An immigrant, to my knowledge anyway is one who leaves one country for another in order to set up permanent residence. An asylum seeker is someone who seeks refuge and safety from oppression to a neutral country..........No ......I don't equate the two at all. The press however would have us  believe that ALL immigrants are asylum seekers, therefore some of the less tolerant elements of society fail to differentiate. Hope that answers your question.

It doesn't help when you read of asylum seekers that smash up their accomodation because it is not 'good enough.' Excuse me? You are a guest in a country that has agreed to take you in, and you abuse that hospitality?

It doesn't help when you read of asylum seekers that smash up their accomodation because it is not 'good enough.' Excuse me? You are a guest in a country that has agreed to take you in, and you abuse that hospitality?

That's probably an isolated case.... :'(

Samantha***

This article I obtained from the 22 of October edition of BBC News online, I think it adds a more humanitarian perspective to the issue:

Teaching the asylum seekers
By Justin Parkinson
BBC News Online education staff

Being a young asylum seeker is not easy.
Often thousands of miles from their homelands, children have to grow up in a confusing and scary situation.

A new language to learn, poverty, hostility from local people and the trauma of being separated from friends and family - all this makes learning tougher than for pupils born in the UK.

Many also have to deal with a parent suffering the after-effects of imprisonment and torture.

Schools, according to the education watchdog Ofsted, are doing their best to welcome asylum seeker children.

Buddies

But it has called for a more concerted effort to ensure they get the same treatment all over the UK.

The Salusbury World project is trying to achieve that end in Brent, north-west London, a borough with around 3,000 asylum-seeking children.

Primary school pupils receive extra English tuition and join an after-school club.

They are paired with British children - "buddies" - to make them feel more welcome.

Meanwhile, two full-time assistants also help parents cope with adjusting to a new way of life.

Unsanitary conditions

Project manager Sarah Reynolds said: "A lot of the pupils have made many, many moves within this country since they've arrived.

"They may get shifted from one temporary home or hotel to another, which makes them feel uprooted.

"In the hotels, they may be four or five to a room, sharing their washing and cooking facilities with other families.

"All this makes it difficult for children to do their homework. There's so little privacy, with unsanitary conditions and crime to deal with.

"It's also difficult for them to have friends round or go out and play.


"Our after-school club mixes all ethnic groups, who learn they can get on, whatever their origins. This helps their self-esteem no end.

"With all these problems, we take a holistic approach. We talk to the families too. Whatever benefits the child benefits them, and vice-versa."

The Ofsted report notes that schools in large cities, with their diverse ethnic groups, are better at welcoming asylum seekers than those in small towns and villages.

Salusbury Primary, where the Salusbury World project is based, looks after pupils who speak 45 different languages.

Ms Reynolds thinks this gives the flexibility to deal with up to 100 asylum-seeking pupils at a time, from as far apart as Somalia, Iraq, Albania and Afghanistan.

She said: "The situations we deal with vary enormously. This is a tolerant area and there's no racist name-calling among the pupils, but you still need help integrating people.

"Some of the parents have spent time in jail abroad for their political activities or beliefs. They may be traumatised, which trickles down to the children.

Family breakdowns

"The simple fact of being uprooted and leaving a whole life behind, with the family and support network, is hard for children.

"A lot have had to go through a terrible experiences to get here. The parents' relationship may have broken down as a result, adding to their sense of unrest.

"So moving around the UK all the time is not really good for anybody. It would be much better for the children and their families if they could be given adequate housing and they could stay in one place."

Last year, 110,700 people applied for asylum in the UK, a rise of 20% on 2001. Most applicants were under the age of 30.

Apart from children's psychological wellbeing, they face adapting to the academic demands of English schools, despite wildly varying experiences.

'Unique'

Ms Reynolds said: "Some have had no education whatsoever, such as girls from Afghanistan, who were excluded from schools under the Taleban.

"Others have had a patchy education, in places like Pakistan. Even those who have been well taught have usually had lessons in a language other than English.

"The situation is far from simple or unusual, but our project is unique. We want people elsewhere to try similar things."

With that end in mind, the Salusbury Project, together with the charity Save the Children, is publishing a schools' guide to dealing with asylum seekers.

Called Home from Home, it will offer advice on welcoming children and setting up clubs and activities for them.

Ms Reynolds said: "Quite often people haven't got the whole picture or an accurate picture.

"This is a result of ignorance, not prejudice. Once a school knows what to do, the children's self-confidence and self-esteem grow before your eyes.

"They develop friendships whatever their origins and have a good time. Surely that's the least they deserve."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/education/3204303.stm

Published: 2003/10/22 14:28:58 GMT

© BBC MMIII