The Good News Only - thread...

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Unkraut

Master of the Inane Comment
Location
Germany
Interesting. When did that come into force? 2014 or Feb 2022 ? Presumably, there is an age range specification?

I would assume Feb 2022. When mass arrivals started there were virtually no men amongst them.

I met a Ukrainian woman and her two young children in Austria last summer where I was staying and she was hoping to return to the Ukraine to her husband for a few days. It was impossible for him to leave to visit her and the children.

There was a certain urgency in this as she didn't know otherwise whether she would ever see him again. Brings home the sheer awfulness of the war in a way that news and documentaries don't.
 

glasgowcyclist

Über Member
I’m not sure if this qualifies as good news as such, it’s a very dangerous thing to do but understandable.

A man who has been hosting a Ukrainian woman and her daughters has volunteered to take them back to Ukraine himself. She has missed her husband terribly and she wants to be back there to rejoin her husband and her son. As Unkraut says, men between 18-60 cannot leave.

The host bought a minibus for the 2,500 mile journey and will be bringing back ten other refugees on his return. That’s definitely good news.

Full story and short video here: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-66303046
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
I would assume Feb 2022. When mass arrivals started there were virtually no men amongst them.

I met a Ukrainian woman and her two young children in Austria last summer where I was staying and she was hoping to return to the Ukraine to her husband for a few days. It was impossible for him to leave to visit her and the children.

There was a certain urgency in this as she didn't know otherwise whether she would ever see him again. Brings home the sheer awfulness of the war in a way that news and documentaries don't.

Yes, never doubted the sheer awfulness of their situation.

Son No1 has a few Ukrainian acquaintances, (male), via his job.
 

icowden

Legendary Member
Given that parts of both Syria and Ukraine have been reduced to rubble by Russian bombs with mucho civvy casualties and homelessness etc I'm asking why the UK government won't treat Syrians in the same way as Ukrainians.
Simple. They only like those nice white refugees from next door rather than those heathen brown ones from foreign lands with their funny religions...
 
OP
OP
mudsticks

mudsticks

Squire
Yes, never doubted the sheer awfulness of their situation.

Son No1 has a few Ukrainian acquaintances, (male), via his job.
And it's just as awful in places like Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, and so on.

In those places it could be said to be even worse as it is internal strife and civil war that is making life impossibly dangerous.
So it's not a case of all the nationals of one country banding together and bravely resisting a clear invading aggressor like Russia.

In those places It's often the authorities of the country itself attacking it's own people. So there's no obvious potential end to that oppression .

And yet there is no way for people from those countries to apply to seek sanctuary, before they get here.

Why is there such a difference in how people from equally conflict ridden countries, are treated??

It's no surprise that accusations of racism arise when there are such glaring contrasts in terms of help offered.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
And it's just as awful in places like Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, and so on.

In those places it could be said to be even worse as it is internal strife and civil war that is making life impossibly dangerous.
So it's not a case of all the nationals of one country banding together and bravely resisting a clear invading aggressor like Russia.

In those places It's often the authorities of the country itself attacking it's own people. So there's no obvious potential end to that oppression .

And yet there is no way for people from those countries to apply to seek sanctuary, before they get here.

Why is there such a difference in how people from equally conflict ridden countries, are treated??

It's no surprise that accusations of racism arise when there are such glaring contrasts in terms of help offered.

Never doubted the awfulness of the situation in the places you mentioned either.
 
There was only 500 successful asylum claims last year. There are something like 50,000 arriving each year. A tiny percentage. 1%.

On current numbers around 160,000 backlog. So 0.3 %

The do gooder lawyers are only cherry picking the best chance claims, because most are economic illegal immigrants

Where are you getting you figure of 500 successful claims from?

It's different by several orders from numbers I can find for those granted leave to stay in one way or another?
 
Data on asylum in the UK here. Says updated for 2023, but most stats seem to still be 2021 ish, which will not reflect any Ukrainian applications.

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migration-to-the-uk-asylum/

Some of the questions from this thread:

'In 2021, the top five most common countries of nationality of people who applied for asylum in the UK were Iran, Iraq, Eritrea, Albania and Syria'.

'When compared against EU+ countries, in 2021 the UK ranked 6th in the absolute number of people to whom it gave protection, comprising asylum seekers and resettled refugees'.

'Looking at all people who sought asylum from 2010 to 2020, 68% were male, and 65% of all grants of asylum or other leave at initial decision were to men or boys'.

'Of all refugees resettled in the UK from January 2010 to December 2021, around 70% were Syrian citizens'.

The % of applications being refused/granted is more complicated because obviously it's subject to variables like country of origin. For example, might be high in a year when most applications were from Syria and lower in a year when most applicants were not fleeing obvious war zones.
 
Were you not saying Syrians were badly done to in the UK?

Not quite.

I asked why Syrians in Syria, or in camps in adjoining countries, were treated differently to Ukrainians. In other words why is there not a safe route here.

That, once here, they're given refugee status is consistent with the need for safe routes.

It's also an indication of the fact that a lot of Asylum Seekers are slam dunkers to refugee status and people from Syria, Iraq, Sudan etc should be fast tracked. Similar for people from Albania or other safe/safeish countries albeit they'll be flown home PDQ.

Administratively, they're low hanging fruit.
 
I think the difference is most Ukranians here haven't applied for asylum. The understanding seems to be they are here temporarily until they can return home. Syrians had to go through the asylum claim system along with everybody else, which can be protracted and complex.

The government announced a fast track system for those from war torn countries last year I think, including Syria. Also includes Iran I think, who don't take anyone back.

I presume they don't offer a safe route from the camps because the numbers would be overwhelming. There are around 200k Eritreans in refugee camps in Ethiopia alone, around 300k in Sudan. They might all well qualify. It wouldn't stop the channel boats. The channel would simply become the last recourse for those who didn't qualify for a safe passage route or for those already in France.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom