The UK’s broken asylum system

[Ian H]

You may be correct, but, we have had 4 or 5 Home Secretaries in the period in question, three with brown faces. Have they all had the same insecurity? Did none of them think to question why processing rates were falling?

Any ideas on why they are falling?

Will Labour be able to get processing rates up again? (If we don’t know why they are falling, I struggle to how we can be confident of reversing the trend).

It's deliberate. It gives the Tories an enemy they can point to whilst accusing the opposition parties of wanting to be soft on immigrants. The sad thing is that Labour seem to be rising to the bait.

 

[BoldonLad]

It's deliberate. It gives the Tories an enemy they can point to whilst accusing the opposition parties of wanting to be soft on immigrants. The sad thing is that Labour seem to be rising to the bait.

It may well be. I am not defending it.

The question was, if they have increased staffing levels, why have decisions per staff member fallen?

It is pretty simple to guess at reasons (eg, first thoughts would be, poor training, poor quality staff or a combination of that), but, if the problem is to be solved, then the real reason(s) need to be identified.

 

[newfhouse]

It is pretty simple to guess at reasons

My guess (but based on friend-of-a-friend testimony) is that they were exceeding their targets for approvals and being expected to waste time looking for non-existent reasons to decline applications.

 

[BoldonLad]

My guess (but based on friend-of-a-friend testimony) is that they were exceeding their targets for approvals and being expected to waste time looking for non-existent reasons to decline applications.

Let us hope that is correct, because, then, once Starmer parks his backside in no 10, all they have to do it rescind the time-wasting instruction, and, all will begin to improve, on this front at least.

If the creating of delays in the application system is a deliberate act, then, it is, in my opinion, a spectacular own goal, since almost everyone of my acquaintance (including a few Tory voters) thinks that sorting the Applications process should be a priority.

But, of course, my acquaintances may not be the proverbial "man on the Clapham Omnibus".

 

[newfhouse]

Let us hope that is correct, because, then, once Starmer parks his backside in no 10, all they have to do it rescind the time-wasting instruction, and, all will begin to improve, on this front at least.

I live in hope but not expectation.

Oh, and the other reason, of course, is that Tory friends with hotel portfolios and prison ships to rent are quids in. That figure of £6 million a day ends up in someone's pocket, right?

 

[All uphill]

My guess (but based on friend-of-a-friend testimony) is that they were exceeding their targets for approvals and being expected to waste time looking for non-existent reasons to decline applications.

My hearsay is that officers are being encouraged to be meticulous, rather than pragmatic,in assessing applications and that more asylum seekers are arriving without documents or other ways for officers to verify their grounds for asylum.

Clearly officers assessing claims need to be certain before returning people to a regime that would harm them, and it is (imo) legitimate for a country to decide that it wants to be 99.9% sure before granting leave to remain, rather than, say, 80% sure.

 

[BoldonLad]

I live in hope but not expectation.

Oh, and the other reason, of course, is that Tory friends with hotel portfolios and prison ships to rent are quids in. That figure of £6 million a day ends up in someone's pocket, right?

View attachment 4398

While that is true, the arrivals, whilst here, have to be accommodated somewhere.

Even if we put on a (free) ferry, and just waved everyone through, it would still be necessary to have accommodation for the new arrivals. No matter if they are accommodated on barges, or in houses (which will have to be built, since we don't have enough), there is money to be made, or, are you suggesting that all of the House building companies are Labour sponsors?

Beginning to wander into tin-foil hat land, in my opinion.

It would be interesting to discover if the Bibby-Stockholm has been hired on competitive terms. I have little confidence in most Government Departments (no matter the shade of Government in power).

 

[newfhouse]

My hearsay is that officers are being encouraged to be meticulous, rather than pragmatic,in assessing applications and that more asylum seekers are arriving without documents or other ways for officers to verify their grounds for asylum.

Clearly officers assessing claims need to be certain before returning people to a regime that would harm them, and it is (imo) legitimate for a country to decide that it wants to be 99.9% sure before granting leave to remain, rather than, say, 80% sure.

Similar reasoning, different spin I guess.

 

[BoldonLad]

My hearsay is that officers are being encouraged to be meticulous, rather than pragmatic,in assessing applications and that more asylum seekers are arriving without documents or other ways for officers to verify their grounds for asylum.

Clearly officers assessing claims need to be certain before returning people to a regime that would harm them, and it is (imo) legitimate for a country to decide that it wants to be 99.9% sure before granting leave to remain, rather than, say, 80% sure.

It is only a few days ago, that it was being claimed on here (not by you) that this was an invention of the Daily Mail, are you saying it is true?

Heartily agree with the second bolded bit.

 

[newfhouse]

Beginning to wander into tin-foil hat land, in my opinion.

I'm not saying it's a master plan, merely that these thieving bastards are willing and able to exploit and extend any situation for their own financial benefit.

See also pandemic loans, PPE supplies, energy prices, you name it.

 

[BoldonLad]

I'm not saying it's a master plan, merely that these thieving bastards are willing and able to exploit and extend any situation for their own financial benefit.

See also pandemic loans, PPE supplies, energy prices, you name it.

I am not disputing that there have been and still are lots of "snouts in troughs", I am simply doubtful that this is a uniquely Tory phenomena. Obviously, Politicians of other persuasions have not been able to get in on the act recently, because, they have not been in power.

But, we were speaking of the financial benefits of having lots of migrants to house, I was simply pointing out that, if the are here, they need to be house, that costs money, so, the snouts in the trough may be different ones (eg barge owners rather than house builders and/or landlords), but, they are still snouts in the the trough.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I'm impressed by the amount of psychic power on here.

Lots of posters seem to know what the government really means or wants.

Either that or there are some particularly dumb conspiracy theories...

Surely not.

No psychic talent required, PR, just reading comprehension. Consider the following facts:

• The Tories have introduced the Illegal Migration Act, which makes it impossible to claim asylum here.
• Anyone arriving by irregular means will be detained and deported, without their claim being considered.
• To claim asylum in the UK you must physically be present here but the UK does not supply asylum visas to anyone abroad to allow them to legally enter the country.
• In her leadership campaign, the present home Secretary backed the proposals of fellow Tory MPs to have the UK withdraw from the ECHR, thereby removing all international obligations in respect of granting asylum.

Now, you may interpret all of that differently to me so I’ll let you explain how it doesn’t show a desire, if not a commitment, to end asylum altogether.

 

[All uphill]

It is only a few days ago, that it was being claimed on here (not by you) that this was an invention of the Daily Mail, are you saying it is true?

Heartily agree with the second bolded bit.

As you know it's easy to get into a polarised situation where anything 'they' say is untrue and everything 'we' say is an indisputable fact.

I have no hard evidence but understand that the absence of documents that securely establish identity is not unusual, either because the home country does not issue them, or because it is advantageous to have some uncertainty
.

 

[newfhouse]

But, we were speaking of the financial benefits of having lots of migrants to house, I was simply pointing out that, if the are here, they need to be house, that costs money

Not so much if their applications were processed swiftly and those granted the right to stay were able to work, support themselves, and contribute to the country.

Not so much if there was an effective and fit for purpose housing policy.

Not so much if the increases in NHS funding weren't magically disappeared in payments to private companies.

It's almost as if government failures may be linked.

 

[BoldonLad]

Not so much if their applications were processed swiftly and those granted the right to stay were able to work, support themselves, and contribute to the country.

Not so much if there was an effective and fit for purpose housing policy.

Not so much if the increases in NHS funding weren't magically disappeared in payments to private companies.

It's almost as if government failures may be linked.

Could you explain to me why it makes a difference to the Landlord if their income is provided directly from Government vs from the earning income (or indeed, investment income, or pension) of the tenant?

Housing policy. If there are not enough houses, then, more must be built, so, the House Builders get their money, regardless of who is paying to build the houses. We could, or course, encourage Local Authorities to build houses (Croydon, etc anyone?).

To me, the common thread here is that certain "Business People" are making money, and, to enhance their prospects, are cosying up to the Conservatives. I think, their loyalty is to making money. If Labour (or any other party) were in power they would cosy up to them, with similar results.