Couple of things here.
I guess English is not your first language which may account for misunderstanding but nothing you've quoted, on my reading, implies you can apply outside the UK.
I will also use this to respond to
@glasgowcyclist as he said almost the same, yes i did misinterpreted that, so the real situation is that the UK has singed the convention, but doesn't really wants to commit to it.(anymore?) Which creates the strange situation that the government says it has to be done on one way but makes it on the other hand impossible to do so.
If anyone here isn't doing it already I'd suggest volunteering with an organisation that works with people seeking asylum. You might be surprised.
The variety of situations and backgrounds is astonishing, but once you've seen them as human beings (and very often courteous and polite humans with obvious skills) it's difficult to apply the lazy stereotypes, and much easier to start to think that they could be assets in an aging population with low productivity.
Go on, test the opinions you currently have!
My sister did that, had to have protection/security around her, daily stabbings etc. etc. but i guess experiences do vary but going with hers doesn't really reach the positive undertone your comment seems to be aiming to reach.
One of the problems with applying for asylum when you arrive is that if you arrive having come through 'safe' countries then you should have applied for asylum in the first safe country that you went through
The problem is that ''we'' (=most european countries) have signed a convention that says amongst other things that people are free to choose the countries they want to claim asylum in, but most countries who signed this convention don't really want to commit to it. Because years of government non or misspending, ignorance, and so further and so forth have all haven been dumped onto normal people, along with all the issues that come with letting a lot of people in an space when there really isn't space. And when the obvious opposition happens, their portrayed as racist. i'm writing it down here again in case anyone wonders why the likes of Farage and similar in other countries are so successful. While they don't provide a solution at least they don't ignore the problem.
hence, as we are an island anchored off the Western edge of the continent, then the only way you can do it is to arrive by bota via international waterway and not stopping en-route - or to fly
both of which require additional checks and money
Also - if I understand it correctly, there used to be ways of applying in foreign embassies and consulates
The government withdrew this route in most countries so now you HAVE to come to the UK - but not through a safe country
i.e. the EU should take them all because to get to us you have to go through an EU country first
apparently that is no (longer?) possible so the uk has succesfully shifted the problem, they should just be honest about it about the true reason why people cross illigally.
Oh - and - the EU countries take a lot more than us
But if you allow people to cherry pick, which is what the convention does, you can't really say ''they are taking in more then us'' as the other country can also be simply more popular amongst asylum seekers. In addition to that reported numbers are not really an limit as they can't really limit that anymore once they are in the EU. And even if they get ''send out'' they simply take the train to a other EU country and take the train back again.
I agree that the chap with lots of braid on his uniform told the HoC Committee that many/most destroyed their documents, or such documents as they had. Many other reports say the same but they're all from sources like HMG, Migration Watch and other anti migration outfits and reported in the Mail or Telegraph.
I'm struggling to find real numbers and why/how type facts from a reliable source - has the Oxford Migration Observatory for example written on the subject?
It's an very known practice and due to the very nature of it it is hard to put it in numbers, the best guess is probably number on the amount of asylum seekers that arrive without documents but that doesn't say whether they tossed it overboard.
From what I can find it's not about concealing their identity and origins for the purposes of their claim to Asylum. Rather, it's about what can happen if their claim for Asylum is refused.
If there's no evidence that passed through x or y it's even more difficult than it would be otherwise to get y or x to accept them as returns.
It's not amazon you known? it are people not ''returns'' but it's a bit more complicated than that. just as collecting evidence is
