Starmer’s chronicles

[Carth]

I guess the one (or two) that are out are already on their way to join the back of the queue

[thenry]

Queue it sounds like a well oiled machine

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Carth

Oh good, that will hopefully be the Doctors and Dentists we need.

I wouldn’t have any of them attending to me!

---------- Post added at 17:35 ---------- Previous post was at 17:32 ----------

Originally Posted by papa smurf

GB news reporting 1 migrant out and 800 in today

I’m beginning to think that Diane Abbot was behind this policy. What is worrying is that Starmer thinks she had a brainwave!

---------- Post added at 17:38 ---------- Previous post was at 17:35 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

"One migrant out" is there for deterrent purposes. If you think that you might be returned back to France, you may not set off in the first place.

Whether migrants perceive this to be a deterrent in reality, time will tell.

Oh, come off it Andrew, what planet are you on? The migrants are openly boasting that they will use our legal system to avoid deportation, and if that fails, they will be back. They are laughing at our stupidity.

Why are we spending all that money putting them in four star hotels when every other country has them living in tents? No wonder they want to come here.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Oh, come off it Andrew, what planet are you on? The migrants are openly boasting that they will use our legal system to avoid deportation, and if that fails, they will be back. They are laughing at our stupidity.

Why are we spending all that money putting them in four star hotels when every other country has them living in tents? No wonder they want to come here.

Please read my post as oppose to imagining what I said. To assist you: I am explaining the government's rationale and I concluded that it remains to be proven as to whether it will work. I didn't offer my opinion either way onto it.

Please provide links to show we're housing the majority of refugees in four-star hotels whilst France, Germany, etc house them in tents.

[nomadking]

If it really is a deterrent, then the large numbers currently in France, would be claiming asylum in France.
Only small number are ever going to be in the "out" category, so not only is there a high probability they wouldn't be affected, they might end up being in the "in " category.
There is a time limit of 2 weeks between when arriving in the UK and the UK applying to France to have them returned. Get past the 2 week limit and the scheme doesn't apply.
Link

c. shall not apply if the Third-Country National was known to have arrived in the United Kingdom more than 14 calendar days prior to the date of the readmission request;

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

If it really is a deterrent, then the large numbers currently in France, would be claiming asylum in France.
Only small number are ever going to be in the "out" category, so not only is there a high probability they wouldn't be affected, they might end up being in the "in " category.
There is a time limit of 2 weeks between when arriving in the UK and the UK applying to France to have them returned. Get past the 2 week limit and the scheme doesn't apply.
Link

The government has designed it as a deterrent and they don’t expect it to have instant impact.

It's clearly not a volume shifter as it's one in, one out. What do you think it was designed to do?

As I said before, whether it works only time will tell.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Please read my post as oppose to imagining what I said. To assist you: I am explaining the government's rationale and I concluded that it remains to be proven as to whether it will work. I didn't offer my opinion either way onto it.

Please provide links to show we're housing the majority of refugees in four-star hotels whilst France, Germany, etc house them in tents.

Not tents, but not 4 star hotels either.
Link

Following the reform of June 2019, asylum seekers are generally obliged to stay in an initial reception centre for a period of up to 18 months after their application has been lodged (Aufnahmeeinrichtung).[16] An obligation to stay in these centres for a maximum of 24 months can be imposed by Federal States since July 2017 (see Freedom of movement).[17] Furthermore, asylum seekers from safe countries of origin are obliged to stay there for the whole duration of their procedures.

They are for some strange reason only too happy to trudge through France etc, at most living in tents.
France

Accommodation facilities for asylum seekers under the national reception scheme (dispositif national d’accueil, DNA) are the following:

• Accommodation centres for asylum seekers (CADA);
• Emergency accommodation for asylum seekers (HUDA, AT-SA, PRAHDA, Reception and orientation centres (CAO, Centre d’accueil et d’orientation));
• Reception and administrative situation examination centres (CAES).

In practice, there is a discrepancy between the type of places available and the reality of asylum seekers in France. Many reception centres have been organised so as to receive families or couples, thereby making it difficult for single men or women to be accommodated. A 2023 parliamentary report contrasts this with the fact that, at least in the context of regional orientation, 61.8% of asylum seekers were single men, 27.1% families and 11.1% single women, while of the 3,000 empty accommodation units available in July 2021 (corresponding to 5,000 people), 71% were places designed to accommodate families.[5] At the national level, in 2023, 41.6% of accommodated people were single persons and 58.4% were part of a family.[6]

So while some may be housed in hotels as a last resort, most are held in large reception centres, eg large former airport.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Not tents, but not 4 star hotels either.
Link
They are for some strange reason only too happy to trudge through France etc, at most living in tents.
France
So while some may be housed in hotels as a last resort, most are held in large reception centres, eg large former airport.

Thanks, similar to the UK then.

Did you find anything to back-up Old Boy's four-star hotel claim?

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

The government has designed it as a deterrent and they don’t expect it to have instant impact.

It's clearly not a volume shifter as it's one in, one out. What do you think it was designed to do?

As I said before, whether it works only time will tell.

There is a cap on numbers. There also has to an "in" candidate.
All the others that also arrived in that 2 week period are not subject to the scheme. Those are good odds, given how many arrived with only 2(?) leaving.
If they have made a "dangerous crossing", they can't then claim to be seeking safety. Automatically asylum should be refused.

---------- Post added at 23:57 ---------- Previous post was at 23:39 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Thanks, similar to the UK then.

Did you find anything to back-up Old Boy's four-star hotel claim?

UK

Asylum applicants should not stay in initial accommodation for any longer than 3-4 weeks415

That rule for some reason doesn't apply to France or Germany, and possibly others. Weird that.

There was a huge increase in the use of hotel and other full-board accommodation during 2020 and 2021, this has continued since. The Home Office issued a statement about the use of hotels and other temporary accommodation.417 The use of hotels for anything other than a very short period continues to be criticised, including in a report from the Refugee Council in July 2022.418
If the asylum applicant qualifies for Section 95 support they are moved into smaller units, mainly flats and shared houses, in the same region, but as regions are large this may not be within travelling distance of
their legal representative if they have one.

Link

"This is where I had my honeymoon. It's a four-star hotel. It's got a sauna and a jacuzzi and a pool. The people in it have come here illegally into our country."

Link

Asylum seekers recently arrived during the small hours at the wharf-side four-star Britannia International - 610 rooms,

Not quite 5,000 crammed into a former airport in Germany.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

There is a cap on numbers. There also has to an "in" candidate.
All the others that also arrived in that 2 week period are not subject to the scheme. Those are good odds, given how many arrived with only 2(?) leaving.
If they have made a "dangerous crossing", they can't then claim to be seeking safety. Automatically asylum should be refused.

---------- Post added at 23:57 ---------- Previous post was at 23:39 ----------


UK
That rule for some reason doesn't apply to France or Germany, and possibly others. Weird that.

Link

Link

Not quite 5,000 crammed into a former airport in Germany.

Thank you for stepping up to the challenge which Old Boy has yet to take up.

However, your research does not answer my question below.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Please provide links to show we're housing the majority of refugees in four-star hotels whilst France, Germany, etc house them in tents.