sick Boy to be deported

[Osem]

Lines have to be drawn but wherever they are there are worthy causes just the wrong side. The Third World is full of equally deserving people to whom we don't offer similar help isn't it? How many of us lose sleep over that fact or indeed even raise that issue in forums such as this?

Originally Posted by Osem

Lines have to be drawn but wherever they are there are worthy causes just the wrong side. The Third World is full of equally deserving people to whom we don't offer similar help isn't it? How many of us lose sleep over that fact or indeed even raise that issue in forums such as this?

True, but by the same token should we ignore the ones that do come here & ask for our help?

I find it ridiculous that it takes so long to come to a decision on their eventual fate, allowing someone to stay here for 4 years before deciding 'nah send them back', isn't right in my book - ok each case needs to be looked at fairly, but we should be able to assess them in a fair way within a much shorter timescale??

[WHISTLED]

In my opinion we need to 'draw the line' somewhere & assessing the overall cost/benefit ratio of the situation should include a number of factors, of which I'd assume the potential for making a meaningful contribution to the community would be one

Having just done a few quick google searches asylum seekers are encouraged to to volunteer work while waiting for a decision on their application and many of the 85% with some level of language competence do.

As would I if I thought it would aid my application! It has I suspect very little bearing on their future contribution.

Personally as a tax payer im happy for anyone to come if they can contribute. By contribute I mean fill a skilled job that cannot be filled by a UK citizen (or in a similar position where they can bring new skills or technologies)

By filling one of these positions I can be confident they will not become a financial burden to the UK and will integrate successfully.

We already too have too many pensioners and children below the poverty line, EVERY pound is spent on illegal immigrants and asylum seekers is a pound we take from them.

Many will disagree and I will reconsider my position when pensioners have decent state pension.

[Osem]

Some would argue that the ones who come here deserve less help - at least they had the money to get here in the first place. What about all those who don't have that luxury?

Yes it is a difficult issue and unless we all want to pay much more in taxes it's one which isn't going away.

It's a big world with many problems in many areas but we are a samll country and simply cannot right the world. Lines do have to be drawn how they are drawn i would like to believe is by fairness but doubt this is the case. When you have to deport people i suppose you are always going to find cases where you feel you shoud make an exception but once thats starts where does it stop. I wish the family well and hope the child gets some sort of effective treatment to cope but if it was decided to deport them i am sure the reasons were defendable as they have to be these days.

Originally Posted by WHISTLED

Having just done a few quick google searches asylum seekers are encouraged to to volunteer work while waiting for a decision on their application and many of the 85% with some level of language competence do.

As would I if I thought it would aid my application! It has I suspect very little bearing on their future contribution.

Personally as a tax payer im happy for anyone to come if they can contribute. By contribute I mean fill a skilled job that cannot be filled by a UK citizen (or in a similar position where they can bring new skills or technologies)

By filling one of these positions I can be confident they will not become a financial burden to the UK and will integrate successfully.

We aleady too many pensioners and children below the poverty line, EVERY pound is spent on illegal immigrants and asylum seekers is a pound we take from them.

Many will disagree and I will reconsider my position when pensioners have decent state pension.

not to disagree, per se, but we now live in a global community & have to, imo, consider that in our dealings with the rest of the world.

We should not, in my opinion, discriminate against useful immigration because we have failed to provide the infrastructure ,education & training, ourselves, which would preclude such importation of skills - why was the QM2 built in France - because we couldn't do it!!!!

imo asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are two very separate subjects

[alferret]

Originally Posted by homealone

SNIP!

imo asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are two very separate subjects

Not always, greater than 50% of the illegal immigrants that come here, get caught and then claim asylum.

If I go abroad I buy insurance, this allows me to be medicaly treated and when fit to travel given passage back to my homeland regardless of the lenght of my stay.


I'm in agreement with Derek S & WHISTLED on this.


Edit****
Given that this lad has sickle cell, dependant on the variant he has a life expectancy of another 28 to 46 years, and although this condition can lead to a shortening of life the majority of sufferers have mild to moderate symptoms and live long and fruitful lives.

We are not a country that is without compasion. But we are a country bursting at the seams with only a limited amount of funds.
Would we all agree to an increase in stamp and tax so that we can look after people who do need attention, who come to the UK in search of a softer life?
I for one cant withstand another increase in tax's along with the continuing increase in the cost of living just to continue to live just above the poverty line.
I'm not a heartless ******* but......

Originally Posted by alferret

Not always, greater than 50% of the illegal immigrants that come here, get caught and then claim asylum.

then there should be a time limit on how soon asylum is claimed after entry - no proof of entry, no asylum..

Originally Posted by alferret

I'm in agreement with Derek S & WHISTLED on this.

I'm not, my brother & I were born abroad while my father was a serving member of the Royal Air Force, my brother had problems 'proving' he is a british citizen when he allowed his passport to lapse, each case is different & should be assessed on its merits - unfortunately that doesn't fit with the 'targets' set - and , of course proving we comply with targets means we are doing a great job

Originally Posted by homealone

then there should be a time limit on how soon asylum is claimed after entry - no proof of entry, no asylum..



I'm not, my brother & I were born abroad while my father was a serving member of the Royal Air Force, my brother had problems 'proving' he is a british citizen when he allowed his passport to lapse, each case is different & should be assessed on its merits - unfortunately that doesn't fit with the 'targets' set - and , of course proving we comply with targets means we are doing a great job

You should have seen the hoops that I had to jump through when I couldn't find my passport I had been issued when I was 15 and which my mother had been 'looking after' before she died, all because because I was born in a former British colony.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by alferret

... But we are a country bursting at the seams with only a limited amount of funds........

Britain is one of the richest countries in the world, with one of the slowest growing populations. As Homealone said, we have a moral obligation to help our neighbours on this planet, especially those from poor, overcrowded countries.

After all, we have caused (and continue to cause) many of the problems that people in these countries face.

If you want to put it into perspective, calculate the cost of keeping this family in Britain as a proportion of the cost of keeping Northern Rock afloat. Or the cost of Gordon Brown's trip to China (where he had dinner with Richard Branson ).

[Osem]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Britain is one of the richest countries in the world, with one of the slowest growing populations. As Homealone said, we have a moral obligation to help our neighbours on this planet, especially those from poor, overcrowded countries.

After all, we have caused (and continue to cause) many of the problems that people in these countries face.

If you want to put it into perspective, calculate the cost of keeping this family in Britain as a proportion of the cost of keeping Northern Rock afloat. Or the cost of Gordon Brown's trip to China (where he had dinner with Richard Branson ).

That may/may not be true but if our population continues to grow unchecked as it has done in the last few years we will reach the point sooner or later at which we can help nobody. As I've said before what's required is a firm efficacious immigration system and a policy of overseas aid on behalf of the richer nations which helps the truly needy and doesn't just line the pockets of people like Hussein and Mugabe. Unless we tackle to problems of poverty etc. at source there will be a never ending stream of deserving people trying to come here and all those they leave behind will be no better off.

[WHISTLED]

not to disagree, per se, but we now live in a global community & have to, imo, consider that in our dealings with the rest of the world

We do live in a global community and we are one of the largest contributers in financial aid - Only behind Germany if i remember correctly.

then there should be a time limit on how soon asylum is claimed after entry - no proof of entry, no asylum..

I agree but its not so simple is it, people cant bring proof that they were in danger, typically they dont even bring any passport/documents so we first need to try and prove they are who they say they are. If I diont have a passport you cant send me home quickly.

As an island we should logically see few asylum seekers, we have a natural border which makes it difficult to get here illegally. If I was threatened in my home I would run for help next door... I wouldnt run to the Isle of Man. (A simplified view I know but factual and logical)

I can understand that this is partially down to us speaking english but I cant accpet this is the appeal of the UK, despite what most of the pro asylum groops suggest, these people do know that we have a better benifits system than our european neighbours.

Spain is tackling things differently by providing Libya helecopters, vehcles and funding so they can control their borders, believed to be a main transit route for Africans into Europe. Stopping at source and preventing many of the deaths en route.

If you want to put it into perspective, calculate the cost of keeping this family in Britain as a proportion of the cost of keeping Northern Rock afloat

That makes no sense to me, first of all the cost on the economy of allowing the NR to fold would have been much more than the bail out, especially if they can secure the sale with bonds as seems likely now.

Additionally you comparing a bank collapse to the cost of a family on benifits? That suggests a 'just one more' approach, hardly policy making is it.

[alferret]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Britain is one of the richest countries in the world, with one of the slowest growing populations. As Homealone said, we have a moral obligation to help our neighbours on this planet, especially those from poor, overcrowded countries.

According to the Optimum Population Trust Projected population by 2051 wil be 77.23 million, an increase of 16 million people from 2007\08. We have grown by more than 20% in population since 1950.
How long will it be before this country becomes one of your poor overcrowded countries? We need to look after the space we have because the UK can only sustain a certain population.

The UK has a landmass of 241,590 sq km which equates to 256 people per sq km. GDP £1.1 trillion

Lets take Nigeria (as in the OP first post) covers an area of 911,000 sq km with a population of 135,000,000 this is 148 people per sq km, not so crowded now compared to the UK. GDP £100 billion

Yes the countries we talk about may be poor, but not so crowded as our own.

In comaprison the US has an area of 9,161,923 sq km and a population of 301,139,947 which is 32 people per sq km and the worlds largest economy. GDP £6.5 trillion

Where as India has a population of 1,129,866,154 and 2,973,190 sq km which is a very crowded 380 per sq km. GDP £2.1 trillion

I dont dispute that some countries are poor in relation to the UK.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

After all, we have caused (and continue to cause) many of the problems that people in these countries face.

I dont think we have caused "all" the problems faced by these countries, and we certainly dont continue to do so, because if we did we as a nation would be ostracized by the rest of the world.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

If you want to put it into perspective, calculate the cost of keeping this family in Britain as a proportion of the cost of keeping Northern Rock afloat. Or the cost of Gordon Brown's trip to China (where he had dinner with Richard Branson ).

This has nothing to do with Northern Rock or Brown's dinner date with Branson in China. I dont think thats it's me that needs to keep things in "perspective".

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by alferret

According to the Optimum Population Trust Projected population by 2051 wil be 77.23 million, an increase of 16 million people from 2007\08. We have grown by more than 20% in population since 1950...

Nigeria has a population of 144 million, projected to be 281 million by 2050. Britains growth is trivial by comparison.

...How long will it be before this country becomes one of your poor overcrowded countries? We need to look after the space we have because the UK can only sustain a certain population. ..

I think we can last an awful lot longer than most of our neighbours!

...The UK has a landmass of 241,590 sq km which equates to 256 people per sq km. GDP £1.1 trillion

Lets take Nigeria (as in the OP first post) covers an area of 911,000 sq km with a population of 135,000,000 this is 148 people per sq km, not so crowded now compared to the UK. GDP £100 billion

Yes the countries we talk about may be poor, but not so crowded as our own....

Comparisons based on land area are misleading, as they don't take into account land that is uninhabitable.

...I dont dispute that some countries are poor in relation to the UK...

Thank goodness for that - I was beginning to wonder.

...I dont think we have caused "all" the problems faced by these countries, and we certainly dont continue to do so, because if we did we as a nation would be ostracized by the rest of the world....

Who said "all"? I said "many". For example: sugar, coffee, tobacco, oil, diamonds, copper, platinum, rhodium, etc. etc. Not to mention land mines, many construction projects, and the World Bank.

The reason we are not "ostracized by the rest of the world" is because our pals have played (and continue to play) the same game.

...This has nothing to do with Northern Rock or Brown's dinner date with Branson in China. I dont think thats it's me that needs to keep things in "perspective".

The OP issue was spending public money.

We live in a wealthy democratic country. We should behave like responsible adults, not spoiled children.

[alferret]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Nigeria has a population of 144 million, projected to be 281 million by 2050. Britains growth is trivial by comparison.

Britains growth may seem trivial to you, but to me it is an important issue.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

I think we can last an awful lot longer than most of our neighbours!

I dont think so, we'll agree to differ on that.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Comparisons based on land area are misleading, as they don't take into account land that is uninhabitable.

This is true, but it give an average, and like most things they are done on averages.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Thank goodness for that - I was beginning to wonder.

Wonder no more, I dont view the world through rose tinted glasses.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Who said "all"? I said "many". For example: sugar, coffee, tobacco, oil, diamonds, copper, platinum, rhodium, etc. etc. Not to mention land mines, many construction projects, and the World Bank.

My mis-quote, apologies, should have said many.
We all play the same game and sing off of the same hymn sheet, but we give back in aid many millions of pounds a year to these countries too. As mentioned the UK is second only to Germany on humanitairian and financial aid, whether or not its to ease our conscience.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

The OP issue was spending public money.

We live in a wealthy democratic country. We should behave like responsible adults, not spoiled children.

I dont think we behave like spoiled children, we are a compasionate nation but a line does have to be drawn somewhere, now or in the future.
And I dont think that we are a wealthy democratic country. We do as Brussels says (but thats for another topic) and wealth, well try saying that to the 17% of this population that lives below the "poverty line" charity begins at home.