• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

Immigration

'Reform' is preparing a series of legal challenges to close down asylum hotels in areas where it now has control.
'Reform' has appointed a team of lawyers to prepare judicial reviews aimed at blocking the opening of new asylum hotels in the 10 councils it took control of in the local elections.
The party will also fight to close existing hotels through legal means.

'Reform' mention about closing existing asylum hotels but to the best of my knowledge have offered NO details as to where these people will be housed.
 
Willo said:
'Reform' is preparing a series of legal challenges to close down asylum hotels in areas where it now has control.
'Reform' has appointed a team of lawyers to prepare judicial reviews aimed at blocking the opening of new asylum hotels in the 10 councils it took control of in the local elections.
The party will also fight to close existing hotels through legal means.

'Reform' mention about closing existing asylum hotels but to the best of my knowledge have offered NO details as to where these people will be housed.
Click to expand...
Who cares, let them find their own accommodation like the rest of the population.
 
Willo said:
Overheard some irate gentleman somewhat 'Long in the truth' suggesting that they should be herded to detention centres with stark accommodation and basic provisions.
His tirade included the mention of 'Guantánamo Bay'.
Click to expand...
Why provide them with anything - they would soon stop coming.
 
georgenorman said:
Who cares, let them find their own accommodation like the rest of the population.
Click to expand...
1) They aren’t part of our population. They are asylum seekers awaiting processing. They cannot work and we are bound by international conventions.

2) Help is available to those in our population who have problems in finding accommodation.

3) Having people roaming the streets, without money or the legal means to earn any, doesn’t seem like a good idea.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
1) They aren’t part of our population. They are asylum seekers awaiting processing. They cannot work and we are bound by international conventions.

2) Help is available to those in our population who have problems in finding accommodation.

3) Having people roaming the streets, without money or the legal means to earn any, doesn’t seem like a good idea.
Click to expand...
Are the French not bound by International Conventions? Why are they not supplying accommodation for the “asylum seekers”? If they haven’t applied for asylum in France, why not? and why aren’t the French making moves to removed to whence they came?
 
Spiderman said:
Are the French not bound by International Conventions? Why are they not supplying accommodation for the “asylum seekers”? If they haven’t applied for asylum in France, why not? and why aren’t the French making moves to removed to whence they came?
Click to expand...
Recent rulings in Europe have stated that all that needs to be supplied is food, shelter and safety. Germany has been returning people to Greek migrant camps.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
1) They aren’t part of our population. They are asylum seekers awaiting processing. They cannot work and we are bound by international conventions.

2) Help is available to those in our population who have problems in finding accommodation.

3) Having people roaming the streets, without money or the legal means to earn any, doesn’t seem like a good idea.
Click to expand...
Clearly they are a part of our population - they are here. We are not bound by convention - weak government chooses to be. Indigenous people with accommodation problems are disadvantaged by priority given to illegal immigrants masquerading as 'asylum seeks'. If they were not given accommodation and other 'support' they would not come.
 
Badger11 said:
No a bad idea. In 1968 a Czech friend of mine fled the Russian invasion with her family and came to London. She was granted asylum but received nothing in the way of benefits including housing. She was supported by a charity though.
Click to expand...
Is that actually true?

I thought that whilst the responsibility for arranging support was shifted from Local Authorities to the Home Office refugees have been entitled to support and benefits ever since we signed the 1951 UNHCR Convention.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Is that actually true?

I thought that whilst the responsibility for arranging support was shifted from Local Authorities to the Home Office refugees have been entitled to support and benefits ever since we signed the 1951 UNHCR Convention.
Click to expand...
Why would he make it up? I think it was probably just to “ provide a safe haven”. Those were the days when they were all genuine asylum seekers
 
georgenorman said:
Clearly they are a part of our population - they are here. We are not bound by convention - weak government chooses to be. Indigenous people with accommodation problems are disadvantaged by priority given to illegal immigrants masquerading as 'asylum seeks'. If they were not given accommodation and other 'support' they would not come.
Click to expand...
No they aren’t! They are refugees from other populations seeking to become part of ours.

We are bound by conventions. We could withdraw but would damage our international reputation and standing should we do so.

The reason why they do not immediately become part of our population is so that the necessary processing takes place to weed out those who are masquerading.
 
Spiderman said:
Why would he make it up? I think it was probably just to “ provide a safe haven”. Those were the days when they were all genuine asylum seekers
Click to expand...
I am not suggesting it was made up. More that it was misinformed or misunderstood. Leaving aside whether they were genuine in 1968 and not genuine today it was whether benefits were available then that was queried.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
No they aren’t! They are refugees from other populations seeking to become part of ours.

We are bound by conventions. We could withdraw but would damage our international reputation and standing should we do so.

The reason why they do not immediately become part of our population is so that the necessary processing takes place to weed out those who are masquerading.
Click to expand...
Rubbish. These are invaders!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top