Mecky Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 It's an 'old chestnut' because it's a perfectly valid argument, I was asking about the British children of people who were granted asylum... If they're granted asylum, it's a temporary category and therefore their children will not be British unless their spouse is either British or a Settled foreign national. If the latter is the case, why was the family living apart? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 You mean if things were different. As they are now, the children of someone granted asylum will be British, which IMO makes perfect sense as they'll be born in Britiain and go to British schools, they certainly won't be given a passport or citizenship from the country there parents fled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 What is hard to understand ? If people have been granted citizenship then they are not asylum seekers and exempt from what the topic is about. Anyone not classed as asylum seeker are obliged to get a job and pay into the system like the rest of us are they not ? Unless you are like the others that assume that raising a topic about immigration/asylum automatically puts you in a certain bracket of person ? In which case your one of the reasons why we can't have a practical debate about it in this country, nothing will get solved and the divide will grow wider. It's you that doesn't appear to understand the system. Asylum seeker is a status that comes before being granted asylum. Asylum seeker and accepted person in asylum are not the same thing. I thought we were trying to have a practical debate, it's difficult though when the people you debate with don't really know anything about the topic but have their opinion firmly entrenched and supported by what they've imagined to be the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Asylum that is being abused is always out of control. Looks like you're saying "I don't know". The people that come here and don't get it just sneak in anyhow or don't leave, we can't keep track and end up letting everyone stay just because we have not kept a grip and can't regain the initiative. So why would it be so difficult to say that all those that can go back should ? If the grounds of your request are no longer valid then we should be obliged to re look at the granting of the asylum status, its not difficult and its a start. It's massive change to a world wide treaty actually. Maybe that's not difficult in your world... It's also wrong for the various reasons already set out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Should they start families then that would be up to the authorities to decide whether or not they had broken the terms and conditions of their asylum. I have not started any personal attacks on you so please don't start on me or come up with stupid arguments about the deporting the whole population. Is it stupid because it makes it clear that deporting people after granting them asylum is wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Having a better infrastructure to support people should most defiantly not be what its about but it all to often boils down to that. Once the threat to life or what ever constitutes warranting asylum is removed then they cannot in effect be in need of asylum, its pretty basic for us all to grasp but Im sure we won't. Granting asylum is not a temporary thing. How long can you expect someone to live in a temporary position? Asylum could last for the rest of their life, but always with the fear that anything they start now they might have to abandon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Yes but not many of them (if any) are as easy to get into and stay in as the UK. The 7 is incorrect as there are over 190 countries in the world. You're intimately familiar with a) the asylum application process in the UK? and b) the asylum application process in 146 other countries. You must be some sort of asylum expert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I know every so often they admit defeat and then let everyone stay, just to get the figures off the chart so they can start again and calm everyone down because it looks out of control. That's not true either. There's been one amnesty, and it wasn't as simple as you're making out. You really should research the topic if you want to discuss it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I know which message I would sooner give out to any would be migrant coming here to float our systems of compassion for economic reasons. Are you still confused about why asylum seekers come here (or the many other places they go)? It's not for economic reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinnwok Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 But we are not talking about migrants coming here for economic reasons. We are talking specifically about people claiming asylum. The two are entirely different, and different rules apply. You need to decide first, which group of people you want to talk about. Only then can we have a sensible debate. Asylum is a decent Christian policy, but its lost all credibility in this nation. This nation has done enough. I think the country is full. Full to immigrants. Full to economic migrants. Full to asylum seekers. Full to any other form of person wishing to settle here. Before we allow anymore in, from anywhere, we need to get rid of all illegal immigrants. When this is done we should only allow individuals in as individuals leave. Tourists are fine and so are students as long as they do not work here, have insurance and leave at the end of the holiday or course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.