LeMaquis Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 And what happens when Asylum is granted, They get benefits when they get leave to remain in the UK but they're no longer asylum seekers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 He can't, now he's requested asylum. Asylum seekers are not allowed to claim benefits. Are you sure? We're all in this together As asylum seekers have their benefits cut, Rowenna Davis stays with a Bangladeshi mother whose weekly struggle to make ends meet is replicated throughout the country. Shakira Begum does not look like a conventional warrior. She stands at five foot nothing, sports a ponytail and wears Velcro trainers. But from a small terrace house on the outskirts of Greater Manchester, Begum, an asylum seeker from Bangladesh, fights each day to support herself and her daughter on 30% a week less in benefits than British families receive. Who pays for the house and food? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad.Malky Posted July 28, 2012 Author Share Posted July 28, 2012 They get benefits when they get leave to remain in the UK but they're no longer asylum seekers. And there we have it ………….. it all comes down to the word “seeker”, they are still the same person, are we really arguing over terminology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Asylum seekers can't claim standard non-contributory benefits, they can claim contributory benefits if they've somehow managed to pay enough NI contributions. However, they aren't allowed to starve, they do still get some benefits paid from the UK border agency, at a lower rate than standard JSA & they are housed. Other similar countries usually have higher benefits for asylum seekers. Anyway, as Rupert says, is it too late to get him in Team GB? We should have thought of this earlier, could've advertised it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 And there we have it There we have what? Are you suggesting that UK residents should not be entitled to benefits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 And there we have it ………….. it all comes down to the word “seeker”, they are still the same person, are we really arguing over terminology. Yes we are arguing over terminolgy. When they're seeking asylum they don't get benefits. When they get asylum they do but are no longer seeking asylum and so are no longer seekers. Seekers seek. If they're no longer seeking they're no longer seekers, though maybe Sikhs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hard2miss Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 At the 2002 Commonwealth Games in Manchester, 20 members of the Sierra Leone team 'disappeared' from their camp before the end of the competition. Thanks, that is what I was thinking of, I tried googling the student games and nothing came up but I knew it had happened. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad.Malky Posted July 28, 2012 Author Share Posted July 28, 2012 There we have what? Are you suggesting that UK residents should not be entitled to benefits? There we have the fact that at the stroke of a pen a “seeker” that contributed nothing is entitled to a raft of benifts while my mother who worked all her life is paying £400 a week residential fees because she managed to save a few bob during the last 83 years………….. and all you are bothered about is terminology christ give us a break ……… the country is sinking fast. Is LeMaquis a fully paid up member of the spelling police? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bypassblade Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 There we have the fact that at the stroke of a pen a “seeker” that contributed nothing is entitled to a raft of benifts while my mother who worked all her life is paying £400 a week residential fees because she managed to save a few bob during the last 83 years………….. and all you are bothered about is terminology christ give us a break ……… the country is sinking fast. Well put old bean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retep Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Yes we are arguing over terminolgy. When they're seeking asylum they don't get benefits. When they get asylum they do but are no longer seeking asylum and so are no longer seekers. Seekers seek. If they're no longer seeking they're no longer seekers, though maybe Sikhs. Even the failed asylum seeker can claim benefits under section 4, http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/asylum/support/apply/section4/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.