Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Doesn't make good reading yet again!! 19:18 - Feb 15 with 3442 viewsnordenblue

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/asylum-seeke

The figures highlight a potentially massive problem
0

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 19:46 - Feb 15 with 3317 viewsisitme

It really does.

I suppose lower rents in places like Rochdale and Oldham make it financially sensible to place them there, rather than in more expensive southern towns. Is spending £500 a month on rent better use of tax payers' money than £1,500?

I would also question why 'single young men' are deemed as being at risk refugees?
0

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 21:49 - Feb 15 with 3067 views49thseason

I have never seen the point of dumping very poor people into very poor towns. I can't
see how it can possibly be good for the Asylum Seekers or Refugees and it most certainly isn't good for the local community to be lumbered with the additional costs of having large numbers of these people in the Borough. Last year there were over 450 AS children entered into local schools - the equivalent of an extra one and half to two Primary Schools. Some secondary schools were "obliged" to include in their GCSE results 15-year-old boys and girls who do not even speak English much less were capable of sitting any exams.
This whole nonsense has been going on too long and the stresses and strains are too much for the local infrastructure to bear. It takes 3-4 weeks to get a non-urgent doctors appointment, Many local schools have been extended (or are due to be) simply to cope with a rising birth rate in the local population (which neatly corresponds to the years 2004-2010 when the brakes were taken off migration to the UK by Blair and Brown www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn06077.pdf), adding the dependants of Asylum Seekers simply makes it almost impossible to plan for future education requirements.

By the way, some people may not realise that Asylum Seekers are counted by the number of people actually making a claim for asylum and not their dependants hence a family is only counted as one - the main applicant.
0

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 22:06 - Feb 15 with 3014 viewsrochdaleriddler

Blair and Brown are not in power any longer, it is Cameron that is allowing these people in knowing they aint going to Witney.Serco making big bucks out of rehousing them, and RBH and others happy to let their unlettable properties. I realise there is a huge issue here, and making party political points isnt going to solve it
1

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 22:47 - Feb 15 with 2940 viewsmingthemerciless

This lot have been in power for over five years now. When does it become their responsibility ?
0

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 23:07 - Feb 15 with 2917 viewsD_Alien

It's just an observation, but those who tend to support allowing greater numbers of asylum seekers into the UK also tend to be the ones who create most noise about unequal distributions of them around our towns and cities.
0
Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 23:43 - Feb 15 with 2846 viewsNigeriamark

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 19:46 - Feb 15 by isitme

It really does.

I suppose lower rents in places like Rochdale and Oldham make it financially sensible to place them there, rather than in more expensive southern towns. Is spending £500 a month on rent better use of tax payers' money than £1,500?

I would also question why 'single young men' are deemed as being at risk refugees?


Although rents may be lower, if you place someone in an area where there are no jobs, then they will never get out of the benefit cycle. Placing migrants in an area with more job opportunities, even if rent is initially higher would make more sense as ultimately they would pay the rent anyway out of what they earn. I don't subscribe to the theory that migrants come here to go on benefits. However even if they come here to work and you stick them in places like Rochdale then ultimately that is what will happen. Local communities lose out as do the migrants themselves

Whole immigration issue seems out of hand and I agree with Cameron wanting to tighten up this area. Immigration by all means but with quotas, preference to skill sets required ( which can actually be worked out in the medium term) and placing those who come in areas where those skills are required. Happy for the UK to take a share of political refugees, but again placed where it makes sense, not where politically convenient
0

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 23:47 - Feb 15 with 2838 viewsanotherbiffo

Given that the population of Greater Manchester is roughly 2,700,000, then 5,586 asylum seekers make up just over 0.2% of the population.

Or, put another way, the same proportion would have added 5 onto Rochdale's Saturday attendance.

And the copywriters would have believe we're being swamped!
0
Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 23:52 - Feb 15 with 2823 viewsD_Alien

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 23:47 - Feb 15 by anotherbiffo

Given that the population of Greater Manchester is roughly 2,700,000, then 5,586 asylum seekers make up just over 0.2% of the population.

Or, put another way, the same proportion would have added 5 onto Rochdale's Saturday attendance.

And the copywriters would have believe we're being swamped!


The real question is, would they have been searched if they'd gone into the main stand?
0
Login to get fewer ads

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 23:54 - Feb 15 with 2816 viewsYorkshire_Dale

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 23:47 - Feb 15 by anotherbiffo

Given that the population of Greater Manchester is roughly 2,700,000, then 5,586 asylum seekers make up just over 0.2% of the population.

Or, put another way, the same proportion would have added 5 onto Rochdale's Saturday attendance.

And the copywriters would have believe we're being swamped!


That's 5 we could do with!


None of this lot will be anywhere near San Spotty though,we all know that.
0
Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 04:01 - Feb 16 with 2739 viewsTalkingSutty

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 23:54 - Feb 15 by Yorkshire_Dale

That's 5 we could do with!


None of this lot will be anywhere near San Spotty though,we all know that.


They should be forced to attend Spotland for a one season probationary period, we have to go so why shouldn't they?

Instead they are given warmth and shelter which I don't have a problem with,but living in Rochdale should be 'Warts and all', that includes having to go to the football unfortunately.

At home to Crewe on a freezing cold Tuesday with Jim McNulty playing at left back (or Bunney) will soon make them realise this isn't 'The land of milk and honey' that they imagined!!
[Post edited 16 Feb 2016 4:04]
3

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 09:14 - Feb 16 with 2583 viewsanotherbiffo

Yes, and then we could break the more resiliant ones with a trip to Boundary Park (main stand).
3
Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 09:47 - Feb 16 with 2521 viewsmingthemerciless

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 23:07 - Feb 15 by D_Alien

It's just an observation, but those who tend to support allowing greater numbers of asylum seekers into the UK also tend to be the ones who create most noise about unequal distributions of them around our towns and cities.


I don't see anything wrong with that point of view. I'm not particularly beating the drum for asylum seekers / economic migrants but it's seems pretty cynical to me how these people are always directed to areas such as Rochdale that are really deprived to start with. I say that for the Tories, they certainly how to apply the first rule of politics - " Reward your friends and punish your enemies ".
1

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 09:56 - Feb 16 with 2502 viewsKenBoon

I fear the sight of our pitch may 'trigger' them.

Even though rents may be higher elsewhere, asylum seekers should be evenly distributed. Isn't inclusion part of the objective here. Just dropping them in a select few (poorer) areas won't do that. Its the same as Guardianisti, in their hipster cereal bars in London blabbering on about high rents and how it's pushing poorer people out.

That's a brave article. Stuff like that is usually dismissed as bigoted and hateful or not 'being helpful', usually by people who don't want a conversation or feel better in themselves because our country is helping. There was a belting article in The Independent (or Guardian) about a woman who'd taken in a legit Syrian Refugee. She's explaining how great he is and stuff. I don't think she has any Chia Seed stories but it does sound like he is her pet Syrian. I guess at least she is helping though. To many other well-meaning folk make lots of noise but stop at slactivism.
0
Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 10:58 - Feb 16 with 2435 views49thseason

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 23:47 - Feb 15 by anotherbiffo

Given that the population of Greater Manchester is roughly 2,700,000, then 5,586 asylum seekers make up just over 0.2% of the population.

Or, put another way, the same proportion would have added 5 onto Rochdale's Saturday attendance.

And the copywriters would have believe we're being swamped!


"If net migration continues at around recent levels, then the population is projected to rise by 2.5 million over the next five years and to reach 73 million in the next 15 years. This is the ONS ‘high’ migration scenario of 265K per year. This increase of 8 million people is the equivalent of adding the combined population of Greater Manchester and the cities of Birmingham, Glasgow, Liverpool, Leicester, Leeds, Sheffield, Bradford, Nottingham, Portsmouth and Bristol. 75% of this increase would be from future migration."

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/key-topics/population
0
Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 13:22 - Feb 16 with 2306 viewsD_Alien

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 09:47 - Feb 16 by mingthemerciless

I don't see anything wrong with that point of view. I'm not particularly beating the drum for asylum seekers / economic migrants but it's seems pretty cynical to me how these people are always directed to areas such as Rochdale that are really deprived to start with. I say that for the Tories, they certainly how to apply the first rule of politics - " Reward your friends and punish your enemies ".


That's why I described it as an observation. There's nothing inherently amiss with holding both those views, except I'd say it's incumbent upon those who advocate greater numbers being allowed in (than currently) to also explain how the "fairer" distribution should work. I put the word in inverted commas for a good reason, since I believe there's no such thing as a "fair" way of doing it. Perfectly equal distribution among the indigenous population is a chimera. Which single immigrant (for instance) would want to be placed in a small English village to meet their quota?

More importantly, are the immigrants then expected to stay put? If you placed a few in (for instance) Witney, they might decide they don't like it there and move at the first possible opportunity to a big town or city. So in the real world, quota distribution is a fantasy and unworkable, unless you want to restrict the freedom of movement of immigrants once they're here.

it'll certainly be interesting to see how the hundreds of thousands in Germany start to re-settle themselves once they've got to grips with the reality.
0

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 15:49 - Feb 16 with 2166 viewsanotherbiffo

Also interesting to contemplate France's commitment to containment of migrants at Calais and Dunkirk should Britain vote itself out of the EU?
0

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 15:51 - Feb 16 with 2163 viewsSalwaDale

Good article.

I think it is important to differentiate between asylum seekers and economic migrants (or expats as they are called when a Brit goes to work abroad). Economic migrants must contribute to the country or there is no benefit to the country and no reason for people to move to the UK. I'm all for people being allowed to move around the world and contribute.

Asylum seekers and refugees are slightly different as they are escaping horrible lives, where they are in danger. One of the reasons why it is mostly single men is because they move first, take the risks and then try to bring their family over. It is vital that asylum seekers are allowed to work and contribute as soon as possible. The line that stood out in that article for me is:

"They are poorly supported by the Home Office’s contractor, Serco, and are not allowed to work so have got no money and are hanging around"

There is no doubt that Britain does not deal well with migrants, asylum seekers and refugees.

TBBT

1

(No subject) (n/t) on 15:52 - Feb 16 with 2159 viewsSalwaDale


TBBT

0
Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 16:34 - Feb 16 with 2111 views1mark1

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 15:49 - Feb 16 by anotherbiffo

Also interesting to contemplate France's commitment to containment of migrants at Calais and Dunkirk should Britain vote itself out of the EU?


That was a Cameron scare story. If we come out, we will not have to move the detention centres to England, as the people in those centres are in a EU country, and therefore would be , Up to France to control that border, ie containment of the people at Calais and Dunkirk. The inners and outers are just as guilty as each other of scare stories , based on scare stories and in fact lies.

Poll: How much is your support for the Royals?

0

Doesn't make good reading yet again!! on 18:42 - Feb 16 with 1988 viewsArthurDaley

I'm still waiting to hear how many immigrant family's Yvette Balls Cooper has taken in since all the immigrant's started flooding into Europe, along with some so called scouse comedian and some others, they pledged to take in some familys. Which seems a long time ago now. It will be a very long time until they keep their promise. I f ever.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-3239347/Refugees-welcome-Age-Stupi

A large VAT Dave

0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2019