Evening Times: click here to return to our homepage
Four out of five asylum seekers 'live in poverty'
 
Quin is six months pregnant but has no permanent place where she can stay
Quin is six months pregnant but has no permanent place where she can stay
 
Sandra White: let asylum seekers work
Sandra White: let asylum seekers work
 

by Wendy Miller

HUNGRY, destitute and living in overcrowded flats in constant fear of a dawn raid. That is the reality of life for many of Scotland's asylum seekers, says a report.

The Glasgow charity Positive Action in Housing paints an alarming picture of the conditions faced by hundreds of families who have come to Scotland to escape torture and persecution.

Pregnant Quin is too terrified to go home

ALONE, homeless and six months pregnant, Quin Chen must wait another month before she has a legal right to a roof over her head.

As a failed asylum seeker she is denied any state protection - but she is too frightened to return home to China because she says she and her parents were persecuted simply for being Christians.

The 23-year-old has been unable to contact her parents and is convinced they have been arrested. She worries she could be too if she is sent back.

Quin was told last month her asylum application had been turned down. She says she is still unclear about the reason for rejection and is hoping to lodge an appeal.

Without Positive Action in Housing Quin would almost certainly be sleeping rough.

Initially, two weeks' temporary accommodation was arranged with two city families through the charity's volunteer service. The charity is now paying for Quin to stay in the Euro hostel until a new volunteer comes forward.

Quin said: "If I had not got help from Positive Action and the people they know, I do not know what I would have done. I had nowhere and nobody to go to. I am so grateful for the help I have received. I am very afraid to go back to China."

Case worker David Reilly said: "We would appeal to Glasgow residents to volunteer for our temporary accommodation service. We ask people to give someone a room for only a week at a time."

Any volunteers should telephone 0141 353 2220.

In its report, out today, it says more than four out of five people (around 81%) of those who approached the charity for help between March 2006 and March this year were on or below the poverty line.

More than one in three people were in accommodation that was "severely overcrowded", with most facing an average two-year wait for suitable housing. Some waited up to five years.

It gave one example of nine Lithuanians sharing two rooms.

Many failed asylum seekers face homelessness. The report said 39% of people the charity helped had no roof over their head.

Positive Action in Housing says it gives out hundreds of pounds of donations in an attempt to stop people ending up on the streets.

Whenever possible, it will book people into city hostels, but some hostels refuse to admit asylum seekers.

Often it is left to Glaswegian families to offer them a room and the charity is appealing for more volunteers to share their homes.

Throughout the year the charity stepped in to find emergency accommodation for 228 people forced into destitution.

Most of these cases were asylum seekers who, on having their claims rejected, had their rights to benefits and a roof over their heads, withdrawn.

Asylum seekers also reported living in fear of Home Office snatch squads', who take families from their homes to a detention centre to wait to be deported.

The report says: "The Home Office keeps making noises about making dawn raids humane. But little has changed. 1100 long- term asylum families, many of whom have been here for over six years, continue to face the fear of dawn raids'.

"Young children generally stay up from 6am onwards daily, in fear of these snatch squads. Scottish tenants have begun to organise daily dawn patrols in communities like Glasgow's Kingsway and Sighthill to protect their refugee neighbours."


Let them work, says city MSP

By Brian Currie

ASYLUM seekers should be allowed to work, a Glasgow MSP told the Scottish Parliament.

Sandra White urged MSPs to back Glasgow City Council's view that they could contribute to the economy.

Leading a Holyrood debate, the MSP said "the myth of asylum seekers as simply benefit seekers" should be dispelled.

She said many people wrongly thought of asylum seekers as scroungers claiming benefits.

"Asylum seekers want to work and research has shown the money generated for the local economy would far outweigh the cost of providing benefits," she said.

"Furthermore, many asylum seekers are highly skilled. Recent figures show there are more than 900 doctors, 150 nurses and 100 dentists unable to seek work.

"The current skills shortage in some professions, particularly health, has led to the bizarre situation of running recruitment schemes abroad to fill these positions when, by granting asylum seekers the right to work, we could go some way toward solving this problem."

Publication date 07/09/07

Posted by: Scottish Rose, U.S.A. on 12:48pm Fri 7 Sep 07
I don't mean to disrespect anyone, but what were they expecting when they arrived in Scotland? A marching band greeting them at the airport? I'm sure the country they came from wasn't a lap of luxury, otherwise they wouldn't have left. They DO still have the option of going back home, if it's THAT bad. There is after all a lot of Scottish people that probably could use a wee bit of help first.
Posted by: Finbar 71, Nottingham,UK on 1:39pm Fri 7 Sep 07
In response to the MSP-a long way to sorting the problems of genuine asylum seekers would be to actually have an asylum system that serves it's purpose and is not clogged up by economic migrants.My partner works on asylum cases in England and has done for the last 8 years and frankly the volume of asylum seekers who are not genuine is astonishing.In addition with regards to qualifications are we seriously suggesting that for example a medical degree from Nigeria is commensurate with one from Scotland not withstanding the fact that 'degrees' can now be bought over the internet??!!The naivety and ignorance of some of the people in power is mind boggling.This issue should have been attended to long,long ago and the two groups who suffer most are the genuine asylum seekers and the hard pressed taxpayer.
Posted by: wee malky on 1:50pm Fri 7 Sep 07
Scottish Rose wrote:
I don't mean to disrespect anyone, but what were they expecting when they arrived in Scotland? A marching band greeting them at the airport? I'm sure the country they came from wasn't a lap of luxury, otherwise they wouldn't have left. They DO still have the option of going back home, if it's THAT bad. There is after all a lot of Scottish people that probably could use a wee bit of help first.
Couldn't agree more!
Posted by: Stewie Griffin, Glasgow on 2:00pm Fri 7 Sep 07
Scottish Rose wrote:
I don't mean to disrespect anyone, but what were they expecting when they arrived in Scotland? A marching band greeting them at the airport? I'm sure the country they came from wasn't a lap of luxury, otherwise they wouldn't have left. They DO still have the option of going back home, if it's THAT bad. There is after all a lot of Scottish people that probably could use a wee bit of help first.
Great post, says it all. You cannot expect to come to another country and have it all handed on a plate to you. Why get pregnant if you have nowhere to live?

Posted by: Grandpaw, Glasgow on 2:00pm Fri 7 Sep 07
wee malky wrote:
Scottish Rose wrote: I don't mean to disrespect anyone, but what were they expecting when they arrived in Scotland? A marching band greeting them at the airport? I'm sure the country they came from wasn't a lap of luxury, otherwise they wouldn't have left. They DO still have the option of going back home, if it's THAT bad. There is after all a lot of Scottish people that probably could use a wee bit of help first.
Couldn't agree more!
Same here....couldn't agree more.
Posted by: raypaterson, Glasgow on 2:31pm Fri 7 Sep 07
I'm sorry, but if I have read this correctly, it is talking about FAILED asylum seekers, in other words, people who have no right to be here, yet still expect the taxpayer to keep them! Also, plenty of working people are living in poverty, and they too wait a long time for decent housing! We can't look after our own poor, so why should illegal immigrants get special treatment?

As for dawn raids, I believe these are only carried out as a last resort, in cases where the people simply refuse to return home.
Posted by: Scottish Rose, U.S.A. on 3:49pm Fri 7 Sep 07
raypaterson wrote:
I'm sorry, but if I have read this correctly, it is talking about FAILED asylum seekers, in other words, people who have no right to be here, yet still expect the taxpayer to keep them! Also, plenty of working people are living in poverty, and they too wait a long time for decent housing! We can't look after our own poor, so why should illegal immigrants get special treatment? As for dawn raids, I believe these are only carried out as a last resort, in cases where the people simply refuse to return home.
Good Post raypaterson!. Also,Stewie Griffin say's Why get pregnant with nowhere to live? Your spot on.
Posted by: robert, glasgow on 5:09pm Fri 7 Sep 07
if they dont like it go home.
Posted by: view, glasgow on 5:39pm Fri 7 Sep 07
I know of a family from Glasgow who have been overcrowded for 10 years and there is no-one fighting their corner. There are many families in Glasgow in these circumstances and the housing provider cannot cope.
Posted by: max on 5:46pm Fri 7 Sep 07
Scottish Rose and raypaterson hit the nail RIGHT on the head
Posted by: belcher, parkbench 36 on 6:08pm Fri 7 Sep 07
As they say in Texas 'If the cat had kittens in the oven, we wouldn"t call 'em biscuits.
Posted by: john, glasgow on 6:09pm Fri 7 Sep 07
surely there must come a time when the door must close and no more immigrants{loosely speaking}are let in,no matter what job they can do.then some of our own talent might not move on
Posted by: tam-m, southside on 6:22pm Fri 7 Sep 07
too true Scottish Rose, as for your comment=Stewie Griffin,=if the child is born here would it not be a british citizen.if so in 3 months she will be here for life and entitled to every benefit going.how many countries did this lot pass through to get here if you were that desperate the first safe country would do.
Posted by: Betty Uttley, California on 9:34pm Fri 7 Sep 07
I applaud all the comments here, was it at one time that the local doctors could not get jobs?? Yet there are 900 doctors from foreign countries waiting to take the jobs over, what happened to all the young doctors. I was also wondering if Sandra White has taken any one into her home??? Its the same way here, getting pregnant says "you may stay here for ever" its called an anchor child, one Mexican came here illegally to "get pregnant" she now has her anchor child and is a single mother that the taxpayer is paying for.
Posted by: Grandpaw, Glasgow on 9:56pm Fri 7 Sep 07
A large part of the problem is Human Rights. Let's get rid of this and replace it with another "HR".......HUMAN RESPONSIBILITIES and starting with "oor ain folk".
Posted by: Betty Uttley, California on 9:58pm Fri 7 Sep 07
Please excuse me for posting again.

The question is Quin is a failed asylum seeker, why are the government trying to find her somewhere to live? and do the people that volunteer have to pay for everything, like food and clothing, or are the welfare people still giving her money??

I was under the impression that "failed" meant "go home" does that mean she is staying in the country illegally???. There are so many questions. Did she come into the country to get pregnant? Of course medical is free over there, you see we have to pay for all their pre-natal, hospitalization and support the baby until it is 2 years old, so the tax payer pays quite a lot, for a person that also needs welfare, food stamps, medical, subsidization for housing, paying no taxes, and putting nothing into the system.

Its quite obvious that Quin wants everything before she "goes home".
Posted by: whiskyjack, Tyne and Wear on 11:12pm Fri 7 Sep 07
I used to think that most asylum seekers didn't have a valid reason to stay here, or were "spongeing". We have quite a large number of Iranians where I live, and believe me these guys work hard, as they own 2 shops nearby (my local pizza shop for 1). I have an Iranian family above me, and they are among the friendliest people I know. When their new baby was born, they went out of their way to show her to me and my wife. Most of the guys I know have had to leave their country as they were being persecuted for being CHRISTIAN. Back here in good old Blighty, you're free to practice what you like in freedom, irrespective of what you are. I can agree with what's being said about the failed asylum seekers, as again, we seem to be the World's meal ticket. As for the Chinese lassie, was she already pregnant when she left China? You have to weigh up both points I think.
Posted by: Sid Noggins, East End on 3:22am Sat 8 Sep 07
shielagibb wrote:
I challenge the Evening Times to investigate Quinn’s story. I have no doubt you will uncover that she is lying. Somebody has put her ‘up the chopsticks’ moved on, and now we’re expected to keep her. £6,000 is our cost for the birth of her wean and then countless thousands to educate , feed, clothe, house etc. the two of them whilst Quinn sits on her backside all day. Get her out, back to China, and let her people pay for them. How about it Evening Times, how about an investigation.
Well said - where's the father of Quin's kid?
Posted by: bipod, glasgow on 4:41pm Sat 8 Sep 07
People are just gettimng fed up of these so called hardship stories of failed asylum seekers. They get free accommodation and most of them are working on the black economy working cash in hand. When was the last tim you saw a glaswegian big issue seller ??
Motherwell Councillors voted to rehouse 100 congolese families at the detrimemnt to local people who were waiting to be re housed now the crime rate is through the roof with handbag and purse thefts on the increase
and everyone frightened to do anything because of the old PC brigade. If your a failed asylum seeker get on the first flight home after all its all paid for by the tax payers.
Posted by: Agnes McNab, Canada on 5:40pm Sat 8 Sep 07
Legally,failed asylum seekers are to be deported. So why is she still here? Scottish Rose you know the same as I do, this goes on in U.S.A. and Canada with illegal immigrants and the taxpayers are the losers.
Posted by: govanmac, Erskine on 5:54pm Sat 8 Sep 07
I think it is an absolute disgrace that failed asylum seekers are not removed as soon as the legal process has been completed, I read that from the moment these people arrive in the country to the day of the final appeal, the legal costs for each applicant is in excess of £100,000, if there is six in the family that is over £600,000 for that one family.
Plus the cost of looking after them while they are here.
It is a national disgrace, and the blame must surely be left at the door of Tony Blair and his cronies.
I don't know what has happened to the people of Britain who continue to stick their heads in the sand with this subject.
If everyone who felt that we as a nation are being taken for a ride with these parasites wrote to their MPs and councillors and expressed their feelings on this subject, they would soon take notice.
The problem with this government is they don't act on the wishes of the majority, they are too busy attacking the motorists in every way they can to have the time to look after the issues which are destroying this country.
The papers are not helping by sympathising with people like this Quin, and also every time there is a dawn raid it makes a great story when there is a child who has just started school and loves going to McDonalds involved, it is pathetic, they should not be here, they are given the opportunity plus £3000 re-settlement grants to go home, yet they decide to stay.
Wake up people of Britain, we have gone too soft.
People like Sandra White and all her cronies should hang their heads in shame, they are helping to destroy our great country.
Posted by: Scottish Rose, U.S.A. on 6:19pm Sat 8 Sep 07
Agnes McNab wrote:
Legally,failed asylum seekers are to be deported. So why is she still here? Scottish Rose you know the same as I do, this goes on in U.S.A. and Canada with illegal immigrants and the taxpayers are the losers.
Very true Agnes. What upsets me the most is The Scottish people need the help FIRST. Not too long ago the E.T ran a story about SCOTTISH children that lived in poverty. ( I dont remember the percentage). Did they recieve any help? I never heard any more about that story. (Yesterdays news now) I'm not against helping anyone out if they need it. BUT, when people start taking advantage, then there's a problem. It's no WONDER the Scottish citizens are upset. I dont BLAME them!. It's costing them a fortune! Enough is enough.
Posted by: raypaterson, Glasgow on 7:00pm Sat 8 Sep 07
I was shocked to learn that all over the UK, failed asylum seekers still get state funding from a different source, but taxpayers money nevertheless.

Most people are tolerant, but I feel our tolerance and generosity has been taken to the limit. We are all struggling to pay rents, mortgages, fuel and food bills, yet we are taxed to the hilt, and our money goes to anyone from a foreign country who enters our shores. Enough is enough!
Posted by: shielagibb, Glasgow on 9:44pm Sat 8 Sep 07
govanmac posted:- ‘It is a national disgrace, and the blame must surely be left at the door of Tony Blair and his cronies.’

Partly true, but the real culprits are Glasgow City Councillors. Circa 1999, Glasgow Council did a deal with the Home Office to accommodate asylum seekers in Glasgow. Two deals were involved amounting to £250,000,000 (sic) of British taxpayers’ money. This sum was ONLY to house the asylum seekers in FREE furnished accommodation. The dole money they receive every week is doled out by the government. They do not pay rent or council tax, hence FREE accommodation. The councillor responsible for setting up the deal was Charlie Gordon, then City Council leader. Charlie Gordon has now moved on to Holyrood as MSP. He doesn’t ‘want to know’ about the asylum seekers (FAILED or otherwise) he inflicted on Glasgow.
From the article:- ‘Sandra White urged MSPs to back Glasgow City Council's view that they could contribute to the economy.’’ From her statement it would appear that our Glasgow City councillors are refusing to take any action (no surprise) or become involved in assisting to remove the FAILED asylum seekers, now legally classed as illegal immigrants. Clearly our councillors are not representing the Glasgow people.
govanmac:- also posted:- ‘If everyone who felt that we as a nation are being taken for a ride with these parasites wrote to their MPs and councillors and expressed their feelings on this subject, they would soon take notice.’’
Not so govanmac. I’ve done just that. Our letters go into the dustbin. MP‘s, MSP‘s, councillors will not speak out against asylum seekers, refugees, illegal immigrants etc. Reason? Ms Robina Qureshi director of Positive Action in Housing throws out her insults at anyone who dares to criticize the asylum and immigration con.
bipod posted:- ‘ Motherwell Councillors voted to rehouse 100 congolese families at the detrimemnt to local people who were waiting to be re housed‘‘
I witnessed that happening on TV. Congolese asylum seekers, supposedly fleeing rape, persecution, murder, torture, blah, blah, etc were welcolmed to their (our) FREE furnished accommodation. They were laughing and sniggering as absurd wee asylum supporters handed each family bouquets of flowers. They and the rest of the world must know we’re the biggest mugs going. As with the Glasgow councillors, the Motherwell councillors are to blame.
Good news is things are changing. Look at the number of comments on this article which are anti-asylum. The newspapers must be taking notice and must start to represent the readership in reporting the true downside of asylum in Glasgow.
Posted by: BLOCKEM, Glasgow on 9:59pm Sat 8 Sep 07

Ms Qureshi, highly paid director of tax-funded of charity, Positive Action in Housing, Let’s get one thing clear. These families have not come to Britain, Scotland or Glasgow ‘‘to escape torture and persecution.’’ They came here to live off our benefits. This has been proven. They are legally FAILED ASYLUM SEEKERS who, together with you, refuse to accept the laws and decisions of our courts, and they refuse to leave Britain. They are proven liars. They are no longer asylum seekers. They are illegal immigrants who have no right to be here.
These FAILED illegal immigrants are receiving free weekly dole money, free furnished accommodation, free NHS treatment, free education, free legal representation et al to which they are not entitled.
And why should they be given ‘‘suitable accommodation‘‘ - countless thousands of our own people do not have ‘‘suitable accommodation’’ - your FAILED asylum seekers are entitled to nothing.
If your illegal immigrants want ‘‘suitable accommodation’’ - let them return to their own countries. Take their offspring back to their own country and let their own people pay for them. Let their offspring be educated in their own schools and be brought up in their own culture. Oh, and IF the parents want to work let them find jobs in their own countries. There are no jobs here for them.
Asylum seekers come here to escape ‘‘torture, rape, murder, persecution’’ - absolute rubbish - a total con!!
Posted by: shielagibb, Glasgow on 10:28pm Sat 8 Sep 07
Another wee challenge.....

FOR THE ATTENTION OF:-
Sandra White, supporter and campaigner for Glasgow’s asylum seekers.

I request that you offer to accommodate in your home, Quin Chen, the six months pregnant asylum seeker who has no permanent place where she can stay. I ask that you look after Ms Chen until and after her baby is born. You will be able to claim financial allowances whilst Ms. Chen is in your home. You continually complain with regard to the inhumane way with which asylum seekers and refugees are treated. Here is an excellent opportunity to put your words of support and compassion into action.

Please notify us through this ‘comments’ section of your intention. No reply means a refusal.
Posted by: Scottish Rose, U.S.A. on 1:14am Sun 9 Sep 07
shielagibb wrote:
Another wee challenge..... FOR THE ATTENTION OF:- Sandra White, supporter and campaigner for Glasgow’s asylum seekers. I request that you offer to accommodate in your home, Quin Chen, the six months pregnant asylum seeker who has no permanent place where she can stay. I ask that you look after Ms Chen until and after her baby is born. You will be able to claim financial allowances whilst Ms. Chen is in your home. You continually complain with regard to the inhumane way with which asylum seekers and refugees are treated. Here is an excellent opportunity to put your words of support and compassion into action. Please notify us through this ‘comments’ section of your intention. No reply means a refusal.
GOOD JOB SHIELAGIBB!!!! GOOD IDEA!!! My family live and work in Glasgow, and they are SICK of it too.
Posted by: thinkin, glasgow on 11:34am Mon 10 Sep 07
Shielagibb I fail to see the part in the article where Sandra White advocates letting failed asylum seekers stay. What she says sounds good to me get them working while their claims are being looked into, then they won't cost us any money and will actually be paying taxes. If they are failed Asylum Seekers then of course they should be sent back. It seems that most posters here don't have a solution (other than 'get rid of them all') or any other constructive ideas
Posted by: raypaterson, Glasgow on 1:48pm Mon 10 Sep 07
thinkin wrote:
Shielagibb I fail to see the part in the article where Sandra White advocates letting failed asylum seekers stay. What she says sounds good to me get them working while their claims are being looked into, then they won't cost us any money and will actually be paying taxes. If they are failed Asylum Seekers then of course they should be sent back. It seems that most posters here don't have a solution (other than 'get rid of them all') or any other constructive ideas
thinkin,glasgow

A constructive idea would be to speed up the decisions, and if failed then immediate detention until deportation. Also, Glasgow should not accept any more asylum seekers until the backlog is sorted out.

It would also help if do gooders stopped preventing immigration officers from carrying out their job.

I also believe that succesful asylum seekers should have to repay financial help by way of instalments, after all, Jobseekers Allowance is paid back through tax.

I for one, firmly believe, that if we did not have a welfare state, then the vast majority of these people would have stayed in the nearest safe country.
Posted by: bluey, glasgow on 9:08pm Mon 10 Sep 07
Britain's share of the world’s population is under 1% but according to UN High Commissioner for Refugees we held 3% of the world’s refugees as at the end of 2004. Of approximately 40,000 Afghan refugees in Britain, only about 40 are known to have returned home whereas the majority of Afghan's that moved to neighbouring countries have returned. In terms of asylum seekers, only a third are granted asylum and humanitarian protection/discretio
nary leave which means two thirds are simply economic migrants. The top ten countries of origin of asylum seekers have a combined population of nearly 2 billion. In Germany less than 3% were granted asylum but in Britain, the average (for 1997- Q3, 2006), including Exceptional Leave to Remain, was 37% but over 80% are believed to stay on anyway. Germany grants asylum to 3% of applicants which presumably shows why the UK is one of the top destinations.
Posted by: shielagibb, Glasgow on 9:09pm Mon 10 Sep 07
thinkin posted:- ‘Shielagibb I fail to see the part in the article where Sandra White advocates letting failed asylum seekers stay. What she says sounds good to me get them working while their claims are being looked into, then they won't cost us any money and will actually be paying taxes. If they are failed Asylum Seekers then of course they should be sent back. It seems that most posters here don't have a solution (other than 'get rid of them all') or any other constructive ideas’

To go along with Sandra White’s suggestion, ie, to allow asylum seekers who arrive in Britain unannounced (most under false pretense) to work would permit asylum seekers to ‘jump the queue’ to the detriment of those who have applied through official legal channels to come here and work.
Of those asylum seekers who have come here and it’s eventually proven that their asylum claims are false how would that equate with them having been allowed to work. Would the fact that they had been working be used as another reason for them being allowed to stay even though their asylum claim was a pack of lies.
The free movement of European labour to Britain, Scotland and Glasgow has more than filled any vacancies here. There are no jobs for asylum seekers.
Instead of continually bleating about her poor wee asylum seekers and throwing insults at our immigration officials Sandra White, along with other MSP’s and councillors, should be working to remove the thousands of FAILED ASYLUM SEEKERS who are here.
‘get rid of them all’ - that is my solution and my constructive idea - get rid of all the FAILED ASYLUM SEEKERS who have no right to be here - ‘then they won't cost us any money’ and we will actually be saving taxes.
Posted by: shielagibb, Glasgow on 9:17pm Mon 10 Sep 07
raypaterson posted:- ‘A constructive idea would be to speed up the decisions, and if failed then immediate detention until deportation. Also, Glasgow should not accept any more asylum seekers until the backlog is sorted out. It would also help if do gooders stopped preventing immigration officers from carrying out their job. I also believe that succesful asylum seekers should have to repay financial help by way of instalments, after all, Jobseekers Allowance is paid back through tax. I for one, firmly believe, that if we did not have a welfare state, then the vast majority of these people would have stayed in the nearest safe country.

Agree with all you say ray, apart from not having a welfare state. We need that for our own people but nothing should be doled out to freeloading failed asylum seekers aka liars aka illegal immigrants and their offspring.
Posted by: shielagibb, Glasgow on 9:44pm Mon 10 Sep 07
bluey, glasgow posted:-
Britain's share of the world’s population is under 1% but according to UN High Commissioner for Refugees we held 3% of the world’s refugees as at the end of 2004. Of approximately 40,000 Afghan refugees in Britain, only about 40 are known to have returned home whereas the majority of Afghan's that moved to neighbouring countries have returned. In terms of asylum seekers, only a third are granted asylum and humanitarian protection/discretio
nary leave which means two thirds are simply economic migrants. The top ten countries of origin of asylum seekers have a combined population of nearly 2 billion. In Germany less than 3% were granted asylum but in Britain, the average (for 1997- Q3, 2006), including Exceptional Leave to Remain, was 37% but over 80% are believed to stay on anyway. Germany grants asylum to 3% of applicants which presumably shows why the UK is one of the top destinations.

Nice statistics which show that which we witness - Britain is the asylum dumping ground of the world and Glasgow is the asylum dumping ground of Britain.
Glaswegians don‘t have to look at ‘the statistics’, we witness the continual massive build-up of immigrants daily in Glasgow.
From your posting,:- ‘In terms of asylum seekers, only a third are granted asylum and humanitarian protection/discretio
nary leave which means two thirds are simply economic migrants.’ Not ‘economic migrants’ but failed asylum seekers, illegal immigrants, freeloaders and liars.

Posted by: raypaterson, Glasgow on 2:14pm Tue 11 Sep 07
sheilagibb you said

>>Agree with all you say ray, apart from not having a welfare state. We need that for our own people but nothing should be doled out to freeloading failed asylum seekers aka liars aka illegal immigrants and their offspring.<<

I think you misunderstood me, I agree with the welfare state for our own people, no-one else.

I was trying to make the point that our welfare state is what attracts most of these 'asylum seekers'. There seems to be umlimited funds to care for them, when many working, elderly and disabled people are denied life saving drugs, and have to live in substandard housing.

Glasgow has enormous problems without adding more, and you are correct that Glasgow City Council started this whole situation by agreeing to take all these people in the first place.
Posted by: shielagibb, Glasgow on 7:57pm Tue 11 Sep 07
ray posted:- ‘I think you misunderstood me, I agree with the welfare state for our own people, no-one else.

I was trying to make the point that our welfare state is what attracts most of these 'asylum seekers'. There seems to be umlimited funds to care for them, when many working, elderly and disabled people are denied life saving drugs, and have to live in substandard housing.

Glasgow has enormous problems without adding more, and you are correct that Glasgow City Council started this whole situation by agreeing to take all these people in the first place.’

OK ray, I agree with EVERYTHING you said - and well said. More and more readers are posting the way we think. Problem is, how do we turn it into action. How do we change the councils fear of speaking out.
Add your comment
Please note: to publish your comment you must be registered on this site. If you are already registered, please enter your details below.
Email:
Password:
Travel Shop
Airport Parking
Travel Insurance
Car Hire
Copyright © 2009 Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights Reserved
Terms of Use