Buddha
Vital Football Hero
Nothing practical ?
What could be more practical than co-operation?
In my experience things always seem to work better when people help each other out and generally co-operate. But that's just my experience.
Nothing practical ?
Co-operating in what way.What could be more practical than co-operation?
In my experience things always seem to work better when people help each other out and generally co-operate. But that's just my experience.
I know I'm on the other side to the pro-immigration crew, but an idea would be to pay the asylum seekers money, and build them houses, in their own country. Making them trudge halfway around the world to get free money and free housing is a huge waste of effort and bad for the environment.Co-operating in what way.
Could any potential asylum seeker borrow your van for a few months?
Co-operating in what way.
Could any potential asylum seeker borrow your van for a few months?
As for borrowing my van, there's a bed in the back of it and if somebody needs a place to sleep it's available. My community is welcoming to those who face persecution and discrimination because we know what that feels like to face . If people need help we'll offer it because we know how grateful we've been when we've needed help and others have offered us some.
People DO need help, and have done for some time. Is this what you WOULD do, or what you HAVE done?
Fair playBoth.
Edit: and a few years back I donated an old caravan to go to Calais to help.
Theoretically, there is a solution, but the practicality required to achieve it is the biggest challenge. The solution is to make the (original) places from which refugees currently flee safer, more sustainable and less corrupt nations. Ironically, if the many countries who contribute enormous sums to help refugees pooled their finance and resource, there would likely be sufficient to underpin the change required. But equally ironic, perhaps, is that the pooling nations would have to enforce the eradication of corruption - and that might lead to even more conflict !! Vicious circle at present.
Rather than paying asylum seekers money and building houses for them in their war torn home countries we could simply refrain from selling arms and promoting war. That'd be a start.
So, what about the ones coming from countries that we have not sold arms to or promoted war?
I think I alluded to unworkable in my post, though, the theory is, in essence, is a solution. With many years behind me in the job that I have done (and, I suspect, likewise with your working background) I feel confident that i`m in the real world !
One thing for sure, trying to silence or shut down opinion, on the back of easy to sling around virtue, will not solve this issues - but I suppose it makes some people feel better.
What could be more practical than co-operation?
In my experience things always seem to work better when people help each other out and generally co-operate. But that's just my experience.
You made it clear that you were talking about an ideal situation Lancs. My comment about the real world was not directed at you but more at the idea that borders can be sealed and migration controlled perfectly in the modern world.
Funny how we live in a housing crisis when the developers seem keen on unaffordable accommodation in places where the concept is laughable. New estates cropping up in Medway alone are sold as <50% affordable. What about London? Kidbrooke is now 38% affordable FFS!
Meanwhile in the more central postcodes like Vauxhall and Southwark many apartments are glorified summer homes. I look at scorn at all the ugly developments going up.
The Government and its councils have the power to turn the tide on this. In the meantime free up unsold and underused apartments. Make more affordable, both housing and apartments. FFS fix your council incompetence and develop proper housing plans, rather than inaction leading to pandering to developers through fear of being taken to court.
It may need to take a hit on purchasing some for the aim of accommodating refugees (in rented APARTMENTS with a grace period, not housing) who have been given residency.
We accept 100k refugees a year and a percentage of that will stay at friends and relatives. Meanwhile people (particularly refugees and economic migrants) are leaving in their droves. Is it really the case that everyone partially sympathetic for the plight of immigrants needs to house one? Cheap argument.
Covid came at a horrid time in terms of accommodating those waiting to be processed. I feel somewhere like Folkestone barracks would’ve needed minor improvements (more toilet and washing facilities) in order to be habitable pre-Covid. In Covid you simply cannot bung hundreds of people together in barracks, whether or not there are sufficient facilities.
Even our prisons. How many cells contain people who have been incarcerated for such non-jailworthy (IMO) like non-payment of their licence fee?! 1/3 of total female convictions are for the TV fucking licence.
Christ, you’re right. 100,000 sounds like merely an application figure. Barely 10-20k is the usual result.No argument with much of what you say Trev but that 100,000 figure is way out. This year's figures are down to covid 19 and other factors but we've been nowhere near that figure for years.
https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...ny-people-do-we-grant-asylum-or-protection-to
Meanwhile people (particularly refugees and economic migrants) are leaving in their droves.