I've just been reading an interesting article in the Washington post that claims immigration isn't as much of a concern to the people in the UK as it was at the time of the Brexit vote and that the number of articles about immigration has fallen from over 300 in the Express and Daily Mail before the referendum to almost nothing now. https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...3ae9c99658a_story.html?utm_term=.f261abe01cc0
Except they don't.... https://fullfact.org/immigration/why-do-migrants-and-asylum-seekers-want-come-uk/ The only way we'll cut actually cut down immigration is if we tank the economy and reduce employment (cut the nose off to spite your face option) Otherwise I wouldn't trust this government to actually cut down numbers on immigration after we've left the EU as at some point we're going to have find a younger workforce to help finance the elderly retired xenophobic gammons who can no longer escape to Spain and we're going to be opening those borders as fast as we can to full those jobs that people here don't want to do.
You do post some crap,how many asylum seekers per 1,000 people who live here.WTF has people who live here got to do with it. how many are risking there lives at Dover trying to get to France and the EU ?
As more pollies resign, May is becoming more stubborn and determined to become a traitor to our country, and more importantly, the people. She's now so desperate she brought back Amber Rudd and promoted an unknown.......Won't be long now.
You’re so bad at geography you could be Brexit Secretary. The reason they are on the French side is because it’s nearer to where they came from
See the French people are doing what they do best. Protesting against a diesel tax, unfortunately someone has been killed. They are also calling for Macron to go. Maybe we should offer our support !
Nothing to do with geography. He's making the point that many want to come here and are risking thier lives to do so. Once here there's not exactly a stampede to go back the other way, hence the lack of anyone risking their lives in Dover.
It would be a little of both. There are people coming from Calais to seek Asylum as they believe there is better chances of employment here. But as is shown the majority are not doing that and are seeking Asylum in Germany. Strangely people whose lives have been destroyed in Syria are just looking for somewhere to live where they and their families will not be bombed or killed; they've more than likely never even heard of Cheshire, much less have a desire to live there. But in terms of geography as Mr Raab just noticed we are an island so it is much harder to get here to make an initial application for asylum, so if you could already make it to the UK you're unlikely then to want to move on, as otherwise you would have probably been able to get their easier, hence the lack of camps (well until we turn the M23 into a lorry park) .
The "fact" that there are proportionately more asylum seekers settling on mainland Europe than the UK does not alter the fact that many are striving to get to this Country and continue to do so. It's not a matter of statistics and numbers - once here they do not "strive" to return to the mainland as was pointed out by Chesh. The reasons are obvious. Despite its' detractors, this country remains a huge attraction. You could argue that the majority of those settling in the European mainland countries is simply because it's far easier to do so by crossing land borders than attempting to cross 22 miles of sea to get to this island. Whichever way you spin it, the displaced people of the tragedy that is Syria accept that anything is better than what they've experienced and mainland Europe is a more than a satisfactory option.
There was 39,000 Asylum applicants in the UK in 2016 when the Calais camp was at it's heights with 10,000 seeking to get to the UK. In the same year there was 1.3 million asylum applications in Europe. Of course the UK is an attractive option as a relatively safe, relatively rich, relatively stable democracy with a popular language. But Germany, Spain, Italy, France, Denmark, Sweden etc etc fit most if not all of these criteria and the numbers back this up. Spinning it otherwise is falling in to the British exceptionalism trap.
Seeing you like statistics, why not look at the density of population in the above mentioned countries for a start.
As far as I can see nobody is disputing your figures - you're obviously a keen student of the subject. I realise this is "The Politcal Thread" and as such is diverse from football, but just what's the point you're trying to ram home?
Ok how about Belgium; 11 million population and nearly 19,000 asylum seekers in 2016. or Netherlands; 17 million poulation and 31,000 asylum seekers. They have 393 and 337 people per square km. The UK has 267. Just behind us in Europe with 237 people per square km is Germany . Population of 83 million and 280,000 asylum applicants in 2016.
This was the point I was trying to refute. Falls into the wider point of British exceptionalism that has poisoned the whole Brexit debate and negotiations; the we hold all the cards despite all the evidence to the contrary approach.
Ok if you want France its half as dense as UK with 122. It’s population is about the same with 67 million. And in 2016 it had over double the amount of asylum applicants as the UK with 86,000 applications.
