h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Asylum Seekers - Welcome to Hell! - A701939
Author: Fenchurch the Honky Tonk Thumper <Zero Intolerance: A593796 > - U177893

This article attempts to explain some of the logistical difficulties faced by Asylum Seekers. The article has been written from a British viewpoint, but many countries give shelter to people seeking Refugee status, and understanding is a key to acceptance.

Sadly, I couldn't find any details about Asylum Seekers on h2g2. Asylum Seekers are marginalised in Britain - let's not marginalise them in Cyberspace!

I see you made it to PR. Best of luck with this,

seeya
spiff

*off for a re-read*

The title strikes me as a bit emotive?

I'll go along with BluesShark here.
Asylum status is a knotty problem, but 'Welcome to Hell' is a bit of an over-statement. Things might not be that comfortable, but if you've travelled across the world to get away from an oppresive regime, then you might not find the free bed and board, with a bit of cash thrown in, analogous to Hell at all.
Other than that, the piece is well written (although I think you repeated the vouchers and cash sentence two paragraphs running), but ultimately suggests that the UK government is somehow being oppresive themselves, rather than offering a roof, food and some money, when it has no obligation whatsoever to do so. Perhaps this imbalance could be corrected by listing some of the conditions asylum seekers have escaped from?

I agree. The entry strikes me as somewhat emotive and unbalanced.

If the conditions for asylum seekers in the UK is so horrible, why are so many risking death in the Channel Tunnel on a daily basis to get here from France?

There is more to this issue than the entry puts forward, and so I think some context is necessary.

I agree that the Entry is emotive, but then so is all the 'bogus asylum seekers swamping our country' that you get in the 'Daily Mail' and 'The Sun'. That said, I think that 'Asylum Seekers' Lives In Britain' would be a better title. Also, the first-person stuff at the start will have to go. It could be replaced by saying 'This Entry... instead of 'I...'

There are some extensive changes planned for the British asylum system - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_1626000/1626533.stm . I'm very glad to see that these include the abolition of the voucher system. Quite a few asylum seekers use my friendly neighbourhood Morrisons supermarket, and I always feel sorry for them as they struggle to find vouchers to the right value at the checkout (which they have to do, since they don't get change). The vouchers make the asylum seekers very conspicuous. That's not just humiliating for them, it's also dangerous, considering the amount of violence there's been against them in some parts.

One thing in the Entry did surprise me, though: I haven't noticed those asylum seekers filling their baskets exclusively with economy range items - and I would have noticed that, since the Morrisons economy range has a distinctive can and packet design. Are you sure about that bit, Fenchurch?

Anyway, good luck with the Entry!

In 1999, Asylum Seekers were no longer...

should be

As of 1999, Asylum Seekers were no longer....

or

Since 1999, Asylum Seekers are no longer...

Ormondroyd....

I'm asking for context, nothing more. The simple question "Er....what's wrong with France, guys?" is a valid one, and isn't dependant on having a Daily Mail view of the world.

An entry that discusses Asylum Seekers in the UK should, in my opinion, also discuss their motivations for coming to the UK in obvious preference to other rich, western, democratic states.

Or are we advocating straw man arguments all of a sudden?

Geoff

Geoff, that is a good point, and one I've often wondered about myself. Especially given that British welfare benefits are often miserly compared to those available in other European countries!

I really don't know why so many people are so keen to seek refuge here. Is it because of some ancient British reputation for fairness and decency that is now outdated? Discuss!

Maybe, sitting in France, the refugees feel nostalgic and then decide they would prefer to to live in a place with second-world hospitals, and schools and a third-world transport system. They most certainly wouldn't be flocking to the UK for the food

hi again Fenchurch,

I agree with others here that, a) the title is a bit OTT; b) the whole thing leans a little on the 'evil oppressive govt' side of things.

As to why the UK and not France, I have an idea that - and I'm not speaking as an authority here - but I have heard something along the lines that in the UK, once you are in, you are *in*, whereas in other countries you may only be granted limited status. I think, in fact, that the French authorities only allow the people in question (who end up in the camps at the Ch Tunnel entrance, for instance) into France on the basis that they are on the way elsewhere. It is not a 'right to asylum'.

Indeed, I'm not sure but I think Britain is more open towards asylum seekers than either France or Germany. Not sure *at all* about that.

Of course, different countries tend to attract specific nationalities of immigrants. In Germany it is the Turkish population, in France the North African Arab community and in the UK Indian and Pakistani communities, as well as Caribbean immigrants.

There is also a lively trade in china where gangs virtually force (or at best con) groups of local chinese into make the long and hazardous trip to the UK, where they will be expected (if they arrive unharmed) to work to pay the journey. Often passports or Id papers are witheld and the would-be immigrants are effectively enslaved. No doubt everyone remembers the horrific discovery of some twenty or thirty chinese illegal immigrants 18 months ago.

As has been said, it's a thorny subject, and one that is causing both sides of the Westminster mob no end of difficulty. They all want to accuse each other of being anti-immigration while discretely advocating cutting it down and ensuring efficient controls. Nobody wants to be financing the next big Social Security fraud either.

Well, it was a brave subject to pick, Fenny, best of luck with it. I think the key word in the guidelines that is going to give you the most trouble here is 'balance'.

So grab your pole and get out on that high-wire! Rather you than me.

seeya
spiff

Of course, there's always the possibility that anybody who can read a paper knows that attitudes to immigrants is a bigger problem in France and Germany than it is in Britain.
Sorry, it's true-for all the recent unrest in Oldham, we have never had anything like the scale of difficulties the Germans have with the Turkish immigrant population (for example), and the idea of a right wing crack-pot like Jean-Marie Le Pen getting a substantial chunk of the vote in Britain is ridiculous.
Glad to see the decline of Commonwealth obviously occupies so much of NZ's time, Loony. We never hear anything about what's happening in New Zealand here in the British Press. Wonder why?

New Zealand journalists use big words

Big words or big letters?

Maybe the immigrants who want to be British are just returning to the land of their forefathers. From what I've read, (proper histories, not British comics, such as the Sun, Mirror and Express) those colonists indulged in quite a bit of hanky panky.

I don't understand - are you asking for some of your sheep back?

Actually, since the Poms joined Europe in 1972, New Zealand has diversified quite a bit. The once mighty sheep has been supplanted by (sane) cows.

And of course, unique amongst native peoples colonised by the Brits, the NZ Maoris weren't defeated. They ended up with a treaty (Treaty of Waitangi) that guaranteed their right to ownership of their land and resources.

Frogbit, you will be pleased to learn British immigrants are still welcome to come and join us in our clean, green paradise.

Actually, I'd be delighted...

Likewise - can you seek asylum from smog?

I will be updating over the weekend, I hope. Not right now, but soon...

x x Fenny (UT)

> "it has no obligation whatsoever to do so."

I'm pretty sure we're signed up to the relevant international treaties on refugees. So yes, we do have obligations.

Basically, I think this entry just needs more information at the moment. You might want to consider whether you want to title it to indicate the UK-centric nature of this entry. And whether you want to deal with the political issues, or simply be an entry on 'living as an asylum seeker in the UK'.

And we've finally got rid of the voucher system. Hooray for New Labour - getting rid of the inanities that they created.