10 ms·

Well, this is only true as long as UK is part of EU. It's an EU law.

widforss 10y ago
No, it's in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights article 14.1: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
pjc50 10y ago
No, it's part of the UN convention on refugees: http://www.unhcr.org/uk/1951-refugee-convention.html http://www.unhcr.org/uk/1951-refugee-convention.html
jvdl 10y ago
I must be missing something. Why didn't he apply for asylum in France then?
- throwaway049 10y ago
  Some motivations for travelling on from France to UK (as mentioned in various news media over recent years) Smugglers telling people that it is better to live in UK (the smuggler then gets to charge for the trip). Easier to get work without papers Community of people from same country of origin More generous welfare provision (UK still gives 'normal' accommodation, other EU countries are re-purposing non-residential buildings to house asylum seekers)
  - RockyMcNuts 10y ago
    more flexible / stronger / better paid labor markets ... easier to get a job in UK than France for most immigrants
- DominikR 10y ago
  Social services don't pay enough.
  - overlordalex 10y ago
    I haven't watched the video, but it would more likely be things like already having a basic grasp of English, being more familiar with the culture, etc, that would make integration easier.
  - curiousgal 10y ago
    You'll probably get downvoted but you are correct. As an Arab it sickens me how these "refugees" are choosing what country to stay in despite the fact they say they escaped war and torture. It saddens me how they are giving us, potential future immigrants with degrees and a desire to be functional parts of society, more bad rep.
    - widforss 10y ago
      As a refugee one is looking for a better life per definition. Surely the primary goal is to get away from war or threats of violence and death, but if you were starting over, wouldn't you want to start with the best possible odds?
      - curiousgal 10y ago
        The worst of those odds still beats living in Syria by a long mile believe me. For this particular guy, going for the "best possible odds" definitely doesn't justify the risk he took. In a nutshell, beggars can't be choosers.
        vidarh 10y ago
        Of course beggars can be choosers. What that statement generally means is that beggars can't generally afford to turn down charity, hoping for others to give something better. But in this case this is not what we are talking about, but a situation where someone has to decide which country they will try to apply for asylum in, amongst multiple possible options. In that case, they most definitively can choose to some extent, even though the alternatives may have different perceived risk profiles. And as with everything else, of course some people will choose badly.
- nraynaud 10y ago
  It's essentially psychological, the UK is more popular amongst refugees, and they natively speak english, the 2 other big countries speak either French or German. I forgot to add: when the application is done, he's legally pinned to the country.
- ljf 10y ago
  From listening to him, he speaks excellent English - I might also assume he'd find it easier to settle here for that reason.
- krona 10y ago
  As the original documentary laid out this week, one of the biggest motivations for them to get to the UK is that once they have asylum, it's far easier for them to get their dependents (the entire family) to move to the UK legally, for free. In other countries in the EU (Germany and France were mentioned), it can take 2-3 years for this to happen; in the UK it can take weeks.
  - pjc50 10y ago
    Why is this?
    - glomph 10y ago
      Probably because France and Germany just accept a lot more asylum seekers.
      - Fiahil 10y ago
        Indeed, Germany accepts more asylum seekers than any other in Europe. However, here in France, the problem is the bureaucracy involved. It's legendarily slow, inefficient, and painful. There is little political incentive to change it since our right wing (profoundly anti-immigration) has gained in popularity in recent years. More generally, anytime you'll have to deal with our administration, it will be incredibly painful (for foreigners and locals alike).
- Perixoog 10y ago
  He's an English teacher.
nraynaud 10y ago
No, it's directly Geneva Convention. There are some EU specific things, like the country of entry is responsible to handle the refugee status application, and the European Court Of Human rights is merciless with States giving in to their instincts on refugees, but the base principles are linked to the big treaties on war.
- roel_v 10y ago
  "and the European Court Of Human rights is merciless with States giving in to their instincts on refugees" Not disagreeing with you, just clarifying: the ECHR has nothing to do with the EU, and AFAIK there is no intention of Britain leaving the Council of Europe (essentially, complaints can be brought to the ECHR against members of the CoE).
  - tremon 10y ago
    AFAIK there is no intention of Britain leaving the Council of Europe Britain's new PM seems to have that intent: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/uk-must-leave-european-convention-on-human-rights-theresa-may-eu-referendum http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/uk-must-leav...
  - andyjohnson0 10y ago
    Theresa May (new UK Prime Minister) has unfortunately been very clear about her desire to leave the European Convention on Human Rights [1] though not afaik the Council of Europe. The Europhobic wing on the Conservative Party may be satisfied with just leaving the EU, or they may not, but I suspect the idea of abrogating the treaty will reappear at some point post-Brexit. (Just to be clear: I profoundly disagree with her on this.) [1] http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/uk-must-leave-european-convention-on-human-rights-theresa-may-eu-referendum http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/uk-must-leav...
    - matthewmacleod 10y ago
      While I agree with this, I would point out that she explicitly ruled out moving forward with this policy as prime minister.

No, it's in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights article 14.1: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."

pjc50 10y ago

No, it's part of the UN convention on refugees: http://www.unhcr.org/uk/1951-refugee-convention.html http://www.unhcr.org/uk/1951-refugee-convention.html

jvdl 10y ago

I must be missing something. Why didn't he apply for asylum in France then?

throwaway049 10y ago
Some motivations for travelling on from France to UK (as mentioned in various news media over recent years) Smugglers telling people that it is better to live in UK (the smuggler then gets to charge for the trip). Easier to get work without papers Community of people from same country of origin More generous welfare provision (UK still gives 'normal' accommodation, other EU countries are re-purposing non-residential buildings to house asylum seekers)
- RockyMcNuts 10y ago
  more flexible / stronger / better paid labor markets ... easier to get a job in UK than France for most immigrants
DominikR 10y ago
Social services don't pay enough.
- overlordalex 10y ago
  I haven't watched the video, but it would more likely be things like already having a basic grasp of English, being more familiar with the culture, etc, that would make integration easier.
- curiousgal 10y ago
  You'll probably get downvoted but you are correct. As an Arab it sickens me how these "refugees" are choosing what country to stay in despite the fact they say they escaped war and torture. It saddens me how they are giving us, potential future immigrants with degrees and a desire to be functional parts of society, more bad rep.
  - widforss 10y ago
    As a refugee one is looking for a better life per definition. Surely the primary goal is to get away from war or threats of violence and death, but if you were starting over, wouldn't you want to start with the best possible odds?
    - curiousgal 10y ago
      The worst of those odds still beats living in Syria by a long mile believe me. For this particular guy, going for the "best possible odds" definitely doesn't justify the risk he took. In a nutshell, beggars can't be choosers.
      - vidarh 10y ago
        Of course beggars can be choosers. What that statement generally means is that beggars can't generally afford to turn down charity, hoping for others to give something better. But in this case this is not what we are talking about, but a situation where someone has to decide which country they will try to apply for asylum in, amongst multiple possible options. In that case, they most definitively can choose to some extent, even though the alternatives may have different perceived risk profiles. And as with everything else, of course some people will choose badly.
nraynaud 10y ago
It's essentially psychological, the UK is more popular amongst refugees, and they natively speak english, the 2 other big countries speak either French or German. I forgot to add: when the application is done, he's legally pinned to the country.
ljf 10y ago
From listening to him, he speaks excellent English - I might also assume he'd find it easier to settle here for that reason.
krona 10y ago
As the original documentary laid out this week, one of the biggest motivations for them to get to the UK is that once they have asylum, it's far easier for them to get their dependents (the entire family) to move to the UK legally, for free. In other countries in the EU (Germany and France were mentioned), it can take 2-3 years for this to happen; in the UK it can take weeks.
- pjc50 10y ago
  Why is this?
  - glomph 10y ago
    Probably because France and Germany just accept a lot more asylum seekers.
    - Fiahil 10y ago
      Indeed, Germany accepts more asylum seekers than any other in Europe. However, here in France, the problem is the bureaucracy involved. It's legendarily slow, inefficient, and painful. There is little political incentive to change it since our right wing (profoundly anti-immigration) has gained in popularity in recent years. More generally, anytime you'll have to deal with our administration, it will be incredibly painful (for foreigners and locals alike).
Perixoog 10y ago
He's an English teacher.

nraynaud 10y ago

No, it's directly Geneva Convention. There are some EU specific things, like the country of entry is responsible to handle the refugee status application, and the European Court Of Human rights is merciless with States giving in to their instincts on refugees, but the base principles are linked to the big treaties on war.

roel_v 10y ago
"and the European Court Of Human rights is merciless with States giving in to their instincts on refugees" Not disagreeing with you, just clarifying: the ECHR has nothing to do with the EU, and AFAIK there is no intention of Britain leaving the Council of Europe (essentially, complaints can be brought to the ECHR against members of the CoE).
- tremon 10y ago
  AFAIK there is no intention of Britain leaving the Council of Europe Britain's new PM seems to have that intent: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/uk-must-leave-european-convention-on-human-rights-theresa-may-eu-referendum http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/uk-must-leav...
- andyjohnson0 10y ago
  Theresa May (new UK Prime Minister) has unfortunately been very clear about her desire to leave the European Convention on Human Rights [1] though not afaik the Council of Europe. The Europhobic wing on the Conservative Party may be satisfied with just leaving the EU, or they may not, but I suspect the idea of abrogating the treaty will reappear at some point post-Brexit. (Just to be clear: I profoundly disagree with her on this.) [1] http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/uk-must-leave-european-convention-on-human-rights-theresa-may-eu-referendum http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/uk-must-leav...
  - matthewmacleod 10y ago
    While I agree with this, I would point out that she explicitly ruled out moving forward with this policy as prime minister.