Refugee crisis

[The Count Of Monte Cristo]

yeah and all 800,000 are coming right here Marco, specifically Blackpool, words got out to the Syrians how its a home from home for them

:-)

 

[aguero93:20]

I thought that myself at first and I share the bewilderment at photo obsessives, however without the picture this discussion wouldn't be happening to the extent it has been.

At least it wasn't a selfie. There's some hope for the world yet.

 

[The Count Of Monte Cristo]

At least it wasn't a selfie. There's some hope for the world yet.

Amen to that.

 

[stonerblue]

Yep. I understand that there's a debate to be had about the level of immigration into this country and that some people think it is too high. That's a perfectly reasonable debate to be had. However, we're talking about people here who have nothing, women and children who are homeless and destitute. We should have people out there in these camps assessing those who are in greatest need, and bringing as many as possible to this country as an act of basic human decency, and instead of pissing and moaning about the numbers we should be welcoming these people with open arms. There's an opportunity here for us to use our relative wealth for a greater good and for our country to lead a worldwide response to a tragic situation, and maybe if we were to do this, some innocent lives will be saved. Surely a good use of tax payers money?

Bang on the money. Great post.

 

[BimboBob]

As monkfish has pointed out, this is categorically untrue. I find it reprehensible that some people are desperate the lay the blame for the boy's death at the hands of his parents.

Let's not get carried away here Ric, the boys Dad DID put him in a boat to go from one European country to another.

No matter the circumstances, if I had done the same I'd have blamed myself, regardless.

As they have just said on the radio, most of the refugees you see trying to climb fences etc are single men, not families. Sure we have an obligation to help, especially as we helped cause this horror of a situation, but we should be targeting the families, helping the young kids.

 

[EalingBlue2]

Let's not get carried away here Ric, the boys Dad DID put him in a boat to go from one European country to another.

No matter the circumstances, if I had done the same I'd have blamed myself, regardless.

As they have just said on the radio, most of the refugees you see trying to climb fences etc are single men, not families. Sure we have an obligation to help, especially as we helped cause this horror of a situation, but we should be targeting the families, helping the young kids.

The refugees can't win! You see the same posters in this thread and in the press criticising single males as clearly being economic migrants, or looking after themselves etc, then seconds later the men who take their family with them are criticised as being responsible for their deaths and basically child killers . So the haters have an argument either way. (BimboBob btw not insinuating you have said these things just responding to you as you have mentioned the issue)

We should help families no doubt but many of those single men may well have family back in Syria , Turkey or elsewhere.

Now is the time to act and frankly all those who think that a few refugees is beyond our means should go and see the rebuilt Tokyo or Saigon and should read about Marshall Aid or some of the amazing things modern man has done to deal with the worst of humanity.

 

[M18CTID]

When people talk of the country being full, I think it's more in relation to things like waiting lists for council properties and they do have a point.

However, if we were to take several thousand refugees there are surely other ways to accommodate them without further burdening the already bloated council house waiting lists. There must be thousands of private properties that are empty which can be put to use with the government subsidising private landlords, plus much larger empty buildings that with a bit of sprucing up could house plenty of refugees. Perhaps hotels can be utilised too. Of course, all these things will cost money but if incentives are offered to help house them then it can surely be done.

 

[kas_tippler]

Well said mate. Some horrible selfish rightwing twats on here now.

Boils down to human decency rather than politics, as soon as help is wanted to deal with these people around Manchester I'll be volunteering.

 

[Chancy Termites]

When people talk of the country being full, I think it's more in relation to things like waiting lists for council properties and they do have a point.

However, if we were to take several thousand refugees there are surely other ways to accommodate them without further burdening the already bloated council house waiting lists. There must be thousands of private properties that are empty which can be put to use with the government subsidising private landlords, plus much larger empty buildings that with a bit of sprucing up could house plenty of refugees. Perhaps hotels can be utilised too. Of course, all these things will cost money but if incentives are offered to help house them then it can surely be done.

Nowhere near enough empty buildings available. And remember, people need more than just houses. They need roads, railways, places to work, places for recreation, shops, factories to make the things they consume, schools, GPs, hospitals and so on.

Net migration to the UK is already running at 300,000 per year and has added several million to the population over the last couple of decades. Infrastructure has not come anywhere near keeping up over that time.

Syria itself won't add much to net migration but even without it, the figures are enormous. So even before we take Syria into account, there has to be a massive programme of development.

 

[stonerblue]

Nowhere near enough empty buildings available. And remember, people need more than just houses. They need roads, railways, places to work, places for recreation, shops, factories to make the things they consume, schools, GPs, hospitals and so on.

Net migration to the UK is already running at 300,000 per year and has added several million to the population over the last couple of decades. Infrastructure has not come anywhere near keeping up over that time.

Syria itself won't add much to net migration but even without it, the figures are enormous. So even before we take Syria into account, there has to be a massive programme of development.

10 second search reveals..
Appendix 2: empty homes
This was a supporting detail page of the main policy document.

Just over 635,000 homes in England are empty, and around 216,000 of those have been empty for over 6 months.

 

[yorknomore]

10 second search reveals..
Appendix 2: empty homes
This was a supporting detail page of the main policy document.

Just over 635,000 homes in England are empty, and around 216,000 of those have been empty for over 6 months.

And all of these houses are habitable? And what are we doing to help the 185,000 homeless people already just in England?

 

[aguero93:20]

And all of these houses are habitable? And what are we doing to help the 185,000 homeless people already just in England?

Fuck all while you keep voting the Tories in.

 

[hilts]

And all of these houses are habitable? And what are we doing to help the 185,000 homeless people already just in England?

Wherever these economic migrants end up it won't be in a Russians townhouse in Kensington or an MPs second home that's for sure

 

[Chancy Termites]

10 second search reveals..
Appendix 2: empty homes
This was a supporting detail page of the main policy document.

Just over 635,000 homes in England are empty, and around 216,000 of those have been empty for over 6 months.

How many of those are in an inhabitable state? How many are lying empty because they've been CPO'd to make way for what paltry development is taking place? How many are empty because their owners died and are still going through the probate process, often by relatives who live miles away?

Trying to fill what empty homes are available and suitable is good, up to a point but would only account for a few months' need. We need millions of new houses, not tens of thousands.

What about all the other things people need? You already have to knock down houses every time you build a new road or railway line. Schools? Shops? Places of work?

Green belt legislation has to go. Planning regs need to be changed so people can't object to or delay new buildings and infrastructure. We will just have to get used to that.

 

[yorknomore]

Wherever these economic migrants end up it won't be in a Russians townhouse in Kensington or an MPs second home that's for sure

If they did it would be a great start but you are eluding to the truth, inner cities and small towns with people fighting for resources. I can't see a way out of taking the refugees because life for them must be shit, if you have ever lived rough in this country it isn't a picnic either.
But I for one am over the moon the wealthy are thinning the resources out that they dont use, like a ships captain cutting the rations.

 

[yorknomore]

Fuck all while you keep voting the Tories in.

There were no homeless while Labour were in? Where were you living when Labour held sway?

 

[aguero93:20]

There were no homeless while Labour were in? Where were you living when Labour held sway?

There were homeless people but the government in power didn't have a policy of shrinking the state ie cuts for cuts sake. I'm not talking about Tony Blair and his Tory lite government btw.

 

[yorknomore]

There were homeless people but the government in power didn't have a policy of shrinking the state ie cuts for cuts sake. I'm not talking about Tony Blair and his Tory lite government btw.

I can agree with that Bliar was as bad if not worse than the Tories, but the return to Labours socialist values isn't going to happen over night and in the meantime the resources at the bottom are getting thinner and thinner. Helping the refugees is a priority and we should and have to do something but not at the expense of the poor and homeless which is what will happen.

 

[aguero93:20]

I can agree with that Bliar was as bad if not worse than the Tories, but the return to Labours socialist values isn't going to happen over night and in the meantime the resources at the bottom are getting thinner and thinner. Helping the refugees is a priority and we should and have to do something but not at the expense of the poor and homeless which is what will happen.

There's fuck all being done for poor and homeless people anyway and that's nothing to do with resources just the direction that the resources are being channelled into, that won't change one bit whether refugees are taken in or not.

 

[yorknomore]

There's fuck all being done for poor and homeless people anyway and that's nothing to do with resources just the direction that the resources are being channelled into, that won't change one bit whether refugees are taken in or not.

The resources are going to become thinner for the poor "Channelling" them means that less funds hit the floor, until we sort our rich out we are not in a position to even help ourselves.