Dismayed!

How can they even contemplate this?

Why does our government feel that it’s ok to compromise the welfare of these children just to pander to the hysterical demands of the xenophobes and the muck-stirrers?  And why do our politicians always target the wrong people when they need a quick-fix to save themselves after they’ve messed up?  The pressure is on them to provide figures which will appease the compassionately-challenged, narrow-minded groan-bags so what do they do?  They go for the quick and easy option – children.  They have no idea where most of the failed asylum seekers are hiding out so they grab the children instead.  Makes their life easier, makes the paper figures look good for a while and they gain back some credibility.

This…

“There are likely to be occasions when IND takes a decision to remove … which is not in accordance with the best interests of the child but is necessary for the immigration control.”

…is NOT acceptable!

If children are involved then all circumstances should be assessed in detail and with sensitivity.  Of course it’s far better to repatriate these children to their own countries – their own families.  But only if and when circumstances are fully suitable to do so.  And certainly not just to appease the scare-mongers or to improve the figures.

Knee-jerk reactions and quick fixes are never a solution and are simply going to let down these vulnerable kids who have endured too much already. They need protecting. We should not let our politicians exploit them further just to save their own sorry faces.  The problems are within the system.  The system-managers have failed.  Genuinely vulnerable children may now have to pay for the mistakes made within a system that has consequently allowed failed asylum seekers to “disappear”.  And why have they (the children that is) been given a “failed” status anyway?  What sort of system is it anyway that refuses asylum to a child who is alone and in need of refuge?  What sort of system would return a child, who has been trafficked into the country for prostitution, to that very same danger?

I acknowledge that the immigration issue does need to be addressed but only in terms of physical space.  Britain is a small island.  But it’s also one of the richest countries in the world.  Anyway, what’s immigration go to do with asylum?  Economic immigration should be controlled appropriately according to population figures/trends and the size of the island…and of course taking the environmental impact into consideration. 

Asylum is different from immigration (and it’s amazing how little known this fact is).  We must always consider genuine asylum seekers…there but for the grace of God and circumstance.  And furthermore, we must strive for asylum-seeking families to remain together because there are some heart-breaking stories about children being separated from their parents once they arrive here.  It’s bad enough that they’ve been dragged for miles and miles into a strange, foreign country but to be then torn from their parents is just brutal.  And there are some sad reports about the treatment of these children under our care. 

And while I’m ranting on about aslyum issues…why are people so gullible?  Why do they always believe the myth-making Murdoch style sensationalism about asylum seekers in the UK and all the blatantly obvious myths that surround their situation?  Gross deceptions such as asylum seekers receiving more benefits than the nationals and being pampered by the state.  Fact is, they get barely enough to survive on and aren’t even allowed to seek work to support themselves until their status has been established. And the fact that many asylum seekers are skilled or professional belies the claims that they come to Britain just to seek our welfare benefits. And other ridiculous myths such as Britain being a soft touch when in fact we take on a very small fraction of asylum seekers most of which, incidentally, are “war displaced” from countries that have been ‘armed’ by the west.  It’s actually the poor countries that are tending to most of the world’s refugees. 

A world without borders?  Dream on.

Anyway, although all very important, that’s not my point here.  Clearly, the issue of failed asylum-seekers is rearing its head again and the politicians are under pressure to come up with something but the issue of child asylum-seekers should remain under special circumstances - a completely separate entity with an individual set of criteria and no way should children be used as tools by politicians to juggle their figures just because they can’t find the AWOL asylum-seekers.

Rant over but not the campaign…