 |
 |
 |
New research just published by the Home Office exploring the factors that influence the decision making of asylum seekers and their reasons for choosing the UK in preference to other destinations, has exploded the myth that the majority of people coming to this country have a detailed knowledge of our immigration and/or our benefits systems.
The research interviewed 65 asylum seekers and refugees already living in the UK as well as reviewing other research. The majority of the interviewees were ultimately driven by the need to reach a place of safety, irrespective of the country they found themselves in.
The key findings of the report highlight that the interviewees also took the following into account when deciding on a destination:
- the presence of relatives and friends already in the UK
- the belief that the UK is a safe, tolerant and democratic country
- previous links between their country and the UK (including previous British colony and ability to speak English)
Vitally, the report highlights very little evidence amongst the interviewees that they had any detailed knowledge of UK immigration procedures, their entitlements to benefits whilst in the UK or the availability of work once in the UK. Most interviewees stated a desire to work and support themselves during their asylum application rather than be dependant on the state.
To view the complete report please click here. (220kb PDF Document)
New MORI Poll June 2002
A poll carried out by MORI to coincide with Refugee Week (June 17-23) shows that the vast majority of the British public are sympathetic towards refugees and asylum seekers, and when faced with a refugee, are four times more likely to show a positive attitude towards that person than a negative one.
The poll also confirms other earlier findings about public misunderstandings over refugee numbers in the UK and their entitlement to state benefits. The poll also highlights the public belief that the media are more likely to portray refugee stories negatively rather than positively.
The key findings of the report show:
- that the public overestimate by 10 times the number of refugees claiming asylum in the UK
- 85% of respondents believe the media to be overtly negative in covering refugee issues
- The term ‘illegal immigrant’ was the most associated with media reporting of the issues, with 64% highlighting this term
- 4% said, if forced to seek refuge themselves, they would want to be able to work to provide for themselves and their families
- Young people were also less informed of refugee issues and therefore less likely to have a positive impression than the overall population.
Taken from BNP website April 2002
BNP councilors will oppose the influx of 'asylum seekers' and 'refugees', and will refuse to lavish money on these economic migrants. We believe that the money the council raises through tax should be spent exclusively on local British people to provide quality services for them. By halting all further expenditure on 'asylum seekers', we will be in a position to make substantial council tax cuts, or to increase spending on services - and we'll ask council-tax payers which they want.
NERS response
Firstly, NERS questions the BNP's use of the term 'economic migrant'. A single asylum seeker aged between 18-24 receives £29.89 a week. This can hardly be considered an attraction for those who are fleeing their countries of origin. By clumsily labeling all asylum seekers as economic migrants, the BNP shows itself to be totally unaware of the vast differences between what constitutes an economic migrant and an asylum seeker.
By halting all expenditure on asylum seekers, the BNP shows itself to not only be unaware of the UK's international commitments (the UK is a signatory of the 1951 Geneva Convention, which guarantees protection for refugees) but also shows blatant disregard for making people destitute. The nationality of a person should not be the deciding factor in whether a person receives assistance or not.
back to top
