In rural Shropshire a quarter of a million buys you a fairly decent new build house. Hence there is some anger from locals, whose kids struggle to get on the housing ladder, that 21 homes on a new estate at Stoke Heath have been bought by Serco to house 83 asylum seekers who will be living there for free while funded on benefits. But to me the real absurdity of the asylum laws is revealed by the 1 family of asylum seekers already on site. That is Muhammad Nadeem, Shamaila and their four kids.
The Daily Mail reports:
Muhammad Nadeem, his wife Shamaila, were moved to the site from Stockport, 60 miles away with their four children.
The family fled their native Pakistan two years ago after fearing for their safety and wanting to make a better life for themselves in the UK. Mr Nadeem obtained a work visa and found work as an Uber driver in Stockport, but when the visa ran out they applied for asylum and were initially moved from their home to a hotel while their application was processed.
They are now living in a barely furnished four-bedroom house on the development in Stoke Heath.
Ends.
So Mr Nadeem got a work visa to be an uber driver. How? With 9 million economically inactive folks in the UK do we really need to import chaps to drive an Uber? And then allow them to bring their non working wife and four kids here to be supported by the State? Was his work visa actually obtained by a taxi firm? I do not believe that he and his family “fled” Pakistan. They are not Christians who might have a rough time in Pakistan. On what possible basis are we saying that they were fleeing.
If they were fleeing they would have claimed asylum on day 1 but did not as that would clearly be a weak case. Asylum was only claimed when the work visa ( which I struggle to see should have been granted in the first place) ran out.
The obvious “gaps” in the tale of Mr Nadeem are the reason that folks are so angry with the asylum system in the first place. He has abused the system. A well run system would spot that and would not need to bag a luxury house for him in rural Shropshire it would simply have him and his family on a plane back to Karachi. And there would be a stewards into how on earth he obtained a work visa in the first place with those who assisted him facing severe enough sanctions as to deter others.
My wife’s family moved here from India in the 1960s and have been good taxpaying, hard working, folks ever since. They came here legally and Britain is a better place for them being here. But it is folks like them who face a backlash from more and more people who look at how Mr Nadeem has gamed the system and is now sucking at the taxpayer teat and just feel anger.
Looking at that anger I see that the Government is now going to make it easier to claim asylum. Talk about pouring petrol on the flames.
The Daily Mail reports:
Muhammad Nadeem, his wife Shamaila, were moved to the site from Stockport, 60 miles away with their four children.
The family fled their native Pakistan two years ago after fearing for their safety and wanting to make a better life for themselves in the UK. Mr Nadeem obtained a work visa and found work as an Uber driver in Stockport, but when the visa ran out they applied for asylum and were initially moved from their home to a hotel while their application was processed.
They are now living in a barely furnished four-bedroom house on the development in Stoke Heath.
Ends.
So Mr Nadeem got a work visa to be an uber driver. How? With 9 million economically inactive folks in the UK do we really need to import chaps to drive an Uber? And then allow them to bring their non working wife and four kids here to be supported by the State? Was his work visa actually obtained by a taxi firm? I do not believe that he and his family “fled” Pakistan. They are not Christians who might have a rough time in Pakistan. On what possible basis are we saying that they were fleeing.
If they were fleeing they would have claimed asylum on day 1 but did not as that would clearly be a weak case. Asylum was only claimed when the work visa ( which I struggle to see should have been granted in the first place) ran out.
The obvious “gaps” in the tale of Mr Nadeem are the reason that folks are so angry with the asylum system in the first place. He has abused the system. A well run system would spot that and would not need to bag a luxury house for him in rural Shropshire it would simply have him and his family on a plane back to Karachi. And there would be a stewards into how on earth he obtained a work visa in the first place with those who assisted him facing severe enough sanctions as to deter others.
My wife’s family moved here from India in the 1960s and have been good taxpaying, hard working, folks ever since. They came here legally and Britain is a better place for them being here. But it is folks like them who face a backlash from more and more people who look at how Mr Nadeem has gamed the system and is now sucking at the taxpayer teat and just feel anger.
Looking at that anger I see that the Government is now going to make it easier to claim asylum. Talk about pouring petrol on the flames.