Failed asylum seekers & Legal aid financial limits

Should legal aid be capped?

  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Depends o n the circumstance

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    212

slim

War Hero
#1
It seems that as soon as an asylum seekers case is rejected an appeal is lodged. The appeal lawyer is paid for by you the taxpayer. Surely the legal aid bill for this should be capped, after all his/her case has been heard by trained government officials. If I as a British citizen attempted to claim asylum in a non european country and had my claim rejected I would be placed on the next flight back to where I came from. I certainly would not be granted legal aid. Human rights lawyers are making an extremely good living from this situation.
 
#3
It should be equal for everyone if we're paying. Maybe we can work a similar system as student loans. You have to repay all or a fair percentage of it, regardless of the outcome. If you win, any compo could cover it (Judiciary could factor this in to the final tally) and if you lose - you're obviously a lying sod who deserves to have to repay it.

Heartless, ain't I. Feeling a little opinionated tonight. Maybe should log out and get a cuppa.

Ah hell, standing by for incoming - now where's me tin hat?

SF
 
#4
If you ever experience in this country what many asylum seekers have gone through in the countries they come from Slim, I sincerely hope you get it.
 

slim

War Hero
#5
golden_rivet said:
If you ever experience in this country what many asylum seekers have gone through in the countries they come from Slim, I sincerely hope you get it.
I have travelled the globe for many years visiting numerous countries many of which are not too pleasant to live in. While there are some genuine asylum seekers the majority are simply after a better lifestyle. These are weeded out by government officials paid to investigate each case thoroughly. If they fail then they should be immediately returned to country of origin. Its because of the dogooders that the country cannot return scum like the hook.
Genuine asylum seekers do not need to appeal
 
#6
Cant see why they should be entitled to it in the first place.Its not like they have paid anything into the pot to start with.
 
#9
slim said:
golden_rivet said:
If you ever experience in this country what many asylum seekers have gone through in the countries they come from Slim, I sincerely hope you get it.
I have travelled the globe for many years visiting numerous countries many of which are not too pleasant to live in. While there are some genuine asylum seekers the majority are simply after a better lifestyle. These are weeded out by government officials paid to investigate each case thoroughly. If they fail then they should be immediately returned to country of origin. Its because of the dogooders that the country cannot return scum like the hook.
Genuine asylum seekers do not need to appeal
I really do wish I had your faith in the accuracy of our governemnt departments. You are talking about the Home Office which the present secretary of state claimed was unfit for purpose. Prove to me that they really do get it right first time and that officials are not selling permits to stay for sex etc, and I might agree with you.

Peter
 
#10
Maxi_77 said:
slim said:
golden_rivet said:
If you ever experience in this country what many asylum seekers have gone through in the countries they come from Slim, I sincerely hope you get it.
I have travelled the globe for many years visiting numerous countries many of which are not too pleasant to live in. While there are some genuine asylum seekers the majority are simply after a better lifestyle. These are weeded out by government officials paid to investigate each case thoroughly. If they fail then they should be immediately returned to country of origin. Its because of the dogooders that the country cannot return scum like the hook.
Genuine asylum seekers do not need to appeal
I really do wish I had your faith in the accuracy of our governemnt departments. You are talking about the Home Office which the present secretary of state claimed was unfit for purpose. Prove to me that they really do get it right first time and that officials are not selling permits to stay for sex etc, and I might agree with you.

Peter
If they do get a permit because they have donated sex to the official then at least they have put somethin into the country
 
#11
[quote="slim]If they do get a permit because they have donated sex to the official then at least they have put somethin into the country[/quote]

not to mention AIDS or some other STD!
 

FlagWagger

GCM
Book Reviewer
#12
slim said:
If they do get a permit because they have donated sex to the official then at least they have put somethin into the country
I think your phrasing leaves something to be desired here - they've given something to the country rather than put something in - it could be better argued that a representative of the country has put something into them! :) :)
 
#13
andym said:
[quote="slim]If they do get a permit because they have donated sex to the official then at least they have put somethin into the country
not to mention AIDS or some other STD![/quote]

I'll have you know I've met some great women in STD clinics.
They're great pick up joints. At least you know they do do the business.
 

bunnyjumper

Lantern Swinger
#14
How many British people get legal aid in Thailand when they get caught carrying crack in their crack?

More to the point, would a British person get legal aid in Saudi, if they decided to deport them for practising a non-muslim religion?

Heck, you'd struggle to get legal aid in the UK as a bona fide born and bred British citizen! Which is more to the point - we're paying for people to get something most of us aren't entitled to ourselves. :?

I accept the arguments about the oppressive regimes they come from, but when they come here at our expense, claiming asylum, supposedly fearful for their lives, one would expect a certain amount of loyalty to the country and people that have taken them in. Instead however, when you try to help them dismantle the oppressive regime from whence they came, they suddenly became fiercely loyal to said oppressive regime, and start flag burning. (and don't tell me that the majority don't sit there in their council flats secretly smirking when they see it all on their 60" plasma screen they got on the social. :evil: ). And yes I know a lot of the trouble makers are actually British "citizens", but these are the same people who burned flags when we stood by and let certain regimes continue.

Are they just worried that once the regime is dismantled, they will have to go back and stop getting the life of riley in the good old capitalistic UK!! Perhaps that's the motivation behind flag burning.......

Legal aid for asylum seekers? NO!! If they're genuine then they should trust the system and abide by it's decision like the rest of us. Isn't that what it's like to be British???
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top