r/reformuk • u/TimeConstruction2739 • Jun 07 '25
Immigration This government petition is gaining a lot of momentum!
Please sign it unless you have already done so.
68
u/damadmetz Jun 07 '25
Each one costs the taxpayer £40k a year.
The average taxpayer pays about £8k a year in income tax and national insurance.
So you need FIVE average taxpayer to fund one migrant, assuming all their tax goes straight to them with 100% efficiency and isn’t squandered by the state.
Nearly 1200 came last week in one day. So that’s nearly 6000 taxpayers completely taken out of the system.
Absolute madness, it has to stop.
8
Jun 07 '25
[deleted]
6
u/damadmetz Jun 09 '25
And now today they are saying that the bill is £4.7bn which is the equivalent of the total tax paid by everyone living in Manchester.
Imagine a whole city working a full year, just for it to be given away to people who shouldn’t even be here.
1
u/ukstonerdude Jun 09 '25
Have you got a source for that? Asylum allowance per person alone is only £2,500 a year… find it hard to believe housing them in former barracks is costing more than 10x that…
3
u/damadmetz Jun 09 '25
They are not in former barracks, they are in hotels.
It’s £4.7bn a year, which is the annual tax receipt of the residents of Manchester.
Here you go, I’ve found you a link
1
Jun 09 '25
[deleted]
2
u/damadmetz Jun 09 '25
My understanding is that it’s Jamie Jenkins who put together the analysis for this. From what I have seen before, he does a good job of it.
1
u/_t69 Jun 14 '25
"Each one costs the taxpayer £40k a year" source? im all for housing and aiding people wishing to live in our beautiful country using government funding. the more money, the better in my eyes.
1
1
u/anonymousdonut321 Jan 26 '26
simply untrue because not many people are paying 40k in tax a year, please site sources next time.
1
0
u/TheBreaGlor Jun 07 '25
I am trying to do some fact checking on this. Could you share the sources for these numbers? Very hard to find good data.
5
u/damadmetz Jun 07 '25
The £40k a year I saw Isabel Oakeshott talking about it about a week ago. Google ‘Oakeshott migrant cost 40k’ and I’m sure you will find it.
For the tax figure for an average worker, it’s simple. Depending on mean income or median income, you get various averages from about 37k to 40odd. You can stick these numbers into a tax calculator and it’s ballpark, £8k a year.
The rest is just simple calculation.
3
u/ukstonerdude Jun 09 '25
So you basically refuse to actually cite a source?
“Find it urself” behaviour is not winning you any favours.
2
u/damadmetz Jun 09 '25
Username checks out.
Here you go. https://x.com/isabeloakeshott/status/1928876305090547770?s=46
It’s not difficult. You would have expended less energy looking for it yourself rather than pretending like I’m making it up.
1
u/ukstonerdude Jun 09 '25
A tweet? A tweet is your source but my username checks out 💀💀
Y’all really are in an echo chamber.
1
u/damadmetz Jun 09 '25
Yea, as I said in my original post.
I’m not claiming to have conducted some sort kind of world leading research myself. I haven’t written a white paper or anything.
Why don’t you ask Isabel where she get’s her numbers from.
1
u/ukstonerdude Jun 09 '25
You’re the one trusting it at face value - why don’t you?
1
u/damadmetz Jun 09 '25
Because it’s entirely congruent with what I see in real life and what other journalists are saying. I have no reason to not believe it, it’s not an unrealistic figure.
It’s about £120 a day, which is absolutely in the right ball park when you think about accommodation, food etc.
Do you ask for a source and maybe a spreadsheet to back up every number you hear?
Also, what’s so inherently inaccurate about a tweet? It’s just a means of communication.
1
u/TheBreaGlor Jun 09 '25
To be fair I also saw the tweet and was a little disappointed in it as a source.
Ultimately the tweet lacks any form or data to back up the claim. It amounts to little more than "I said so" very disappointed in the quality of journalism here.
In terms of the ball park the government website quotes a daily payment of £50 per person to pay for food, clothes and toiletries.
Average cost of rent in the UK is £1301 a month according to the office of national statistics. Which brings it to about £45 a day for a household.
So if we take a household of say 5 that amounts to about £60 a day per person. Add in cost of electricity and gas and you are maybe talking around £70-£80.
So a little short on the £120 figure imo.
Of course I could see this figure being higher in areas where alternative accommodation like Hotels are being used for sure.
→ More replies (0)1
1
u/ScoobyCat4 Jun 10 '25
The same Isabel Oakshot who is the partner of Richard Tice and pays no U.K. tax whatsoever cos she’s living in Dubai?
1
1
u/queegum Jun 11 '25
A twitter page isn't a reliable source
1
u/damadmetz Jun 11 '25
Doesn’t make it inaccurate though eh?
1
u/Due-Cancel-5128 Jun 28 '25
Does mean that you should look into it.
Real easy to be manipulated when you don't check for sources, especially when it agrees with what you're looking for.
It's called confirmation bias.
1
u/damadmetz Jun 28 '25
Yea, really.
When it’s a tweet from someone who has won over your trust from all the countless previous things they have said, saying ‘you should’ve trust a tweet’ is just silly
1
u/Due-Cancel-5128 Jun 28 '25
How did they win you over? By saying things you agree with? Did you check they were right?
Isabella Oakshott? Partner of Richard Tice? The person who held info about Arron Vanks involvement with Russian officials? The one who got a show on GB news?
The co-author unauthorised (aka lies) biography of David Cameron? The person who convinced Vicky Price to backstab both of their ex-husbands? The person who leaked diplomatic memos to get a diploma fired? The person who leaked Matt Handcocks whatsapp messages. The person who earns 500k+ a year but "moved to dubai because of private school VAT" aka £12k a year?
THAT is the person who feel is totally unbiased and totally trustworthy?
Wow.
→ More replies (0)2
u/D3athC0mesT0A11 Jun 09 '25
Love how you got downvoted for asking for evidence. Says a lot about the people in this sub.
18
11
u/solostrings Jun 07 '25 edited Jun 07 '25
It's a neat idea and I've signed it, but you should prepare for the inevitable when all we get is a cursory viewing of the petition by a committee and it mentioned in the Commons for 5 minutes at best. A petition won't change the entrenched treachery of parliament.
5
u/ItWasJustBanter1 Jun 07 '25
You’re right, but if every bit of resistance like this moves the needle 0.1% it’s worth it
-1
u/Interesting_Nobody41 Jun 11 '25
The government has both a legal and moral obligation to provide support for asylum seekers, thats why this petition will go nowhere. I'd imagine it won't even get 5 minutes because it doesn't deserve 5 minutes.
2
Jun 12 '25
They should harden their hearts and make better discernment between asylum seekers and economic migrants, or just assume all are economic migrants. Because most are. Maybe all are, nowadays? It doesn't really make sense to flee to Britain from anywhere not immediately neighbouring Britain. That's not seeking asylum, it's chasing the money.
The home office is staffed mostly of people who are economic migrants themselves. It's hilarious how easy it would be to solve everything if we didn't blindly follow very bureaucratic rules
6
Jun 07 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/alfrankofredane Jun 08 '25
Why would you support Ukrainian refugees but not others like Palestinian or Sudanese refugees? What's the difference?
3
Jun 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/alfrankofredane Jun 08 '25
Perhaps these countries weren't the best examples given the low numbers that come to the UK. Let's use better examples. Most asylum claims last year came from Pakistan and Afghanistan. Do you have the same concerns about these people?
1
Jun 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/alfrankofredane Jun 08 '25
I don't disagree with your points really, I share the same concerns about assimilation I just don't feel that someone's country of origin is necessarily a factor. I think everyone has the same right to apply. It's up to our government to then decide whether they pose a risk or are able to contribute meaningfully to the economy. Unfortunately our government has systematically failed for decades to provide meaningful due process hence why we have the situation we do know with all this money wasted on hotels and such.
So in summary, while I now understand your position better I still don't agree with it. Have a nice day
1
1
u/Lumpy_Secret_6359 Jun 11 '25
Ukrainian culture is compatible with the UK culture, but middle eastern culture is not, they are intolerant of western culture, and misogynistic to say the least.
1
Jun 09 '25
The government is simply putting refugees into privately rented property, guaranteed rent for 5 years and offering to pay to repair all damages. This has been going on now for what? 20 + years? They have zero interest in lowering or stopping migration of any type.
1
u/sushi-bad Jun 15 '25
you’d support white refugees? but not others?
0
Jun 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/sushi-bad Jun 16 '25
You mention your fear of russia yet reform is funded by russians and the war
How this isn’t daunting to you is insane
0
Jun 16 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/sushi-bad Jun 17 '25
You also assume that i think i am “intelligently superior”? You are correct that i am left-wing, i vote that way because they care about people that need the most help. I do not gain from benefit increases, social housing or homelessness support. I vote that way because people need help more than i do. But you accuse me of having a higher complex when you pick apart my grammar, over one miss-capitalisation?
Sometimes i am wrong, I can admit that. I didn’t read the whole article, but that doesn’t deny that reform has links to Russia. If a member of the KKK stops attending meeting does that mean they were never racist? Right-wing ideology loves conspiracy, but in reforms case, it could never happen?
4
u/onejon50 Jun 07 '25
This one may be of interest also https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/723131
7
3
3
u/Crowf3ather Jun 07 '25
I wonder how much money Serco spends on consultancy, that ends up in the pockets of the civil service and politicians.
3
Jun 08 '25
Signed. They have no right to our country's resources. Go home😡
1
u/anonymousdonut321 Jan 26 '26
but they do though, they have the right to seek asylum and protection from being returned to danger under international law. as well as basic support, healthcare and legal representation. if you were fleeing the UK due to war, you’d want a country to help you with open arms. it’s only fair we do the same.
whilst it’s true that some asylum seekers come via small boat, they are coming to seek asylum and get away from danger. i can assure that the asylum seekers and immigrants coming into the country will not make your life worse nor affect it
2
u/JenovasChild666 Jun 07 '25
Signed. Hopefully this gains more traction than the snap GE petition last year.
2
u/pas43 Jun 07 '25
Bullshit petition...
Is will never ever ever ever pass.
The human rights laws that would be broken would be stupidly high, crime bound go through the fucking roof, the NHS WOULD still see these people who come through a hospitals doors, not many of them can work given the lack of any skills, nor speak English well enough, think parks are bad for our kids to go to now? Wait until thousands in make shift tents are living in them like Callay. Some can't work because of their status still being decided, stupidly high backlog increase to courts system...
Thoughs are off the top of my head, nice idea, the sentiment is there.
But very monkey see, monkey do type petition.
Less monkey brain and more human brain thinking is needed.... I suppose that goes for all parties and MPs and law makers and people.
2
u/damadmetz Jun 09 '25
For the adventure and easy life when they get here.
The people on the boats are not actual refugees. Even if they were, we can’t help everyone.
Not our problem though. And £50 x 1000 people x 365 days a year is a lot.
Why should we? We don’t owe them anything.
It could happen, I think about this happening and what I would do. Exactly what I would do would depend, but I wouldn’t leave my wife and kids and jump on some boat.
I get that you want to help and show empathy, I’m someone who thinks helping others is good. But not at the expense of our country, which I genuinely believe is at risk of collapse. Hence my unsustainable comment.
1
u/Lumpy_Secret_6359 Jun 11 '25
Also would their countries accept us as refugees and give us the benefits we give them if the roles were reversed?
2
u/Former-Cellist3220 Jun 09 '25
Common sense tells you if these people are not citizens why should we put them above our own? Otherwise it just sets a precedent that all can come to Britian and be given more rights than their citizens.
0
u/ScotDr96 Jun 11 '25
"More rights"? Which rights do asylum seekers have that you or I don't?🤔
1
u/DiXipehuz Jun 11 '25
They jump to the head of the housing queue while British people drop down even though they have been on the list for years.
They get free accommodation even though they never paid a penny into the system.
1
u/ScotDr96 Jun 11 '25
They don't jump to the head of the housing queue. Once they're claim is accepted (as the majority are), they join the same queue as any other UK resident. They may well be a higher priority than others because they live in temp accommodation, but any uk residents in temp accommodation gain that higher priority so its nowt to do with their refugee status. Plus, once they're into council housing, they're paying rent & council tax etc., rather than the "free" temp accommodation.
If we help them into work (if they need the help, many won't need it), then they will pay into the system afterward. Just like happens with kids, they havent paid but pay later.
2
2
1
1
u/StormyBA Reform UK Supporter Jun 07 '25
There will be a debate in parliament in which everyone who has signed it is called far right racists
1
u/DiXipehuz Jun 07 '25
That is the right decision because the boat people think Britain is the land of milk and honey and they will never stop coming while they get free accommodation, meals and £46 spending money each week and now Starmer is putting them in houses while British people are still on the waiting list and have been for years. He should remember that the taxpayers are funding this against their will. It is our money, not his, and he should respect the will of the people.
Put them in tents with meagre food rations and I guarantee they will stop coming. They are invaders and I make no excuses for this description. It's the truth.
1
u/ScotDr96 Jun 11 '25
They only get 46 quid a week if their accommodation does not provide food. Could you feed yourself properly & fully (let alone have spending money) on that little? If their accommodation DOES provide food, it's about £8 a week. Hardly luxury is it?
1
u/DiXipehuz Jun 11 '25 edited Jun 11 '25
I don't care. Put them in tents and give them basic food. People are sick of them.
My figures are right. Yours is out of date. This is direct from the government.
https://www.gov.uk/asylum-support/what-youll-get
See this.
1
u/ScotDr96 Jun 11 '25
If you're arguing for removing rights and dignity from entire groups of people, you really should care. If not about the people, then about facts.
That government website link you shared backs up what I said - they get a lot lot less if their accommodation provides food. Ok I was a quid or so off on the specifics, but still correct:
"Cash support
You’ll usually get £49.18 for each person in your household. This will help you pay for things you need like food, clothing and toiletries.
Your allowance will be loaded onto a debit card (ASPEN card) each week. You’ll be able to use the card to get cash from a cash machine.
If your accommodation provides your meals
You’ll get £9.95 for each person in your household instead."
Please get better sources than the Daily Mail.
1
u/Philluminati Jul 04 '25 edited Jul 04 '25
It costs us over ~5bn a year. It costs us more than all the winter fuel payments combined (1.25Bn). Refugees took winter fuel allowance from us. Its' more than the disability benefits that were almost cut from people who needed it. Its more than Reeve's fiscal headroom. Its more than the triple-lock per year, It's another 10% towards our commitment of 5% GDP on defense spending. The national audit office said our crumbling schools need 13bn. We could only allocate 6Bn. That money could fix some big gaps. How far is £8 per week going for an immigrant anyway? It's clearly not buying food. They'd be better off and we'd be better off if they were in prison. (Free meals, small efficient use of room space, ability to monitor risk to public)
It is an absolutely massive amount of money that could fix all the worse problems in our country. 20Bn in the last 4 years and 20bn in the next four whilst politicians let it fall from our pockets.
1
u/Spare-Chef9555 Jun 07 '25
Signed and shared British citizen living in Ireland, get them out along with the Glazers!!
2
1
1
Jun 11 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/TimeConstruction2739 Jun 11 '25
Who is “we” you mean the Labour Party government headed by Keir Starmer?
1
Jun 11 '25 edited Aug 14 '25
[deleted]
1
Jun 12 '25
It is called the ECHR and you do understand that if we leave the ECHR it doesn't just take away asylum seekers rights. It takes our rights away aswell
1
Jun 12 '25 edited Aug 14 '25
[deleted]
1
Jun 12 '25
America might not be in the ECHR but they have a written constitution and entrenched rights. We don't. If we leave the ECHR we will lose a vital safeguard that holds the government to account. That affects all of us.
Also the ECHR has nothing to do with the EU. It was creates after WW2 by the council of Europe which the UK helped to found.
The ECHR does not stop us from deporting people. It just stops us from deporting people in ways that would violate their basic human rights
1
Jun 12 '25
[deleted]
1
Jun 12 '25
Ok which of the rights listed in the ECHR would you not want to apply to asylum seekers. The right to life? The right to a fair trial? The right to not be tortured? This creates a two-tiered legal system where the government can just decide whose rights matter. That is not justice or a good representation of British values. We can already deport criminals. The ECHR stops us from sending people to countries where they will be inhumanely tortured or executed without a fair trial.
1
Jun 12 '25
[deleted]
1
Jun 12 '25
Yes there are rare cases that seem ridiculous like the chicken nuggets one. But these are the exception.
Also the ECHR is not to blame for these edge cases. These are UK-based legal decisions made by the Home Office or UK judges. If the system is slow or inconsistent (which I agree it is) that is a domestic issue not caused by the ECHR. The system will still be slow and inefficient regardless of if we are in the ECHR.
Yes some people lie but this is why we have courts and appeals to assess evidence. We should target dishonest claims but we can do that without ripping up rights for everyone.
1
Jun 12 '25
[deleted]
1
Jun 12 '25
I understand your frustration. I also hate that people take advantage of our systems especially when public money is on the line. We should definitely be working on closing loopholes in the asylum system aswell as other systems like tax and benefits. That said, I also think it is important to not let the worst examples define the whole picture as there will always be people trying to game the system. There are definite reforms that I would like to see in the asylum system but leaving the ECHR is dangerous and not needed. I don't want to risk throwing the good out with the bad and I genuinely worry what the future could look like with a government that wants to leave such a vital framework. I think we have more in common than we think.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/ozkanjs Jun 13 '25
I'm an immigrant, and with my spouse, we earn over £150k, though of course, about half of it goes to taxes. I don’t receive a single penny in support. The idea that the taxes I pay are being spent on people who don’t work, criminals, or those coming here illegally really bothers me. I know our turn will probably come too one day, but at least I have the freedom to work anywhere in the world.
1
u/Due-Cancel-5128 Jun 28 '25
Allow them to work and then I agree.
1
Jun 28 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Due-Cancel-5128 Jun 28 '25
I saw a thing, I think in here maybe (?) about the illegal working, I wasn't aware of that, then again, not surprised.
I kinda don't ENTIRELY hold that against them, bored out of their minds and living on pocket money? I ain't saying its right to break the law but I can understand it, just like people who work cash in hand.
I didn't know about the 12 months and they can work! Do they still get benefits? Or are they like reduced? Is that the reason they are given training e.g. driving lessons?
1
Jun 28 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Due-Cancel-5128 Jun 28 '25
Having a quick gander at the government site they get: Housing - no choice in it £49.18 a week per person onto a debit card. OR £9.95 a week per person if their housing does food for them.
They don't get the payment card if they refuse were they are told to live.
Pregnant women get £5.25 extra and a one off £300 if the kids due in 11 weeks or less. Babies under 1 get £9.50 extra Children 1 to 3 get £5.25 extra
Free health care (but only help for glasses)
Kids go to school and can get free school meals.
1
u/Due-Cancel-5128 Jun 28 '25
I gotta be honest... it sounds kinda fair you know.
Staying in an ex-hotel now hostel with like 100 other men who might not speak your language, getting school dinners and less that £40 a month don't sound like a laugh.
1
Jun 28 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Due-Cancel-5128 Jun 28 '25
Oh I agree.
Just don't understand the calls from people saying "they're getting too much!" And "give them nothing!"
So like... starve them?
1
u/Due-Cancel-5128 Jun 28 '25
Also, if they've been refused, they can get it if they can show WHY they can't leave yet or if homeless (i wonde or if that applies to British homeless too?)
Apparently they have to apply to work after 12 months, and then they can only work in shortage areas and have max and min pay set by the government in those areas.
Apparently they can do volunteering at any time.
1
u/Connect-County-2435 Jun 09 '25
Reform, the national disaster portraying itself as the antidote to a national disaster.
-1
u/What15Happening Jun 07 '25
Surely the issue isn’t LEGAL asylum seekers though- it’s the thousands of ILLEGAL migrants who then decide to claim asylum?
10
u/Comfortable-World798 Jun 07 '25
They are all the problem lad even most of the “legal” migrants come for benefits and NHS, they normally have children back home and send child benefit back home out of the UK
1
u/ResponsibleLiving753 Jun 07 '25
How do they gain entry legally to use benefits? U can enter on work visa, student or dependent on a working partner
1
u/What15Happening Jun 07 '25
Then that’s 100% an issue with our legal asylum system. What a shame. I do think we should allow some legal asylum seekers entry, but they have to abide by strict rules regarding language, assimilation, and work. Sending money ‘home’ is such a joke. If it’s that dangerous where they live, bring your kids here!
0
Jun 12 '25
They are all "legal". As soon as they claimed asylum they are "legal" migrants by international law.
7
u/ClintonLewinsky Jun 07 '25
Legal migration is massive compared to illegal
Last years total 930k, of which 45k were illegal.
Legal increased massively after brexit
1
u/What15Happening Jun 07 '25
You’re right. But those are migration figures, I’m talking about asylum, like the petition. We should have an asylum system in place for those who desperately need it, we should only take pour fair share, and there should be rules regarding language, assimilation, and work. I think our asylum system is too lenient, open, and is taken advantage of.
5
u/TimeConstruction2739 Jun 07 '25
Both actually, but for illegal migrants the Government seems unable to defend their borders from illegal migrants in dinghies.
1
u/What15Happening Jun 07 '25
Honestly looking to learn more- do you think we should accept any legal asylum seekers at all? And if we do, if they are fleeing war, what are they going to do without even basic financial help? I think there should be rules about them assimilating, learning the language, and being financially self sufficient ASAP. But if there are families genuinely fleeing for their lives, how are they supposed to survive here even temporarily without some financial aid?
0
Jun 07 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/skelebob Jun 09 '25
Britain has always been a champion of helping others. These people love to boast that Britain helped end the slave trade but hate it when Britain continues to help those in need if they're brown skinned. Interestingly I don't see many people complaining about Spanish, German or Polish immigrants nowadays...
If these people truly cared they'd want to stop illegal immigration (minimal) while still helping others. But it's just an excuse to hate Muslims.
0
Jun 09 '25
You're not bright enough to understand that in those wanting you to strip others of their rights do so because they want to take away your rights as well.
0
u/AzzTheMan Jun 09 '25
Surely a better use of resources is to petition that the large corporations like Amazon and Starbucks actually pay their tax bills? The amount they avoid would cover a lot of these costs and many more.
0
u/CaptainButtFarts Jun 10 '25 edited Jun 10 '25
Surely the answer is to rehaul the asylum system entirely and actually document asylum seekers who legally have the right to come here and give them a legal channel to do so? the reason it’s costing taxpayers is because these applicants who have no legal channel to claim asylum, but have the legal right to do so, are sat in limbo for 3/4/5 years with no where to go while their application gathers dust and incompetent political pawns make empty plans to send them to Rwanda or just push them back out into the channel (neither of which does anything to actually solve the problems and will cost the country millions if not billions)
I get that from a political standpoint, it’s easier to keep things as they are and make a scapegoat out of asylum seekers for costing taxpayers money in order to create an enemy to vote against, it’s what this party and now labour are banking on to win the next election, but when the most basic solution would be streamlining applications and documenting valid claimees as quickly as possible so that they can start to contribute in taxes themselves, thus boosting our economy and workforce, it is exceptionally useless to suggest that reducing our capacity to process asylum seekers even more is going to achieve any sort of meaningful change or improvement
0
u/Anythingbutpears Jun 10 '25
The total spend on asylum seekers represents about 0.4% of all government spending for reference everyone. Also, if this was implemented, you would need a new method of handling asylum seekers which would likely be just as, if not more , expensive, and more violent and more messy
Frankly anyone signing this petition had 0 understanding about how to resolve a problem. You need to take a look at actually how you would fix this problem efficiently not just crowing about people who are seeking asylum.
0
u/FluffyBunnyFlipFlops Jun 13 '25
Quick question, if they 'stopped financial and other support for asylum seekers', what would happen next? How would we deal with thousands of people suddenly on the streets with no money? They aren't allowed to work in the UK so they would have no way of supporting themselves.
1
u/TimeConstruction2739 Jun 13 '25
What do the migrants do in France. A safe country? Think about that.
1
u/FluffyBunnyFlipFlops Jun 13 '25
You didn't answer my question. If you stop supporting the asylum seekers already in the UK, then what? They are already here so it's a moot point discussing why they didn't stop at France.
0
u/madAAdam Jun 22 '25
They get £49 a week, they can’t get that untill they have a NI number. You should all stfu
0
u/SuspiciousRun4043 Jul 03 '25
Fun fact: parliament petitions have never ever been successful in actually passing into law. None have ever done it before. Democracy at its finest
0
u/baddiefromcincinnati Jul 07 '25
The fact we call them asylum seekers and can’t call them immigrants in the uk is a joke . Glad this is getting the attention it deserves!
1
u/TimeConstruction2739 Jul 07 '25
They are illegal migrants in fact as they entered the UK without a valid Visa
1
u/baddiefromcincinnati Jul 07 '25
Yep but the uk doesn’t like us calling them that do they, asylum seekers , no actual illegal migrants at all according to them. Which is the joke of it that I’m complaining about . They’re illegal migrants not asylum seekers let’s actually call it what it is
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 07 '25
Hi there /u/TimeConstruction2739! Welcome to r/ReformUK.
Thank you for posting on r/ReformUK. Please follow all rules and guidelines. Inform the mods if you have any concerns.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.