If you are unable to provide shelter for your children, they will be kind enough to take them to a children's home while processing your removal back to your country.
EDIT in reply to Deepthroat:
It is of course true that asylum-seekers, not being allowed to work, are housed (usually in VERY basic, hard-to-let, accommodation). What would you suggest - leave them on the street? Many are accommodated in detention centres, and are swiftly returned if they are from countries presumed to be safe.
In the same way, a UK citizen who finds themself homeless with six kids would be given emergency housing while the situation was sorted out.
2007-01-28 10:07:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes - http://england.shelter.org.uk/advice/advice-3054.cfm
National Asylum Support Service (NASS) contracts would house you if you simply approached a police officer/council worker and asked for asylum.
Under the current law, you would then be eligible for social housing and for housing and other benefits.
You would be given priority over homeless UK citizens for a limited stock of social housing.
There is a requirement to house you immediately under STATUE law, while a UK citizen is not under any such priority, and is placed on a waiting list which has grown greatly in length.
Funding for rents and social benefits are paid to many private landlords by UK taxpayers out of general taxation. This has kept the local councillors who have to re-elected from having to raising council taxes further and thus objecting to huge influxs in thier areas. In fact many councillors have bought property for NASS contracts.
Aslyum seekers are officially not allowed to work - They would then be competing for income with UK citizens, would drop real wages through the greater supply of labour.
However, In reality, the UK's black economy is Europe's largest - And only 3 employers where prosecuted for employing illegal workers in 2006.
Asylum seekers and refugees have a wide range of support needs. Some need little support, speak good English and can readily adapt to life in the UK, but many have considerable support needs which means translators and helpers would be employed to do chores, all these services and jobs are funded by the UK taxpayer through general taxation.
Britain is the number one destination for international immigrants. They pass through up to a dozen different safe countries to arrive on our shores.
The UK government has been operating a policy of MASS immigration, not controlled immigration. This benefits the rich who see labour costs drop through the greater supply of Labour. The rich now fund the political system, and not membership. These interests control the political landscape.
Both the Labour party and the Conservative party would be bankrupt, if they did not receive millions from these Rich donors, so they depend on these funds each year to win office.
There is no debate about immigration or substantive policy difference between any of the mainstream parties. This is dispite immigration being the main political priority for 86% of the electorate (source: YouGov poll)
2007-01-28 18:23:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by deepthroat 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes of course you will. Only the hard working and honest people are punished and ridiculed in this country.
Something which I find absolutely baffling!
2007-01-28 17:25:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Moorglademover 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
I am sure the UK wouldn't but come on to America, they will, they do for everyone else.
2007-01-28 17:27:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by American___Brit 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
doubt it matey, anyway if you want to emigrate, why not go to somewhere warm?
2007-01-28 17:27:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by julietanndympna 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
>_> wow, are you serious? No they woulden't, they would throw you on the streets like a hobo. =-)
2007-01-28 17:24:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by Klied 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
LMFAO! Thanks for the laugh!
2007-01-28 17:21:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
LOL!!!LOLOLOLOLOLOL!! I can't stop!! Thanks!
2007-01-28 17:28:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by Heywood J Helpaguy 2
·
1⤊
0⤋