Filipinos and Asylum Seekers

I think, in more general terms, 'aliens'are going to find life tougher as regulations separate them more and more from citizens; the changes to Philhealth are a recent example. It is fine with me as it is their country and I can leave if I don't like it, but I would like my home country to reciprocate likewise instead of treating every foreigner the same as (often better than!) its own citizens

 

I agree. If I, as a foreigner here, don't like it, I can always leave. And, yes, it is their country.

As far as reciprocating, coming from the US, my country probably has the most onerous standards for letting the casual traveler in and for meeting requirements for immigration. Getting a visa to retire in the Philippines was as near painless as I could ask for. I am certain no Filipino could say the same about retiring to the US.

 

Not the same in the UK.... you just have to enter illegally and they give you a house, food, clothes.... let you bring all your family .... give you citizenship .... look after you for life. But they don't do the same for their own citizens.... they treat their own citizens who are in need like sh*t.

And a Filipino who goes there to marry a UK citizen has to apply for a total of 4 visas over a period of about 6 years. Then they can get citizenship (how many 'aliens' in Phil are now citizens?). They can buy property; in fact I knew many who had bought Council-owned property at a huge discount and now worth about £500,000. They get free healthcare (except in the first 5 years when they pay £200 per year), free education, eventually can claim benefits, can have the same privileges as a Senior Citizen as any UK citizen (in Phil you can be deported, in theory, even for asking for them), never have to leave the country after they first enter ... etc, etc, etc. Not the slightest comparison between the two and The Philippines is looking to make things even worse for 'aliens'.

 

Hmm, where to start a reply to a post like that.

• "....you just have to enter illegally...."
  The "just" implies that you consider it to be something that is easy to do.
  I suggest you read up a bit on the scores of people who died trying to cross the Mediterranean in rubber boats, or on the desperate efforts to sneak into the small Spanish enclaves on the Moroccan coast, or on the many who are found dead, suffocated in the back of a truck trying to get smuggled into the U.K., or the inhuman circumstances people endured in places like the Calais side of the channel waiting for a minute chance to sneak onto a train. And if you still think it is easy after that, I would suggest you throw away your passport and try. After all, you make it sound like it is easy and attractive, and they'll look after you for life right?
• "and they give you a house, food, clothes, let you bring all your family, give you citizenship, look after you for life"
  No, no, no, no, no and no to each of those. Yes I suppose illegals will be fed, but then they get deported.
  Under long established rules, refugees must apply for asylum in the country of first arrival, and only under pressure from Italy and Greece (where most refugees first arrive) other countries in the EU accepted to take a limited number of these people (but only after it has been established that they are legitimate refugees who qualify for asylum). Only those who are granted asylum will qualify for housing and social assistance.

I am sorry, but that first part of your post reads like the populist garbage that mislead massive numbers of UK voters into supporting the Brexit disaster in the making.

The second part is a little more accurate, but only a little.
Filipino's cannot freely travel to any country in Europe "to marry a citizen" at all. They need to take a language and culture course/exam for the destination country first, find someone who's willing to marry and support them before ever getting on that airplane, and then (despite a thick pile of supporting documents) their visum application could still be rejected if the proposed (or actual) marriage is deemed to be a ruse/ploy serving a more sinister purpose.
And even if their initial visum application is approved, as long as their immigration status is temporary (5 years), then any breakup of their relationship/marriage will lead to a forced departure to the Philippines again.

And when travelling to Europe as a tourist they can only stay a maximum of 90 days, and even getting such a simple tourist visum is a lot harder for Filipino's seeking to visit Europe than vice versa. If they can't prove sufficient ties to their home country and being able to support themselves financially and having adequate health insurance European style then they can forget getting approved unless a friend/relative who is a resident of the European country is willing to provide accommodation and other needs and to guarantee their departure before the visum runs out.

I am sure if similar rules applied for Europeans wanting to relocate or visit here there would be a lot fewer foreigners in this country.

In short, yes there's many differences between Europe and the Philippines, but it is rather shortsighted to paint everything in the one colour you obviously used.

 

YES, it is easy to enter the UK illegally (but VERY difficult to enter legally!); hundreds are entering illegally every day. One man walked through the Channel Tunnel (which is illegal for any person to do), was arrested and allowed to apply for asylum. I would have led him at gunpoint all the way back to France; never set a precedent which will return to bite you. And then there was the truly amazing situation of MEN with stubble and wrinkles being admitted as unaccompanied CHILDREN - then to be allowed to bring their whole families along later when they suddenly realised (as they instantly matured from 'child' to the adult they already were) they remembered where they all lived. And yet many UK citizens cannot bring their spouses or their children in. It is ridiculous. This is the essence of why the UK voted Brexit BY A MAJORITY - fed up being 2nd Class citizens in their OWN country.

Btw, I can read (we did it at school). I know about the 'boat people' - many are economic migrants and also cowards leaving their countries because they are at war.

This part is quite illogical: "And if you still think it is easy after that, I would suggest you throw away your passport and try. After all, you make it sound like it is easy and attractive, and they'll look after you for life right?" I am already looked after for life - why would I try to achieve something I already have???

"Yes I suppose illegals will be fed, but then they get deported." UNFORTUNATELY that is UNTRUE and is the reason why the UK is a soft touch. They get fed and then are given money to apply for asylum .... illegals are NOT deported until they have exhausted every avenue and every penny they can screw out of the hard-working UK taxpayer. Many ILLEGALS are actually allowed to stay. It is not surprising when you are aware that a Vietnamese woman was given permission to stay in the UK after serving a prison term because she said her family would not like her anymore. (You couldn't make it up!).

"Under long established rules, refugees must apply for asylum in the country of first arrival..." But they don't. How do they get from Africa or the Middle East to the UK without going through another country other than by flying on a carpet? You already wrote about their situation in France - how can they leave France and enter the UK illegally without ALREADY being in France (the 'first' country)? That does not even consider how they got to France (answer: they passed through MANY 'first' countries).

"I am sorry, but that first part of your post reads like the populist garbage that mislead massive numbers of UK voters into supporting the Brexit disaster in the making." A difference of opinion is not "garbage" (btw "misled" is the past tense and past participle of mislead) and I supported Brexit! You think people were "misled"? Are you a UK citizen? If you are then it begs the question why you are upset by a democratic decision of your fellow citizens and if you are not then I question why you THINK you know more about how UK citizens think than they do themselves (isn't the polite term for that 'arrogance'?). You seem to think that over half those who voted cannot think for themselves (and so I am forced to assume you think all those who voted to remain COULD think for themselves). I don't follow the lack of logic.... but then as a Brexit-voter I am unable to think for myself.

"Filipino's cannot freely travel to any country in Europe..." I never mentioned "Europe", I mentioned the UK (which IS part of Europe, but not for much longer ) ... what was it you said about being able to read??? "They need to take a language and culture course/exam for the destination country first.... " NOT TRUE; language only. Are you like me a UK citizen who actually married a Filipina in the UK (i.e. first-hand EXPERIENCE) or are you reading this in newspapers and being misled??? "... And find someone who's willing to marry and support them before ever getting on that airplane" Really? My flabber is ghasted. You mean someone applying for a Marriage Visa has to find someone first to marry? There was me thinking that finding someone to marry was NOT even a step in the process and there you are pointing out that it is maybe the FIRST step. I am almost sounding sarcastic. Same incredulity that you wrote about scam marriages being rejected; that sounds unbelievable - the marriage is false and it is rejected (so, trying to learn to think as well as you do (or think you do), am I correct in thinking that genuine marriages ARE accepted?) This 'thinking thing' is quite fun really and wish I had been made aware of it before. If in the UK a marriage ends then the foreign spouse MAY be deported OR, if there is a new relationship, it is sometimes possible to remain in the UK and obtain a new Visa (it depends on circumstances, like most things). However, if the UK spouse dies then the foreign spouse is automatically given Indefinite Leave to Remain (which can lead just one year later to Citizenship). What happens in The Philippines if sadly a foreigner loses by death a Filipino spouse? I am not an expert because I am not a citizen here (dig, dig) BUT I think the poor bereaved foreign Alien person has the Spouse Visa CANCELLED (and could lose all the assets put into the spouse's name); compassion par excellence.

Finally, it is true that Filipinos have to prove that as tourists they will stay only the set time .. BUT I thought that is the same for an ALIEN in The Philippines (lookout for low-flying spaceships landing in Manila). If you don't agree then try something for me (as in your earlier suggestion I throw away my passport, etc) - just overstay your Visa and then tell the BI. Good luck with that one (tell me how you got on). The reason that Filipinos have to prove they will return to The Philippines is that many overstay; I know this as a fact because I met many in the UK who had. Most were former students. Also, I think you might like to look at the world-wide Visa rules for holders of UK passports and those with Filipino passports (or many other country's passports); most countries treat them differently and there are logical (mostly economic) reasons for it. It is not rocket science. I would check it myself but I can't read or even think. :(

 

As per your estimate: "hundreds are entering illegally every day"
As per the Office of national Statistics: about 100,000 visitors arrive (legally) in the UK every day
Case in point: people prefer "easy"to "very difficult", so if you were right, those numbers would be the other way around. I rest my case.

You may have an opinion about "hundreds" being too many, but don't tell me it's "easy". It is not.
Besides, as you are no doubt aware, there is zero evidence about those "hundreds" other than anecdotal.
One man walking through a tunnel....pfff.
The only hint of something substantial that I can find is to compare a 2005 study by the Home Office that estimated the number of illegals living in the UK in 2001 to be around 430,000 with a report by the London School of Economics that estimated the number of irregular migrants to be 533,000 in 2007. That's a 100,000 increase in 6 years, translating to about 50 per day.
Of course 50 a day is plenty fodder for the Tabloids to run loads of scaremongering stories for their reader base.
However, keep in mind that "illegals/irregular migrants" includes all those foreigners who entered legally but then overstayed their welcome (but obviously those are a lot less attractive fodder for the Red Tops, they much prefer writing about a few who need to shave, hiding among a bunch of undocumented children, makes for better selling headlines).

I'm getting the feeling that politicians responded to perceived pressure from voters in making harsher general rules for bringing family members to the UK by British passport holders, with those same voters then discovering those harsher rules don't just apply to UK citizens who were born abroad but also to them, and then started crying wolf and blaming someone else.

Yes, some are definitely economic migrants (many more of those completely legal though, mostly from other countries in the EU, than illegal entrants from elsewhere). However, if I had been born in some poverty stricken country myself, and quite possibly suffering from malnutrition, with no feasible way of improving life for myself and my family, I would no doubt be very tempted to move elsewhere, even if I didn't have a passport. To condemn those that try is not my inclination.
The same goes in even stronger terms for people who have to fear for their life, be it because of war, religious beliefs, sexual orientation or otherwise. For example the Rohingya fleeing from ruthless ethnic cleansing/genocide at the hands of their own government would much prefer to stay in Myanmar, but when your house gets burned, daughters get raped and a gun pointed at you you have no choice. Sadly many in other countries prefer the "not our problem" stance (or would even call those Rohingya cowards).
And by the way, I didn't question whether you can read.

/sarcasm on
Maybe because right now you consider yourself being treated as 2nd class citizen, and it would be preferable to be a 1st class citizen?
/sarcasm off

No, they're not given money to apply. Application for asylum is free.

Once the application for asylum is filed, they are no longer illegal. They are legally allowed to await the outcome of their application in the country where they filed their application. They would only become illegal again if they avoid being deported after their application has been denied.

If you have a problem with the cost and duration of the handling of asylum applications, blame the voters/taxpayers who put lousy lawmakers in office, not the asylumseekers.

No. Illegals get deported, those who are allowed to stay are no longer illegal.

Yes, there are problems with that rule. The UK can't prove they came from the continent, just like the Netherlands can't prove asylum seekers passed through Germany or Belgium, France can't prove they came through Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Germany or Belgium, etc. etc.
However, suppose that problem was solved, what do you propose we do. Keep all asylum seekers in Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece (how?) and let them sort it out for themselves?

Thanks for correcting my mistake. Yes I think people were misled by lies, half truths and hidden agendas.
No, I'm not a UK citizen (my moniker here should give you a pretty good idea about my passport).

No I don't think UK voters can't think for themselves, just that many of them apparently struggled to make sense of it all when deciding their vote in the Brexit referendum.
I think many were lacking information that should have been widely available but wasn't, and instead relied on unreliable and biased campaign promises. I also didn't mean to single out UK voters, many voters everywhere struggle to make sense of available information.

Ah yes, almost forgot, Britain was always a half-hearted member of the EU at best, so you have some different rules. Allow me to correct myself then, the rules for EU countries (except the UK) are that would-be immigrants from outside the EU need to take a language and culture exam before they can even apply for a visum.

Actually, the overstaying thing already happened to me, I was one day late with my last visum extension, paid 1000 PhP fine and that was it.

 

Well; in Australia all you need to do is travel via a dozen or so Muslim Countries where they will accept you, then you pay $30,000AUD per head (instead of 10K AUD to do it legally) then catch the Boat from Indonesia to Australian waters, wait for a Naval Ship to float by, throw all of your Paperwork/ Passports etc overboard, claim you are a Refugee escaping persecution in your homeland only to go through the Immigration Detention Centre round-about to where you can then gain Welfare, petition the rest of your grubby relatives to come and join you to sap the Welfare system even further, pick 5 Wives and have 5 kids to each Wife placing them also onto Welfare, escaping the LAW by pleading Religious persecution then do the rounds each fortnight to collect your share from these stupid women, then run for local Government so you be elected by the rest of the village idiots who have driven the 'normal people' out of their own suburbs, so you can introduce Sharia Law so you can be persecuted just as you were by the very idiots you claimed to be escaping. It is BS!

Sorry I do not know how it works in your country, but I am tired of watching the News daily with more and more of these low IQ Apes and their Gangs freely attacking people and then using their Religious Ideologies as an escape route to prison, at the very least they should be deported and dropped back to whence they came from! IF they had MORE than enough money to flee halfway around the world, then pay TRIPLE++ what it costs to LEGALLY Apply to enter the country via Illegal Traffickers, then p*ss OFF!! IF I take my Wife back to Oz it will be done legally (YES it is harder to do it this way) and not using the Gravy (refugee) Boat (EASY way!) to do it ILLEGALLY!

Millions have migrated to Australia LEGALLY over the past 100+ years and have adapted, assimilated, and become a great part of the multicultural society that makes up the population. Now; the FAKE Refugees are using Australia as a soft target to exploit the Welfare system, they refuse to adapt and insist we adapt top them, most refuse to work, why should they when they get free hand outs? Most refuse to follow the Laws of the land, it doesn't apply to them because they are victims. Yet; they refuse to work to better themselves, and when they do, it is a dance all the way to the Tax Payers money! Sorry something stinks and it is time the West changed instead of adapting to this infestation and swallowing the garbage being sprouted by what equates to Fleas infesting the Dog's back!

To be frank; The Philippines would not stand for it, (Illegal immigration on this level) so why should any one else? I wish Australia was more like the Philippines in MANY ways!

 

Dear Mr Dutchie:

I must admit I did not assume your moniker meant you are Dutch - you wrote with such authority about a referendum in a country of which you are not a citizen that I was confused. Also, dutchie means "a Canadian doughnut popularized by the Tim Hortons chain. It is a square, yeast-lifted doughnut containing raisins that is coated with a sugary glaze." So how was I to know??? - is 'Show Pony' really a pony? Is 'Dr Shiva' really a doctor? Is 'Notmyrealname' my real name?Maybe I changed my birth name by Deed Poll to 'Notmyrealname'.

But ONE thing I will agree with you on (and the only thing because I do not think Brexit is really your business as a non-UK citizen; you can say you disagree but have no right to question the intelligence of those UK citizens who voted the way YOU think was wrong. Perhaps you are worried because you realise that the EU is on the verge of collapse and that Brexit is the first cut) is that there are HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of people in truly desperate situations all over the world. BUT, we cannot solve all those problems - especially one country (the UK) being singled out because it is a soft touch, giving benefits to anyone who illegally breaks in. Perhaps you could return to your home country in Europe and take into your home a few refugees; it might make you feel good but it is like peeing in the China Sea, won't really make any significant difference.

I have no intention of continuing this discussion because, for example, I am not sure that Trump was the best choice for US President but I am not going to tell US citizens who voted for him that they were stupid or misled - it was their decision and I have to respect that.