I, myself, am a tourist of refugee worlds. I was appalled at the conditions these people lived in, the suffering which caused so many family deaths, and sheer disappointment of the children, knowing they have no future…
The dictionary defines “refugee” as “people who have been forced to leave their country and live elsewhere”.
Refugees are inconvenient. Their concern is not for order, systems, or bureaucracies, nor for the general welfare. Their concern, rather, is for survival- their own and that of their families.
Governments, on the other hand, have competing concerns: the sovereignty of boarders, relations with neighboring countries, and controlling immigration. If offering asylum to a refugee is consonant with those concerns, a government might come to his aid. However, if the government cannot see a benefit in terms of its own interests, there is little incentive to pay costs associated with extending protection to the refugee.
A report by the Greater London Authority said that “refugee and asylum-seeking women were eager to fill the skills gap in the capital's schools and hospitals, but were blocked by Home Office regulations and lack of facilities to convert overseas qualifications.”
Researchers interviewed 231 women including 53 teachers, 51 nurses and 75 doctors. They were thought to be representative of a much larger group of displaced professional women in London.
The report, Missed Opportunities, says that “although more than half the women had security of residence with full employment rights, less than a fifth was in work. About 90% wanted to return to their chosen profession”. Asylum seekers used to have the right to work after six months from the date of their asylum application, but this was withdrawn in July. Those who applied before July can work, but women dependent on their husbands' applications cannot.
Now just imagine what possibilities could arise from putting these people to work, what benefits we could use. So why not offer asylum to refugees?
Well, governments want to be portrayed as good guys; they normally use the language of humanitarianism to explain why they can’t grant asylum to refugees. They try to cover up the fact that they don’t want to give grants or money to people, and therefore they do not grant asylum to refugees.
I feel this is wrong, and I hope you do to.
Refugees who become asylum seekers, will have better lives than before, but still not great ones.
These people will have restriction on money and have little freedom. They have no choice over where they live and are usually put in the first place available. Often this means that they are living in places labelled unfit for human inhabitancies, where because of the state of the accommodation there is a very high risk of illness by infection like pneumonia. They are also left outside of support networks and they don’t have access to legal advice or interpreters. This is all due to the government’s lack of coordination with its own dispersal scheme that’s left the local authorities no money, housing or resources to cope.
Now when I say “asylum seeker” you probably think that they are going to steal jobs but if they are granted asylum then they are not permitted to work for the first six months that they are legally in this country. After that most of them fill the jobs that most of us wouldn’t consider doing but need to be done like picking fruit, vegetables and crops on farms. The pay would usually be minimum wage or close to it and they would work long hours. They are actually helping to keep our system going because if no people were doing these jobs then there would be a shortage of a lot of the things we need to live on.
Therefore, it would be better to grant refugees asylum, because then they would at least have a better place to live, they can make something out of their lives, and their children can do what they have been put on this earth for, living.
I just want to leave you with this quote:
“Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security, and every nation has the responsibility to enforce these rights.”
Thank you.