Mainstream wants to see a FIVE YEAR BREATHING SPACE from Asylum applications. We need this to give our overstretched services a respite. All the allocated reception centres for Asylum seekers are full and overflowing. Local council social housing for the 'seekers' are all taken up, so increasingly councils have taken to putting them up in hotels - which are not suitable and are very expensive. Not only this, many of our own indigenous families have been on council house waiting lists for more than a year, and keep getting pushed to the back of the queue. We need a break - we're entitled to a break.

The present mass influx started after the channel tunnel opened in 1994, with refugees fleeing the Balkan war. People suddenly realised that it was easy to enter illegally through the tunnel - in effect were were less of an island than before. The numbers have carried on relentlessly, with no let-up, for the 23 intervening years, so nobody can say we haven't given our fair share of hospitality to refugees.

We have to close the people-trafficking sea routes which have made the Mediterranean a giant graveyard. More people have now died in the Mediterranean doing these illegal crossings, than in all the warships sunk in the Med in World War 2 - it's that many. There should be legal safe ways to cross the water, that means FLIGHTS and that needs co-operation of all European governments. This would be far cheaper for the seekers and migrants who now pay 10,000 Euros (and 5,000 for any children), to risk their lives on unseaworthy boats. A safe crossing by air, would likely cost about 500 Euros a ticket - so twenty times cheaper.

In the long term maybe we might need to consider all asylum claims remotely - i.e. the claimant goes to their local UK embassy, and makes the claim there. If their claim is accepted - they get a visa and only have to pay for the flight. If they get refused, it's cost them NOTHING and also saved the tears and embarrasment of being repatriated from Stansted airport to their home country. Either way it's far safer and cheaper than the trafficking routes.


Your Asylum FAQs

Q. Surely was can't unilaterally stop processing seekers, this would be in breach of our international treaty obligations.

A. No we wouldn't be STOPPING asylum seeking, just SUSPENDING them for five years, like in a state of emergency. That's allowed.



Above:  Alfred Dubs (now in Parliament).  Below, left to right: Refugees from the Dubs era 1945, Rohingyans escaping from Burma, Honduran refugees in Central America.

Walking : Refugees in 1945, and today in the 21st century. All families. Women with babies and children, a few old men. Not a young man in sight.

They're penniless, all their worldly goods on their bags. They've no home to go back to. They all carry some form of identifying document - not usually passports, but national id cards.

These are refugees and come within the scope of the United Nations definition as eligible to claim asylum .


Now what about these?

Below: Crossing the Mediterranean , to Italy (left) , to Greece (right).

Boating in 2018: These groups are different. Not a family in sight. All fit young men, I-phones in their pockets. They've each paid 10,000 Euros for the crossing . They do have homes to return to. Many of them have lost or destroyed their documentation, making it difficult to establish who they really are. They're from poor countries, they're looking for prosperity in Europe, to better their lives and their families' lives, hoping for a new start in life.

But do they fall within the scope of the UN definition of Refugees - and therefore, entltled to claim asylum without any proof of who they are, with all the associated financial and material support from European governments? Or should they be classed as 'Economic Migrants' - and have to fend for themselves, rather like immigrants to the USA during the 1930s depression ? Should we in Europe, differentiate between the two sets of travellers? And what's the correct label for the all-male groups. Are they 'fake refugees' or just migrants? Is there a correct terminology that's not offensive to some people?

Do we treat and process these two sets of people in the same way?

Or is it more humane to have 'No Borders' as some pressure groups want - letting any amount of people move from their own country, into other people's countries as and when, without questioning their motives or background, no limits on numbers, no frontier controls?

WHAT DO YOU THINK? Mainstream wants to know. Join the Conversation now,


No wonder we're the laughing stock of the world!

A thirty-something man worms his way into a children's school class, masquerading as a 15-year old schoolboy. (NOT as the BBC reported, as a student). Anywhere else in the world, the police would be called and he'd be arrested on the spot. But not here. There is a humourous side to it but seriously, it's dangerous, not to mention downright pervy.

 Why isn't this man in police custody tonight?

Suffolk police say they are 'not aware' that this man, an Iranian asylum-seeker, is being dealt with by their force. (You would expect a modern, professional police force to keep records of what cases they're dealing with, but I guess with the pressure the police are under with rocketing crime and the Tory cuts in their numbers, it's understandable that they don't know.)  We'll take that as a 'NO'.

The school staff and teachers knew about this man, but did nothing. It's down to the courage of the pupils for speaking out, telling their parents and the media, that he's been 'outed' and is now 'in the care' of the Home Office - who bear the most responsibility for allowing this to happen.

Should Home Secretary Sajid Javid (right) be thinking about resigning? Many people think so.

And why have all the establishment media published his photo with the face redacted? Their excuse is, it's against the European Directive of Human Rights to publish a child's photo without their permission. But hang on - he's NOT a child, he's an adult, so that doesn't apply for a start, and anyway we're leaving the EU so we're no longer bound by their 'directives'.

Is this happening in other schools? Are YOU a school pupil who's aware that one of your classmates is an adult MAN, impersonating a child?

It's no use calling the police - they won't do anything about it, too busy dealing with the important stuff like Hate crimes and historic allegations. Tell your teachers and parents of course - but also tell Mainstream, we will publish his photo UNCENSORED.

It's bad enough we've got men who 'self-define' as women.

Now we've got ADULTS self-defining as CHILDREN. OMG what next?