Showing posts with label resentment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label resentment. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

Thousands of children in Britain being forced to live on £1 a day

Since, this is happening to 1000s of children, "many of whom are British children," what do you expect will happen to the children of refugees. In many cases, refugees are treated much better than the country's own citizens. Why?

Reason being that, depending on how visible the issue is of refugee crisis (for example, the current refugee crisis stemming from the wars in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya etc.), governments tend to throw inordinate amount of money at the crisis to appease the voting public. But, since, the government has a set amount of money in its coffers, it takes that money from somewhere else in the social security system. So, for instance, in this case, other vulnerable families & children.

This news story also dispels the myth that Western countries are awash in money. This myth is especially true in Asia, Africa, & Middle Eastern countries ... all the developing nations. At least, 80% of the public of Western countries is struggling financially. These people are the residents & citizens of the country; be it UK, US, Canada, Germany, France, Italy etc.

Problem is that these people & stories are not visible. What is visible in the media is the high-falutin' people with luxurious lifestyles of the rich. In many cases, those people themselves are also struggling financially, & only able to afford luxurious items by borrowing heavily on their credit cards.

So, anyway, if & when, refugees & their families are treated much better in a Western country than their own citizens & their families, resentments & hate start fomenting among the public. Citizens turn against refugees, whom they see as robbing them off jobs & money, of which those citizens think they were entitled of, in the first place. Were those citizens entitled of that extra financial help is a separate discussion. But what should be of common sense to any government is that the welfare of its own public comes first.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Thousands of children – many of whom are British citizens – are subsisting on as little as £1 a day because their parents are migrants with no recourse to public funds.

There are 5,900 children in England & Wales living on the brink of total destitution because their parents cannot work or receive government benefits, according to research from The University of Oxford’s migration unit. Charities say the situation is pushing vulnerable children into “severe poverty & hunger.”

In almost a quarter of the families affected at least one child is a British citizen, researchers from Oxford’s Centre on Migration, Policy & Society (COMPAS) found. Some go for months without receiving any help at all, forced to sleep in cars, disused buildings or even on the street.

Most of the families affected are here legally but awaiting a Home Office decision on their immigration case. ... 71% of the families helped by local authorities in 2012/13 had a decision on their immigration status pending.

Forbidden from working or receiving welfare, the only money many migrant parents can find to feed their children is a child poverty payout from social services, which can be as low as £5 a week for a family. If the local authority decides the child is destitute its family will also be given accommodation.

The Home Office does not help families while they wait for a decision on their immigration case unless they are seeking asylum - & it forbids them from working.

Local Authorities have an obligation to help all destitute children under the Children’s Act. The financial support, known as Section 17, is set by individual councils, often on a case by case basis.

Since councils’ budgets have been significantly cut back by central Government, these payments are frequently far below the necessary amount to live on. Payments typically range from £23 to £35 per child per week but this money has to feed parents too. If a family receives help from a food bank the value of this is often deducted from the meagre council help, leaving them with just a few pounds a week for nappies & other essentials.

Matthew Reed, chief executive of The Children’s Society said: “The desire to be seen to be tough on immigration can often mean the government overlooks its legal obligation to recognise children as children. As a result, too often they & their families are being pushed into severe poverty & hunger. They are being made homeless, forced into over-crowded, inappropriate accommodation & even on to the streets.

Some families aren’t even being assessed to determine what help they need or are entitled to. And if they do get support, it is too low & often at the discretion of local authorities. Recent cuts to legal aid & the Home Office’s slow decision making means children are being forced to live on this support for long periods of time. This must change.”

Experts believe the Government needs to step in & provide funding to protect children’s welfare in this situation. Mr. Reed said: “It is critical that these families get the help they need & that the Government provides the funds necessary so local authorities can protect these children’s welfare. Children must be treated first & foremost as children — not as immigration statistics.”

Councils have to assess whether a family is eligible by working out if they are truly destitute. Researchers found social services often rejected cases with very little evidence.

Rita Chadha, chief executive of the Refugee & Migrant Forum of Essex & London (RAMFEL), said: “We see at least one client a day in this situation. They come in extremely distressed. We’ve seen children sleeping in church graveyards & disused shops. In many cases councils won’t give families money until prompted to by other agencies.”

More than a third of families surveyed survived on rudimentary council support for more than a year, largely due to lengthy waits for a decision from the Home Office. In 7% of cases, families needed help for more than 3 years.

Jonathan Price, co-author of the report, said: “Even after they have started receiving Section 17 support, some children face long periods living on subsistence rates that are well below those deemed minimal for any other category of people in the UK. This raises real concerns about the long-term impact of poverty on these children.”

Price added: “These are vulnerable people. We found that, prior to receiving local authority support, children & families were living highly precarious lives & were sometimes subject to exploitation. Domestic violence was an element in many referrals.”

A Home Office spokeswoman said: “We welcome those who wish to make a life in the UK with their family, work hard & make a contribution. But family life must not be established here at the taxpayer's expense.

We work closely with local authorities to ensure that immigration decisions in cases receiving local authority support are made as quickly as possible.

In exceptional circumstances, or where people granted leave on family grounds show that they would otherwise be destitute, they are granted recourse to public funds.”

The study was based on a survey of 137 Children’s Services departments in England & Wales, as well as 105 voluntary sector organisations & 92 interviews.

Sunday, July 12, 2015

The data on alleged police assaults makes the case for representative forces across Britain

A good opinion piece. A country / society can only be considered successful in integrating immigrants when all of its institutions, private & public, are as diverse as the general public.

However, we see that all the public institutions of the developed Western world are mostly native residents of those countries; judiciary, political, & law enforcement departments of the governments at all levels.

This piece is about British police force & British general public, but we all are well aware of what's going on in US right now with the country-wide protests & violence against this exact same thing what this piece is talking about. Just the other day, I blogged how Portuguese police force in Lisbon brutally controls immigrants from its former African colonies. So, this phenomenon of unnecessary police assaults are not confined to one country alone.

Now, why do these police assaults happen? I believe they happen because this gross discrepancy between the actual demographics of the general public & the demographics of the institutions breeds resentment on both sides against each other, i.e. the government makes laws that are incompatible with what's actually going on with the general public or the police, themselves of being mostly of one race, are usually heavily biased towards their own race.

When the public institutions work towards diversifying their rank & file, then the trust between general public & the public institutions increase on both sides, since both sides now understand each others "language".

If the public institutions don't diversify, then it starts to seem like the age of slavery when the "coloured" slaves were assaulted & ruled over with an iron fist. Only this time around, the "slaves" are seemingly free & not coming from one continent only, but the race of the "owner" has neither changed, & still, nor its mentality.

Is the so-called "modern" world regressing back to the era of slavery?

Yes. Be it international foreign affairs or municipal affairs in a small town in North America or Europe, one race is still trying to control the others, because that pesky "illness of superiority" is still lingering around. Besides, immigrants are never fully accepted by the native residents of the country, so the native residents will always find a way to control the immigrant masses.

No worries, that "illness of superiority" is not confined to one race only. For instance, Arabs, especially Saudis, feel superior than other Muslims (non-Arabs & non-Saudis), even though, Prophet Muhammad specifically forbade Arabs from feeling superior than other non-Arab Muslims. What did it do? It created resentment in non-Arab Muslims towards Arabs in general, & especially, Saudis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



When confronted with the shocking news that more than 3,000 police officers are being investigated for alleged assault, it is hard not to be nostalgic for the gentler era of law enforcement symbolised by the 1950s TV series Dixon of Dock Green.

Constable George Dixon seemingly needed little more than common sense & a dose of human understanding to keep criminals in line in his patch of London. Fiction this may have been, but how rare & urgently needed both these traits seem in the real-life police forces of Britain today.

The police face great challenges, headed by a mix of budget cuts, fragmented community cohesion & the growth of gang culture. We also recognise the under-reported & under-appreciated fact that Britain is getting safer, the crime rate having largely fallen for 20 years.

But it is 10 years since the Macpherson report first raised the issue of “institutional racism”. Today – in the cases of the 3,000 police officers being investigated for alleged assault – black & Asian citizens are still three times more likely to have made the complaint than their white peers. Old habits, it seems, die hard.

Professor Lee Bridges at the University of Warwick’s School of Law recently analysed the figures disclosed by the Metropolitan Police for its Gangs Matrix, the intelligence database used to combat gang violence.

It showed 85% of the capital’s gang members are believed to be black or Asian. The figure for white Londoners was only 439. This includes anyone engaged on an organised basis in “violence, criminal offending & gang membership” & is meant to feature all those involved in such organised crimes as drug-dealing, fraud, vice & football hooliganism.

The Met’s figure, it must be said, does not capture the entire picture. This matters as it is investigative tools such as the Gangs Matrix which are behind the Met’s new much-hailed “intelligence-led” investigating approach. If, as Professor Bridges’ analysis implies, there remains a racial bias in the statistics being used, then a racial bias is inevitable in its results, & therefore also in the mindset of the officers out on patrol armed with such information.

Greater London & the West Midlands, the UK’s two largest police forces, accounted for almost half of the assault cases under investigation. But in London, black, Asian & minority ethnic officers make up only 11% of the force compared with 40% of the population, while West Midlands Police admitted last month it had recently selected only 1 black officer from 162 recruits.

This newspaper rarely supports positive discrimination, believing it risks blocking the promotion of the ablest & feeding the resentment of those who feel ignored. But a situation can sometimes be so severe & urgent that it turns a bad principle into a necessary practice. Our police force is one such instance.

Last year the London Mayor, Boris Johnson, raised the prospect of half of all new Met police recruits coming in future from a minority ethnic background. The time has come for his successor to take the steps required to implement a similar policy, & for other forces with a similar disconnect between those serving & those communities being served to act likewise.

It is the common-sense approach, one that also shows a human understanding of the reality of modern Britain.