> Earlier this year, BBC Radio 4’s File on Four found asylum seekers were being issued with a bus pass for one return journey per week. For other necessary travel, like doctor’s appointments, taxis were used.
Seems like the sensible and humane answer would be to give them more weekly return journeys? That way they could stop using taxis but still, you know, retain some shred of humanity and dignity?
Francis-c92 on
>In one case, an asylum seeker said he went on a 250-mile cab journey to a GP, costing the Home Office £600.
>The ban will not stop the use of taxis completely and there will be some exemptions for people with physical disabilities, chronic illnesses and pregnancy-related needs
Yeah, we shouldn’t be paying for these people to have free transport. Buses and trains exist.
callendoor on
Now ban the medical appointments. Ban them from everything. Deny. Detain. Deport.
ashyjay on
From the article is sounds like taxi firms taking the piss and rinsing the home office.
IgamOg on
Are we making sure that they have access to sufficient public transport to get where they need to be without putting themselves in financial difficulties?
We could make that a thing for everyone in this country.
GMN123 on
That this was ever happening shows how little respect government agencies have for public funds.
ExpressAffect3262 on
I work in a local authority and it’s abysmal how much free shit asylums can get under the resettlement scheme.
2x year bus passes,
2x year gym memberships,
tv license paid for a year,
2 laptops (And I note on one case, a father complained the laptop was low specs and was given a higher spec laptop),
2 tablets for the kids,
White goods,
Council tax deductions,
And not even a food bank voucher, but a literal months supply of food and a £150 asda voucher…
Like, I wouldn’t mind it if it was for a month, but they had just started jobs and were given year long memberships or passes.
And hand on my heart, I’m not even rage baiting, I despise Reform & Labour are just a piss-take, they even asked if the child cap benefits could be lifted, to which they were told no (practically because it goes above the social workers head).
7 commenti
> Earlier this year, BBC Radio 4’s File on Four found asylum seekers were being issued with a bus pass for one return journey per week. For other necessary travel, like doctor’s appointments, taxis were used.
Seems like the sensible and humane answer would be to give them more weekly return journeys? That way they could stop using taxis but still, you know, retain some shred of humanity and dignity?
>In one case, an asylum seeker said he went on a 250-mile cab journey to a GP, costing the Home Office £600.
>The ban will not stop the use of taxis completely and there will be some exemptions for people with physical disabilities, chronic illnesses and pregnancy-related needs
Yeah, we shouldn’t be paying for these people to have free transport. Buses and trains exist.
Now ban the medical appointments. Ban them from everything. Deny. Detain. Deport.
From the article is sounds like taxi firms taking the piss and rinsing the home office.
Are we making sure that they have access to sufficient public transport to get where they need to be without putting themselves in financial difficulties?
We could make that a thing for everyone in this country.
That this was ever happening shows how little respect government agencies have for public funds.
I work in a local authority and it’s abysmal how much free shit asylums can get under the resettlement scheme.
2x year bus passes,
2x year gym memberships,
tv license paid for a year,
2 laptops (And I note on one case, a father complained the laptop was low specs and was given a higher spec laptop),
2 tablets for the kids,
White goods,
Council tax deductions,
And not even a food bank voucher, but a literal months supply of food and a £150 asda voucher…
Like, I wouldn’t mind it if it was for a month, but they had just started jobs and were given year long memberships or passes.
And hand on my heart, I’m not even rage baiting, I despise Reform & Labour are just a piss-take, they even asked if the child cap benefits could be lifted, to which they were told no (practically because it goes above the social workers head).