Which borders does this refer to, the borders between Scotland and England, Wales and England, Northern Ireland from Eire? How on earth can we have borders when we’re not even part of mainland Europe? The coasts of the UK are not borders. How asinine to call them that.
Because when you land at an international airport, for example, you are still in International Territory until you cross the border into UK territory. Which is the reason duty free exists. Unless of course you think all asylum seekers swim here?
Bob71350: “The coasts of the UK are not borders.”
You are a pedantic twat. Of course our coast are borders, actually, five miles out to be specific, where they become international waters. Just because we do not physically adjoin another country does not mean we do not have borders. Trust me, if some Ethiopian gunboat wandered more than a centimetre into our territory, the navy would come down on them like a ton of broken down Mercedes parts.
Tommy H: Airports have international areas so that we can send people back without actually having been in Britain, should they not meet our entry conditions. Duty Free is just a handy little kickback from that situation.
Well done UKLGIG for clarifying the sitution. I have great respect for this organisation and it’s surprising that another report has come out from Stonewall. Why not report on the original one from UKLGIG – an organisation that specifically deals with immigration problems for gay peeople. Who commissioned Stonewall to write this seemingly duplicate report. This is rather confusing, duplicating reports and then not giving the true picture of what actually finally happens to these asylum seekers. Can’t Stonewall use their resources in a better way and start campaiging for what the British gay community really want ie gay marriage and leave the issue of asylum seekers to organisations that know what they are doing…Haven’t we already been told that the govt is rectifying the sitution anyway….
Whilst I sypathise with UKLGIG surely they must realise the importance of this story and how it much be shown to the wider public. The more this story is made public, the more action in increasing numbers of people can put pressure on the appropicate agencies/government to take action to make gay asylum seekers better catered for in the UK.
Ted The Stonewall report (on their website) actually has – for the first time – interveiws with Immigration staff themselves. That’s one of the really shocking things about it – that they admit to the homophobia of their organisation.
it’s not a duplicate. Stonewall did additional research, including very valuable interviews with Border Agency officers as well as asylum seekers. Go and have a look at it.
Rob-N, why do you resort to name-calling to make your point? What kind of upbringing did you have? Obviously your parents didn’t do a great job teaching you manners and having respect for others’ views that differ from yours. You are very ill-mannered, arrogant and assume an air of superiority for no reason. You’re not always right but you’d never make such a concession.
Bob, dearie, I think it’s rather disingenuous of come over all how-very-very-dare-you on these discussion boards. Point is, you’re opening comment, aside from being of only the most tenusous relevance to the article, is extremely silly, and you must expect that people will point that out. Rob is well-known for his somewhat, hmmm, trenchant mode of expression, and people will make of that what they will. But I hope you’ll accept that the idea that a border needs to be a land border is, er, hokum.
To the point of the article. I think the headline is slighlty misleading, as it could give the impression that UKLGIG are unhappy with Stonewall’s report, whereas I think they are unhappy with the Independent’s coverage of it, and the excellent work they do.
If you read the report, you will see that it fulsomely acknowledges both UKLGIG’s work and support for the project. The issue of gay asylum seekers has hitherto been under-researched and the Stonewall report builds on what little there is. In that I think it makes a very valuable addition. The coalition govt has made a statement that it intends to address this issue, but it won’t necessarily be easy given the evidential issues and UKBA’s neanderthal attitudes, both of which are highlighted in the research.
Stonewall have presumbaly written their report because they identified it as a topic of concern. I’d agree with them. It doesn’t have to be “commissioned” by anyone.
I’d agree that it’s a shame that UKLGIG’s report didn’t receive more coverage. On the other hand, Stonewall’s press operation is very slick. Ben Summerskill is, after all, an ex-newspaper man. But once again, what people seem to resent about them is that they are professional and effective. Jealousy, I fear.
Can’t be arsed to write about gay marriage any more.