Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Labour MP Chris Bryant defends UK Border Agency over claims it has deported gay asylum seekers

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. GulliverUK 3 Jul 2013, 12:13pm

    Sorry, that’s bollox. I can’t remember how many times I’ve tweeted about and signed petitions trying to half deportations, and PN has also covered some of these too.

    I like and have a lot of respect for Chris Bryant, but if he hasn’t been paying attention … we have. The UKBA have all sorts of problem generally with abuse of asylum seekers, and need I remind him and we have an International obligation, by treaty, to render assistance to genuine asylum seekers. Too often their applications are handled by judges and UKBA staff who have absolutely no idea how to determine the truth of whether someone is gay or not, they make insulting derogatory degrading remarks, telling people to go home and don’t act gay.

    Miller – add this to the list. It’s a broken promise, and it will come up at election time, including for Labour.

    1. GulliverUK 3 Jul 2013, 12:38pm

      Perhaps I can just point Mr Bryant in the direction of THIS article;

      UK: Protest planned outside Home Office following death of lesbian Ugandan asylum seeker
      http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/03/13/uk-protest-planned-outside-home-office-following-death-of-lesbian-ugandan-asylum-seeker/

      His contention that all decisions are right and the system is working are utterly outrageous – people have died because it doesn’t work.

  2. Timotheus 3 Jul 2013, 1:01pm

    What a shame, I used to think that Chris Bryant, rarely for a politician, was a reasonable human being. Obviously I was wrong.

    This is dog whistle politics: note that the remarks were made in Lincolnshire, where immigration is a hot topic.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 3 Jul 2013, 1:29pm

      I agree, and guess who else is an MP in that area? None other than.RC homophobe Edward Leigh, one of the most vicious opponents of Equal Marriage recently honoured by the Queen.

  3. My respect for this man has gone right down.

    What a cock. And he repeats the usual unsubstantiated claim that the asylum system was used by large numbers of people who were economic migrants. I know of NO empirical studies which cumulatively back this claim up, and consider myself fairly well-versed on the academic literature regarding this topic. How shameful.

    1. Sister Mary Clarence 4 Jul 2013, 9:15pm

      It is indeed shameful and when the UKBA don’t collect the statistics they have been required to collect that would shed more light on the situation, it does show Mr Bryant to be a c0ck, and a c0ck who is talking out of his @rse.

  4. Redfern Jon Barrett 3 Jul 2013, 1:28pm

    Are we surprised? The Labour party kept an automatic ban on asylum applications from Jamaica, a country where homosexuals are stoned to death.

    All three main parties are more concerned with “protecting the British taxpayer” (Bryant’s words) than the lives of LGBT/Queer people.

  5. Sorry but this is bollocks. the whole thing about “Protecting the British taxpayer” is nonsense. How many cases have we read about now where migrants are deported despite having partners testify in court? Is he suggesting that British citizens are committing perjury to help “economic migrants” or that heterosexual foreigners are having gay relationships (including sex) just to live here and claim benefits? Absolute hogwash! The system is discriminatory towards LGBT people and that’s undeniable!

  6. Colin (London) 3 Jul 2013, 3:29pm

    Sorry guys but this is not black and white.

    This country has a responsibility to it’s own first and foremost whether gay or not.

    We risk being a dumping ground for anyone who wants to be an economic migrant using their sexuality as way in.

    Yes the system needs to be looked at from all angles. How do you differentiate how this countries money is spend. Asylum seekers get free housing, health care, education.

    What about our 1.5m young people who need jobs, houses and a future. Or our old who need warm houses etc.

    We all need to look at the bigger picture as well.

    1. GulliverUK 3 Jul 2013, 3:54pm

      I do see your point, but we have a treaty obligation under law, and for very good reasons. Would you have turned away Jews during WWII? I hope not.

      Our problems with jobs, generally, is down to government inaction, in my opinion, and I don’t think it’s particularly fair to say that just because we’re in times of economic hardship that we turn our backs on helping others, and refuse entry to those fleeing persecution. You have to ask yourself — how low do we have to get to suspend our humanity? Did you mummy never tell your the story of the Good Samaritan and explain how important it is to help others?

      I think perhaps you need to go and live in one of these places for six months and see if you still feel the same way. And how many are we talking about? 500, 5000? It won’t make tuppence difference to the jobs situation. Try cutting VAT to 15% and I think that will make a difference. Try employing people who care in these back-to-work programmes, do house building, etc.

      1. Colin (London) 3 Jul 2013, 4:34pm

        GulliverUK

        You clearly are an intelligent and motivated person but in some way I agree and in others I disagree.

        We need governments and armies to come together to force changes and human rights around the globe.

        Look at Africa…look at all the money the west has given but we still have droughts and kids dieing. No-one talks about controlling the birth rate, no-one talks about personal responsibilities in terms of community, taxation, work….it’s always the government or someone elses money. This planet is not perfect but opening our doors to every poor sod will only destroy our country.

        Please I have worked in many countries around the globe reorganising companies that were failing. Having an open door policy is in MY opinion not the way to go.

        We need the UN and world leaders to demand change, we need banks to stop taking their leaders funds and hiding them, we need companies to demand political changes before they will trade with them and we desperately need all

        1. Colin (London) 3 Jul 2013, 4:37pm

          the worlds churches and every parishioner to stand up for equality against their leaders and say not in my name. Stop funding religion. Stop their religious leaders, politicians, bankers from travelling etc.

          Only my take…I wish you well and note your good comments.

          1. GulliverUK 3 Jul 2013, 5:16pm

            I don’t know how we light a rocket under the UN or Council of Europe, and others – nothing seems to happen, they say it’s bad, but do nothing.

            In cases where, for example, a paper has printed a list of people who are gay, like in Uganda, and their very lives are in real danger, we should not refuse them. This is not immigration, a completely different issue, but asylum. I wonder if we have the same criteria for others who come here seeking asylum – it always seems to be LGBT who get thrown out, back to an uncertain future, possibly death. We may well be their last hope,, which is why people seek asylum.

            Churches here don’t do anything – don’t want to upset the Anglicans (if you can even call them that) in Africa. They urgently need to get them to stop discrimination against LGBT – but the CofE isn’t really much better is it. Very homophobic language used over the last 2 years.

            Appreciate your comments.

    2. You are living in relative luxury compared to any country these people are coming from. How about giving up that 5th pint or 3rd pie every once in a while, and give a bit to protect someone from torture, imprisonment and death?

    3. Sister Mary Clarence 5 Jul 2013, 5:21pm

      You’re absolutely right, and the taxes that these gay asylum seekers would pay would help to ensure that British born people can continue to live well off the state.

      Immigrants into this country are net contributors to the economy (and its housing, healthcare and education) … it staggers me that whenever the subject of asylum seeking comes up the same tired old misinformation is trotted out about them coming here with their hands out.

      As for the 1.5m young people who need jobs … the jobs are there because supposedly all the bloody foreigners are having no problem in snapping them up … so perhaps we’d do better looking at why unemployable young people are being churned out of the education system.

  7. Samuel B. 3 Jul 2013, 4:00pm

    It’s the sardonic sneer – the way the corners of his mouth appear to be turned up as if trying to break out into a smile while his eyes remain completely blank – that makes me wobbly at the knees, even more than seeing him parading about in his Y-fronts.

    Sigh…

  8. Well, you really hauled him over the coals there, didn’t you pinknews? If you’re not going to ask the hard questions, what exactly was the point of that article? Government apologism.

    1. GulliverUK 3 Jul 2013, 5:08pm

      They got all we need to know – he doesn’t think there’s a problem. Obviously the twit has never typed in “asylum” in to the search box on PN, and has no idea what’s going on.

      But what can we expect – he’s a politician – many seem totally out-of-touch with reality. Not him … I heard you say, and I would agree on much of the marriage equality debate, but on this issue he knows next to nothing. I’m … disappointed in him, and it’s the first time. I don’t want a repeat performance or I might lose faith in him altogether, so I hope he reads this and goes away and does him homework. I can accept a Tory MP coming out with complete codswallop like “poverty doesn’t exist”, or “the moon is made of cheese”, but not him.

  9. Translation: protecting the British taxpayer = chasing after xenophobic votes.

  10. he is such a closeted tory ‘count’

  11. Common sense 5 Jul 2013, 4:48am

    I think maybe he could have chosen his words better. But down here in Australia there is an emerging discussion about how many of the boat people are economic migrants with some evidence that “gay persecution” is used by some nongay economic migrants as an inherently untestable justification for asylum. And Brits should remember the case of Gabriel Vengesai as evidence that this does go on in the UK too:

    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2006/06/05/hiv-positive-rapist-is-lowest-of-the-low-says-gay-rights-campaigner/

    Ultimately UKBA has an extremely difficult job telling the genuine from the fake gay asylum seekers and unfortunately sometimes they get it wrong in both directions.

    1. it seems that australia and uk exclude ‘benefit of the doubt’ from the decision making process

      1. Common sense 5 Jul 2013, 7:40am

        hmm, that’s a little unfair. While I have some sympathy with a global suspension of immigration restrictions . . . . back in the real world that just is not in any way practicable and certainly not unilaterally.

        We are obliged by treaty and by moral imperative to offer sanctuary to genuine refugees. Both Australia and the UK also have active immigration programmes for people who wish to travel for work or relationships.

        But for people fleeing poverty, a decision has been made in both countries that this is not a legitimate reason to be admitted. Knowing this, many economic migrants will attempt to be seen as asylum seekers. This means that immigration authorities cannot ever take the ‘benefit of the doubt’ position.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all