Complaint over asylum seeker numbers!

From the Advertiser website:

Council complaint over asylum seeker numbers in Rotherham

COUNCIL chief Martin Kimber (pictured) has complained to the Government that Rotherham is being sent too many asylum seekers — but senior officials put a brave face on the situation.

Mr Kimber, Rotherham Borough Council’s chief executive, wrote to the Home Office asking them to ensure people seeking asylum are “distributed in an appropriate and equitable manner” Read on…

23 thoughts on “Complaint over asylum seeker numbers!

  1. I don’t remember Kimber complaining when his party was in government and opened the floodgates.
    We have Chris Bryant MP admitting Labour got it wrong on immigration:
    Now Rotherham along with other cities and towns is paying the price for more Labour failures because as a result of their policies on immigration and the EU we cannot just seal our borders.
    Even more pressures are being put on Housing, Schools and the Health services due to uncontrolled immigration. The Tories must also accept part of the blame because they have also failed to tale robust action on immigration.
    We cannot keep accepting more and more people into Britain who do not have the requisite skills to balance the effects on our economy of those who choose to emigrate.


  2. Totally agree Colin. We really need a lenghty moratorium on immigration and a genuine start to seriously repatriate all those who should not be here, such as the criminals, the people who destroy their passports, and the bogus asylum seekers who have crossed many safe countries to get here. If Cameron cannot take back control of our borders from the EU as well as stopping the pull factor of our benefit system then we should secede from it! For those who say we need immigration, Japan,a much more successful economy than ours, seems to manage without it!


    • Mal, you say:
      “Japan,a much more successful economy than ours, seems to manage without it [immigration].
      Why do you think that might be? ”
      I don’t think that Japan is more successful because it allows only limited immigration, More that it has a very well educated workforce and very little class-division, hardly what we have in UK.


      • RR: Japan has a very low birth rate, but to counter this it has not imported millions of people, many of them totally alien, like we have, it leads the world in robotics. It is developing robots to do the dirty and unpleasant jobs. Since the war, they unlike us have not spent hundreds of billions on an independent nuclear deterent and got embroiled in foreign conflicts! The multi-cultis are flogging a dead horse! The British people do not buy it,they don’t want it, not least because it has been imposed on them!
        You asked me a question I’ll ask you one, Why is it perfectly acceptable for the Irish to want to be Sinn Fein, but if the British say they want to be on their own they are described as racists and xenophobes?


      • Hi Mal,
        Sorry to be so late in replying – but I’m trying to catch up now.
        Like you I can’t help feeling that our token nuclear deterrent and foreign military adventure have been a waste of our national income, that could have been far better spent.
        I seem to remember some politician (UKIP, Tory, Labour ?) saying on radio 4 yesterday morning that they were not going to reduce the MoD budget because the military provided jobs. I just wish those funds could instead be used for training and jobs in a more productive industry.
        I know little about Japan’s immigration policy – tho’ I know many UK IT contractors who have worked out there in the banking business. So maybe they are open to skilled workers but have no need for agricultural laborers and care assistants, as we appear to have. A lot like Switzerland – but like Switzerland it is based on a good education system that is not meddled every few years by politicians.

        I know nothing about Sinn Fein’s policy on immigration today. I thought their name referred to independence from UK and just maybe the early immigration from Scotland that they objected to. I’ve worked in the South (Ireland) and really enjoyed it.


  3. Sensible voices. Usually if you speak out on such issues you are labelled a racist or bigot. Whereas I’ve never subscribed to the whole ” coming over here taking our jobs” mentality, as I’m sure Rotherham has it’s fair share of indigenous population that won’t do the jobs immigrants will, this town seems to be a dumping ground. The problems this causes has a huge impact on immigrants lives. One being unscrupulous landlords giving immigrants to live in squalid accommodation. Creating hatred and serious problems regarding this.


  4. I am not against immigration per se as we have always benefited from it when it was controlled. But immigration unchecked depresses wages so big businesses (and small for that matter) have a vested interest in keeping it going – but its lunacy because any economic benefit is offset by pressure on public services. We have whole schools in RMBC with 95% immigration school populations with failure to hit targets guaranteed because its inbuilt – result: demoralised staff and resources wasted. These could be devoted to improving education of indigenous children and making them fit for work, increasing competitiveness of our labour force and thus offsetting the higher wage costs – the Government could cut corporation tax to offset higher wage bills (and chase tax dodging companies and individuals of course).


  5. Jason your comments are the more sensible and suffer less from the rhetoric which you quite righytly condemn via -‘taking our jobs syndrome moaning tones without any reality check that you quite rightly point out-as having indiginous section of the population that are claimed to be workshy. Thee is also the fact that Tesco and other large companies have in fact sought out other workers from across Europe because of this factor of indiginous non workers mindsets. Though it is a fact that the pressures on education-health and housing is a reality that effecys us all especilaly the providers of those services. But we all seem to have forgotten that it is xcapitalsim -which produces goods for greed for themselves and not for need which could provide abetter economy. I have to agree that Labour councilos who obtain money for accep[ting immigrants are a bit like those that were running drove the Irish economy into the buffers due to short termism and taking the money taht was on credit and not realsiing taht all booms will bust. We are all suffering under aglobal capitalsit system that cares not for ordinary people only profits and unless we retrieve the older socialist ideals for producing for need and building for community we are all left moaning or turning to the madness of the 1930s by electing racist and sexist and anti trade union parties as we never seem to learn from history. Blair /Brown conitinuing trhe Thatcher hatchet job on our industries to promote the finance sector is what has got us intio the mess we are in. This is more gauling that Labour politicians who should know taht you do not sleep with the3 enemy cpaitialists shouuld hold their heads in shamne and so should all the labour politicians taht like Lemmings followed their leaders without a pause for thought. they were overwhelnmed as the real billioniares that control the global economy -and thought they had to cow tow to them. We have to have anew politics taht takes us away drom the self centred egotistical political elites taht all should eat more than humble pie taht will probably bring us towrads afascist world again.


  6. One small but rather important point, these people are asylum-seekers, not economic migrants.

    “Asylum is protection given by a country to someone who is fleeing persecution in their own country. It is given under the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. To be recognised as a refugee, you must have left your country and be unable to go back because you have a well-founded fear of persecution.”


  7. RR: A “genuine asylum seeker” goes to the nearest safe country, as most of the Syrian refugees are doing! The majority of these so called asylum seekers are bogus! In many cases they have come through safe countries which have a similar culture and language to their own. We have French speaking Africans living near us who have come through France, a country whose language they speak, to get to our country and then we have to provide translation for them .Some of these bogus aylum seekers have gone back to the countries they came from on holidays – how absurd is that? Another question: if diversity is such a good thing why do so many people vote with their feet to avoid it?


    • Mal,
      The Syrian refugees are getting out of Syria as fast as possible to the nearest welcoming country, and hoping that they will be able to return to Syria soon. That is normal. It is only later if they can’t get back that they would try and find a new home.
      Germany has committed itself to airlifting 5000 Syrian refugees into Germany, the airlift has already started.
      (In the early 1970’s I worked here:, in 2013 it is still there. Camp life is grim ).

      Everyone’s experience is different, and I try hard to stay away from anecdote but:
      Re: the Francophone Africans; it’s not something I can understand, anymore than I could ever understand what was happening at Sangatte.
      2011 figures:
      Accepted Rejected total %accepted
      germany 3370 21205 24575 13.71
      france 6125 28425 34550 17.73
      UK 7165 11265 18430 38.88
      sweden 1820 11265 13085 13.91
      I think the UK Border Agency was considered “not fit for purpose” in those days, but they are the most recent figures I can find (I hate EuroStat!).
      Re: “bogus” Asylum Seekers, is that actually someone applying for asylum? It’s a process that lasts for just a few weeks – not much time for even a trip to Skegness, never mind a holiday to their home country (and the Skegness trip would be far healthier for them).
      I realise that there are people who get into UK “under the radar” smuggled in, and people, including students, who long overstay their visa. I don’t know what the official term is for those people, I call them illegal immigrants.
      Re: “diversity”, Cavin was asking what “racist” means, please tell me what you mean by “diversity” and “multiculturalism”. I don’t use any of the three of those words.


      • RR:the expressions “multiculturalism” and “multi-cultis” have now been rebranded as “diversity” and “progressives.” The Border Agency is still today considered not fit for purpose, does any one believe the figures they give out! Of dourse life in a house with all the mod cons in a relativly safe country is far preferable to living in a tent in a dust bowl Regarding going back to the country they had supposedly fled from I meant people who had been accepted as refugees and given the right to stay here.. It is a fact that some of these people have gone back to the countries where their life was supposedly in danger for holidays. Some of these people have committed crimes here and then to escape prosecution have gone back. These are verifiable facts not opinions!.


      • You say that refugees who have been given right to stay in UK, go back for holidays… OK.
        It’s not something I know of. You may be right. The country I know best is Ethiopia/ Eritrea and whilst many of the people who I knew there and who found their way out were genuine, some were economic migrants looking for a better life. Most got to the US, some to Sweden, only one (a genuine refugee – who once here managed to get his wife out ) came to UK – he had been employed by the British Council out there before his imprisonment . He was/is a damn good accountant with a masters degree from Birmingham University.

        I have no more trust in any of our government’s (or EuroStat’s or those of the OECD) figures than you have in those of the Border Agency.


  8. what about all the eu people in rotherham …are they asylum seekers ?? do they come in to the picture ? ive emailed dave richmond a number of times about the state of eastwood a masbrough over 12 months , had one reply …. martin kimber a roger stone have turned there backs on the problem ,yes what about all the “bad” landlords…and we all know who they are ….milking in £100 per week for a house not fit to live in .


    • Ronnie
      The “EU people” in Rotherham are definitely not Asylum-seekers.
      From the point that UK joined the EU we were able to go to other countries to seek work and may, subject to certain conditions, have the right to live there permanently, and residents of other EU countries had similar rights in UK.
      When new countries joined the EU other EU countries could put in some restrictions on the new country’s people to come into their country – these are called “transitional arrangements” and last for 7 years. In 2007 Bulgaria and Romania joined the EU, and whilst particularly France and Germany put in these 7 year transitional arrangements – UK (under Gordon Brown) didn’t. This meant that lots of people from Bulgaria and Romania came to UK who might otherwise have gone to Germany or France
      What you are seeing in Eastwood is largely a consequence of this. Gordon Brown has a lot to answer for in this respect.
      (I think I’ve got this EU stuff right, but any corrections/clarifications welcome!)

      Asylum Seekers are people who arrive at our borders from non-EU countries claiming that that they are suffering persecution in their own country. The UK Border Agency puts them through a series of interviews (over a period of 3 weeks or so) and makes a decision as to if they can stay, if they can’t stay they taken out of the country. I would think that what Kimber is going on about is that more are coming here for that 3 or so week period.
      In the year ending June 2013, there were 23,499 Applications of which 11,690 (62%) were refused.
      Once an application has been accepted the applicant is classed as a Refugee and can choose where to live in UK. Naturally they will move to an area of UK where there are more of their compatriots.
      In 2011 (the most recent year I can find data for) Asylum seekers, by country of origin:
      Pakistan 4035
      Iran 3155
      SriLanka 2107
      Afghanistan 1660
      Libya 1200
      Others 14210
      (I can’t find figures for the application success rates. – I hate EuroStat!)


  9. Complain about one of the biggest political issues in the country today when you’ve not had an issue before Mr Kimber? One could argue your party and its failed immigration policy over 13 years has led to this. This is nothing more than an attempt to smoke screen the electorate yet again and deflect the flack from the shameful child exploitation he and his cronies were party too. As a staunch labour supporter said to me today “Rotherham are rotten to the core and its time for a change”


  10. RR: Sein Fein means “our selves alone.” Yet if the British dare say they want to be on their own,racist bigot is screamed at them! There is a rank hypocrisy here! You gave international figures on immigration, well I’m not a statistician and cannot refute them. I simply believe my eyes and they tell me that there are far too many people in this country and in this town who don’t belong here! Once a person has arrived at a safe country they are no longer an asylum seeker; they have got the asylum they were seeking and are now economic migrants!

    To support my argument below are these newly acquired figures from a FOI request to the UKBA (full details have been supplied to Rik) that show that from 2003 to 2013 more than “20,000” section 95 Asylum Seekers were dispersed to Rotherham. Section 95 of the 1999 Immigration and Asylum act means these people are considered destitute. It now appears that finally Martin Kimber has written to UKBA to say that they are dispersing too many of these people here!
    I should say it gives me no satisfaction at all to score a debating point on here when my country is slowly but surely being stolen from me and sanctimonious. indiginous quislings are collaborating in this!

    Table 1
    Asylum seekers in receipt of Section 95 support, as at end of quarter Quarter Region Local Authority Total supported under Section 95 In dispersed accommodation
    2003 Q4 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 769 743
    2004 Q1 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 746 717
    2004 Q2 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 721 694
    2004 Q3 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 703 676
    2004 Q4 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 779 757
    2005 Q1 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 745 722
    2005 Q2 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 682 666
    2005 Q3 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 681 664
    2005 Q4 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 709 695
    2006 Q1 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 669 660
    2006 Q2 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 622 613
    2006 Q3 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 716 702
    2006 Q4 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 790 780
    2007 Q1 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 807 797
    2007 Q2 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 813 803
    2007 Q3 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 789 778
    2007 Q4 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 738 725
    2008 Q1 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 533 523
    2008 Q2 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 571 560
    2008 Q3 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 495 484
    2008 Q4 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 504 499
    2009 Q1 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 548 544
    2009 Q2 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 515 509
    2009 Q3 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 420 415
    2009 Q4 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 399 394
    2010 Q1 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 416 410
    2010 Q2 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 342 340
    2010 Q3 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 306 303
    2010 Q4 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 286 283
    2011 Q1 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 304 302
    2011 Q2 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 289 289
    2011 Q3 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 295 293
    2011 Q4 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 289 288
    2012 Q1 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 305 304
    2012 Q2 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 293 292
    2012 Q3 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 306 304
    2012 Q4 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 388 388
    2013 Q1 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 392 387
    2013 Q2 Yorkshire and The Humber Rotherham 392 388
    Total 20,094


  11. Sorry, but this table has not copied well. The figures for each quarter are the column of the first three numbers, that is in the hundreds, not hundreds of thousands. There should be a space between each set of three numbers which is missing.


    • No problem – I’ll put them into excel and reply as soon as I can. I’ve booked marked the page.
      … and I did know the literal translation of “Sein Fein”, I just didn’t see the relevance of bringing a reference to the sectarian politics of NI into the discussion – they add nothing and are far to complicated; I should know – I was born into them.


  12. Mal,
    Well done, really well done!
    Your figures directly contradict the statement made in the Advertiser article – where it says “the number of asylum seekers in Rotherham increased from 334 in August 2012 to 450 in March this year”, By this they presumably mean the 2012 Q3 and 2013 Q1 figures. Your FoI figures for the same quarters say 306 to 392 a somewhat smaller percentage increase.
    Did you get the National totals for the same periods? To get the full picture one has to look at the actual numbers and and also that number as a percentage of the national totals.
    On the government website I can only find the quarterly data for 2006 to 2102 inclusive – which is frustrating!

    Now, I’m unhappy whenever I see selective stats such as those that appear in the Advertiser article. After all the 2012Q3 figure is historically somewhat low, and the same period’s national figures were the lowest they had been in the whole 2006-12 period.
    What’s not clear is who came up with the figures. Kimber or the un-named “senior official in Migration Yorkshire”.
    Migration Yorkshire turns out to be “a local authority-led regional migration partnership for Yorkshire and Humber, hosted by Leeds City Council. Migration Yorkshire works with national government, local government, and others to ensure that Yorkshire and Humber can deal with, and benefit from, migration. ”
    I can’t find out anything about their governance on their website at .



  13. Pingback: Asylum Seekers – National Audit Office Report | Rotherham Politics

Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.