Denmark - seize migrants' valuables

[a_chap]

Can't believe this isn't being discussed on U75 (if it is tell me I'm an idiot and point me to the right thread)

Migrant crisis: Denmark MPs consider seizing valuables - BBC News

"The government on Tuesday secured a parliamentary majority to alter the proposed legislation to allow the Danish authorities to seize migrants' cash and other individual items worth more than 10,000 kroner (£1,000; €1,340, $1,450).

Wedding rings and other items of sentimental value will not be included"

 

[Treacle Toes]

WTF does this even mean?

Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen has called the plan the "most misunderstood bill in Denmark's history".

Vital info missing from that report....what kind of reasoning or justification is there?

If it's being misunderstood, in which way?

 

[bluescreen]

It's shocking. A Danish MP was interviewed who claimed that 'some' rich Syrians were arriving by private jet and claiming asylum and benefits. Must be loads of them, going over there, in their private jets, claiming benefits.
The BBC seems to be leading on this story. Not a peep (at time of writing) in the Graun...

 

[likesfish]

Cant imagine there are many asylum seekers turning up loaded?
If they are its a fair one.

 

[Treacle Toes]

If they are its a fair one.

What is?

 

[bluescreen]

yes, if someone's turning up in a private jet, fair dos, don't give them benefits. But setting a wealth limit at €1000 is beyond grim.

 

[Pickman's model]

wouldn't this just make them more dependent on the state? seems daft to me.

 

[BlueSquareThing]

WTF does this even mean?



Vital info missing from that report....what kind of reasoning or justification is there?

If it's being misunderstood, in which way?

I *think* that essentially a native Dane would have to do the same thing if they wanted to claim benefits under the current system - I guess that means that benefits are means tested and if you have a shed load of money or gold then you can't claim them.

It may be that this is equalising the system.

Having said that, the DPP gained a lot of seats last year and Venstre is in a minority government, so it may be connected with that in part.

 

[8115]

Asylum isn't about money, it's about safety.

 

[a_chap]

I can't help wondering if the Danes will want to confiscate any gold teeth or fillings the asylum seekers might have.

Seems to ring a bell with Nazis and concentration camps.

 

[8115]

Why is it their business how much money someone has, unless claiming means tested benefits, obviously.

 

[gosub]

private Jet: Say £10k to get a 2.4 kid family from Istanbul to Copenhagen, and the ability to say you claimed asylum in the first EU nation you came to...
How much are the traffikers that load you in a cramped boat with a fake life jacket charging to (hopefully) dump you on the Greek coast? Going to be at least another grand on top (probably 2)to traverse EUrope

 

[gosub]

Yep, what I thought - Mediterranean migrants: Facebook smugglers offer under-3s go free with 'TripAdvisor-style feedback' for voyage to Europe, might even be cheaper doing it by biz jet, certainly safer, more comfortable and quicker (given the precariousness of Schengen). All things you'd consider, when taking your family on a oneway trip out of a hellhole.



Just coz you is in a private jet, doesn't mean you own it.

 

[emanymton]

I *think* that essentially a native Dane would have to do the same thing if they wanted to claim benefits under the current system - I guess that means that benefits are means tested and if you have a shed load of money or gold then you can't claim them.

It may be that this is equalising the system.

Having said that, the DPP gained a lot of seats last year and Venstre is in a minority government, so it may be connected with that in part.

The traditional way means testing works is that if you have/earn over a certain amount you don't get the benefit. Normally they don't take stuff off you until you are poor enough to be eligible.

 

[goldenecitrone]

There's something rotten in the state of Denmark.

 

[bluescreen]

private Jet: Say £10k to get a 2.4 kid family from Istanbul to Copenhagen, and the ability to say you claimed asylum in the first EU nation you came to...
How much are the traffikers that load you in a cramped boat with a fake life jacket charging to (hopefully) dump you on the Greek coast? Going to be at least another grand on top (probably 2)to traverse EUrope

Fair point. It may well be cheaper, and certainly safer.

I'm confused. Is the legislation a way of ensuring asylum seekers are means-tested for any benefits they intend to claim same as everyone else - or is it a tax on claiming asylum, intended to affect everyone coming in, whether seeking benefits or not? If the former, not wholly unreasonable. If the latter it's unconscionable.

 

[mauvais]

The traditional way means testing works is that if you have/earn over a certain amount you don't get the benefit. Normally they don't take stuff off you until you are poor enough to be eligible.

That's true, but assumes that that person can go on existing without said benefit. If you don't have any option but to consume the benefit, because for example you aren't free to get a job or residence but also can't leave, then the context is changed somewhat. Not that I'm supporting this approach.

 

[likesfish]

What is?

If they are turning up loaded they don't get benefits a ridiculous example back in 1990 got turfed out of are barracks in Cyprus to make way for Kuwaiti refugees who had turned up in a private jet admittedly with some extra souvenirs courtsey of saddams forces . They took one look at the luxurious accommodation on offwr and with much apologizing installed themselves in a 5 star hotel instead
I imagine the rich and well connected Syrians have already got themselves the hell out of dodge.

 

[bluescreen]

I missed the Guardian article from yesterday. The confiscation is to pay for accommodation while asylum application is processed. (Do refugees have to stay in camps, or what?) There are other punitive proposals in the pipeline.

Local refugee advocates also warn that there are worse aspects to the new law than the articles concerning refugees’ belongings. If passed on Wednesday, the law will prevent most Syrian refugees from being granted more than one year’s sanctuary, unless they can prove that they are individually under threat in Syria. Parents who arrive without their children will have to wait at least three years before they can apply to be reunited with their family, a clause campaigners have described as particularly cruel.
Michala Clante Bendixen, chair of Refugees Welcome in Denmark, said: “It means that most of these families will be separated for up to five years. First they’ll have to wait for the asylum application to go through, then there will be 3 years of waiting, then they’ll have to apply for reunification. Separating families for five years is completely crazy.”

Denmark to force refugees to give up valuables under proposed asylum law

 

[Casually Red]

Asylum isn't about money, it's about safety.

If you're a genuine asylum seeker then yes . you wouldn't care about this and you would just be glad you were safe .

But a lot of people presenting themselves as asylum seekers seem to want to go to places which give them more money, and pass through numerous other safe countries in order to go there instead.

 

[Casually Red]

Fair point. It may well be cheaper, and certainly safer.

I'm confused. Is the legislation a way of ensuring asylum seekers are means-tested for any benefits they intend to claim same as everyone else - or is it a tax on claiming asylum, intended to affect everyone coming in, whether seeking benefits or not? If the former, not wholly unreasonable. If the latter it's unconscionable.

I think it's much more likely the primary purpose of all the bits of legislation is to ensure even fewer asylum seekers claim asylum in Denmark . And further encourage them to go elsewhere . It's current rate is about a tenth of those flooding into Sweden and I'd assume all this will lower that ratio even further .

 

[bimble]

This has apparently been in the pipeline for quite a long time - but when they started talking about it the amount of valuables you were allowed to keep on you was much lower.

"the minority Liberal government hopes to deter more from seeking asylum by taking valuables or cash worth more than 3,000 Danish crowns"
Danish MEP quits ruling party over plan to seize refugees' valuables

 

[frogwoman]

 

[treelover]

It's shocking. A Danish MP was interviewed who claimed that 'some' rich Syrians were arriving by private jet and claiming asylum and benefits. Must be loads of them, going over there, in their private jets, claiming benefits.
The BBC seems to be leading on this story. Not a peep (at time of writing) in the Graun...

The Guardian is the most pro-refugee organ in the western world, are you saying it won't cover this, there are hundreds of articles articulating their support for them.

 

[bimble]

I think it's much more likely the primary purpose of all the bits of legislation is to ensure even fewer asylum seekers claim asylum in Denmark . And further encourage them to go elsewhere . It's current rate is about a tenth of those flooding into Sweden and I'd assume all this will lower that ratio even further .

That and (maybe mostly) to please the people who voted in such large numbers for the Danish People’s party who are all about patrolling the borders, Denmark for the Danes etc.

 

[Dogsauce]

I presume they too have some kind of dickhead press in Denmark that spreads stories of refugees with iPhones, muslim-only toilets, people having kids for benefits etc. Does Murdoch operate there?

 

[bluescreen]

The Guardian is the most pro-refugee organ in the western world, are you saying it won't cover this, there are hundreds of articles articulating their support for them.

No, I was wrong. The Guardian covered it on Tuesday, as I mentioned in a later post. Denmark - seize migrants' valuables

 

[YouSir]

If you're a genuine asylum seeker then yes . you wouldn't care about this and you would just be glad you were safe .

But a lot of people presenting themselves as asylum seekers seem to want to go to places which give them more money, and pass through numerous other safe countries in order to go there instead.

Really? I've heard that line used often enough in the reference to the UK, where you'd be a fool to imagine that you'd make out like a bandit on our benefits system. Are other countries so notably generous as to make payments a real incentive?

Where communities are, where economies are strongest, where residency is easiest to get, where local hostility is most minimal, where education is best/cheapest. All far more coherent reasons to choose somewhere like Denmark over, say, Greece.

 

[sim667]

Its a total arsehole, but I think its intention is really to try and discourage migrants from going to Denmark, more than it is to seize their wealth......

However it smacks of "we'll take that off you, because you're clearly not educated to do it enough yourself".

I've seen a lot of comments on Facebook, and one in particular comparing it to the plight of the Jews in the second world war...... I mean really if we're going to compare the Danes to the Nazi's for doing it, then in my opinion we're way off target, and in some respects it totally undermines what the holocaust actually meant.

Thats said confiscating their belongings is still a cunts trick.

 

[Wilf]

I'm sure the mega rich would have left Syria many moons ago. Tedious and nasty showboating.