News Dutch in Crisis: Government Expels 20,000 Asylum Seekers

[kat]

Originally posted by Monique
Those legal advisors are most probably paid by the government,

after I read your response I decided to investigate further. Evidently, you're mistaken and there is quite a need for immigration lawyers (beyond any "counsel" provided by the state), particularly with the changes made in the last few years. http://www.immigration-lawyer.nl/ and according to the lawyer in this article
Gloom falls on Dutch asylum seekers

"For a few years they have been waiting to see what would happen, and the answer now is that they are going to be turned out on to the street, with their children as well," says Mr Kuit.

and again, apparently for children it's even more crucial that they get good legal counsel...http://www.expatica.com/cms/source/site_article.asp?channel_id=1&story_id=1971

Chadbourne points to cases where children as young as four have been interviewed without a lawyer or guardian present. In fact, these children are often not given a lawyer or guardian until after the first interview and information from the first is often used against them in the second. Even in cases where the child is clearly traumatised, the guardian appointed will often only watch the interview through a video from another room.

also, same article:

“I had a lawyer on the telephone in tears,” says Chadbourne. “The IND interviewed a two-and-a-half year old from Somalia. His mother is dead, his father is terminally ill and because the child won’t speak he has now been labelled 'unco-operative'. (Which can be a reason to refuse a permit.) We have all been shocked.”

Originally posted by Monique
For instance you have acting as helpers, not exploiters of the law.

I'm assuming that what you're saying here is that American Lawyers are not helpers by exploiters and that Dutch lawyers do not exploit the law and are only helpers. I can't speak for the Dutch other then to mention that when I visited the expat forum on legal problems for immigrants to the Netherlands there were several threads on where to find and immigration lawyer and the different loopholes they might be able to use to get someone's wife or child into the country to join them. It would seem that just like America, if you can afford your own lawyer your chances of be allowed to stay are greater then if you cannot.
As for American lawyers, I have two uncles that practice law. One is a corporate lawyer the other practices family law. I can assure you that the majority of their time is not spent exploiting anything but often on such mundane things as writing contracts, researching deeds for land and home purchases...writing wills etc..Often my uncle who practices family law must not only give legal advice but counsel families as well. In the case of Immigration lawyers, they often are speaking for people who barely understand the language, have little understanding of the legal system or their rights. The "state", often depending on the economics and public opinion of the time may be more or less concerned with being "fair" to the immigrant, they seldom will enlighten them to rights they aren't already aware of or fully understand. The lawyer allows him to have someone he can trust to look out for HIS best interest.

 

[Monique]

ok, I was just being a little cynical. But don't think the US consulate general is fun to go to either, those were the most grimm people I've ever met :S

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Monique
ok, I was just being a little cynical. But don't think the US consulate general is fun to go to either, those were the most grimm people I've ever met :S

Well, I assure you...U.S. immigration is not a walk in the park, I've had to sit through a few hearings myself. BUT, it appears to me that the Netherlands, having been considered the leaders in human rights and their treatments of Immigrants, by becoming the most difficult of the western europian countries is being looked at as the prescendant the others should follow. I'm not sure this is either fair, or positive for the countries. As was out earlier in this thread, your economies are going to need this influx of unskilled labor.
Wouldn't it be better to adjust your approach to how your immigrants are educated, supported etc? I haven't quite figured out if we should be your example or...your country having as your leaders are saying failed with the great 30 yr. experiment..should be our warning..but I do believe it's very important to take a close, honest and critical look at it.

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by kat
your economies are going to need this influx of unskilled labor.

who needs influx of unskilled labor?? how does that help an economy??

And I am still not convinced that our immigration laws has become the most difficult of Western European countries.

 

[jimmy p]

HEY HEY must defend fellow European. How about what Britain are trying out. Our government are thinking of sending some of our Somalian refugees to Tanzania because Tanzania is a safer country than Somalia, and they will pay aid money for the refugees.

How about that then, trade of immigrants... a little barbaric don't you think. I know this isn't actually in action but the government is speculating...

How bout that for possibly difficult immigration laws?

 

[Monique]

Or how about these politicians thinking about making arranged marriages illegal?

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Monique
who needs influx of unskilled labor?? how does that help an economy??

I'm sorry, that should not have read unskilled. Nonetheless, as has been pointed out earlier in this thread. With an aging society that is not producing children you need an influx of workers to support your social programs, and your aging society.

And I am still not convinced that our immigration laws has become the most difficult of Western European countries.

It's stated repeatedly on many sites that are focused on immigration in Europian countries. You can, access the links I've provided or search on your own but, I think you will see that it's true...

 

[kat]

Originally posted by jimmy p
HEY HEY must defend fellow European. How about what Britain are trying out. Our government are thinking of sending some of our Somalian refugees to Tanzania because Tanzania is a safer country than Somalia, and they will pay aid money for the refugees.

How about that then, trade of immigrants... a little barbaric don't you think. I know this isn't actually in action but the government is speculating...

How bout that for possibly difficult immigration laws?

I think that is also a route that has been suggested by the Dutch. I seem to remember seeing that somewhere in regards to refugees. I think we also need to be careful not to muddle terminology, Refugees cover a lot of catagories. A person seeking asylum would be different then one caught off shore, or one who has come into the country already as a refugee on temporary status...It says nothing about their status as a citizen, their work history, why they are there, how long they have been there. For instance you have mixed marriages where there are children involved and one parent may not come for a country that is "up to par" and that parent's asylum is not accepted and removed! leaving a single parent and child behind!

Anyway, I'll get back to you on whether this is already being done by the dutch. In my experience, in the U.S. if someone is removed from the country...usually it is because of criminal activity and no permanent residency status..they cannot be sent back to a country where there physical wellbeing would be threatened..they can however be given other choices of countries(they choose...) and if that country will accept them they will be sent there. That is, providing they can find a marshall to escort them. Otherwise they may sit in detention indefinately..of course I'm speaking criminal deportation here...

 

[Nereid]

old age -> need for new workers

Originally posted by Monique
who needs influx of unskilled labor?? how does that help an economy??

And I am still not convinced that our immigration laws has become the most difficult of Western European countries.

IIRC we discussed a closely related matter on another thread. Basically, the aging Dutch (and British, and Japanese, and German, and ...) population is an 'old age pension' timebomb - within a decade or two the state will be completely unable to pay anything but pittance old age pensions (unless ...), the folk who will be nearing retirement most likely will have far too little saved to pay for their living costs in their retirement (esp medical, tho that will be a far, far worse problem in the US) (again, unless ...), and companies will have largely given up providing meaningful assistance to their workers re an old age pension (also, unless ...).

The US won't face this social crisis for quite a while - it still has lots of young migrants (almost all of whom work), and its women are giving birth at a 'greater than replacement' rate (much to Natchwolf's horror).

So, some 'unlesses': immigration, esp of young, unskilled workers (they will take the jobs which the long-time residents don't really mind giving up); enforced saving (e.g. higher taxes, much sweeter personal pension plans, ... BTW, this could also cause a nasty recession; America's habit of spending beyond its means is a key part of current global economic growth); halting the incessant rise of medical costs; minimum retirement age increased, for both men and women, to 70 or 75; ...

Hey, no wonder the call economic the 'dismal' science

 

[Nereid]

David, are you suggesting that the Souix, Iroquois, Cree, Shoshone, etc should uproot and expel Israelite 'weeds' such as you?

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Nereid
David, are you suggesting that the Souix, Iroquois, Cree, Shoshone, etc should uproot and expel Israelite 'weeds' such as you?

Nereid, he's not an Israelite...he's a fanatical christian from the North American bible belt. The Israelites were a bit brighter then we on this forum have been...they expelled his racist butt from Israel when he started spewing his venom in their country.

 

[Monique]

Zebulon who? Anyway, why is everyone overlooking the fact that together with planning to return 'uitgeprocudeerde' asylum seekers (the ones who have been through the system and for whom nothing can be done), we have granted a license for many to attain status at the same time?

And NO we are not expelling any weeds.

 

[Nereid]

Originally posted by kat
Nereid, he's not an Israelite...he's a fanatical christian from the North American bible belt. The Israelites were a bit brighter then we on this forum have been...they expelled his racist butt from Israel when he started spewing his venom in their country.

Oh, I see. Quite a few of his posts seem to have a rather tenuous connection with reality, and written in such a way that one wonders just where to start in responding to them. Facts that contradict his assertions, and (internal) logical inconsistencies in his comments would normally be a good place to start, but he doesn't seem to be interested in those (a bit like theroyprocess perhaps?).

(BTW, what is an 'Israelite'? )

Anyway, back to Monique:

why is everyone overlooking the fact that together with planning to return 'uitgeprocudeerde' asylum seekers (the ones who have been through the system and for whom nothing can be done), we have granted a license for many to attain status at the same time?

IMHO, a system for assessing and managing those who seek asylum or refuge is essential once a country has taken the honourable step of being willing to accept those who are in danger of persecution or death for their beliefs, ethnicity (etc). Is the Dutch one good? It certainly seems so. Could it be better? Surely! Perhaps though we should be asking pointed questions of governments such as Australia's, or Japan's - why so mean? Also, aren't there many countries which would give those persecuted asylum, or a home for refugees? Maybe it's that they aren't a rich as the Netherlands, or don't have quite as generous a social welfare system. IIRC, around the time that the UK exited Hong Kong, there was much fuss about Vietnamese boat people; a goodly number didn't want to go to third countries (who were willing to have them) because they weren't as rich as the UK!

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by Nereid
Perhaps though we should be asking pointed questions of governments such as Australia's, or Japan's - why so mean?

Exactly right! Does Japan allow ANY immigrants into it's country? What I heard about Japan is that, say, a Chinese immigrant completely integrated after 10 years is still shunned and concieved as a foreigner by the Japanese.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by David Ben-Ariel
I'll wave and blow you a kiss and smile at the camera when I return next year!

I think you should wave goodbye and save the kiss for someone else. You're kidnapping this thread. Please get back OT...and for a refresher..the topic is the change in asylum law in the Netherlands.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Nereid

Anyway, back to Monique: IMHO, a system for assessing and managing those who seek asylum or refuge is essential once a country has taken the honourable step of being willing to accept those who are in danger of persecution or death for their beliefs, ethnicity (etc). Is the Dutch one good? It certainly seems so. Could it be better? Surely! Perhaps though we should be asking pointed questions of governments such as Australia's, or Japan's - why so mean? Also, aren't there many countries which would give those persecuted asylum, or a home for refugees? Maybe it's that they aren't a rich as the Netherlands, or don't have quite as generous a social welfare system. IIRC, around the time that the UK exited Hong Kong, there was much fuss about Vietnamese boat people; a goodly number didn't want to go to third countries (who were willing to have them) because they weren't as rich as the UK!

Neried, it appears that the Netherlands at this point is that which the other europian countries are taking their cues from in regards to refugee/asylum programs. As the Dutch tighten up (so to speak) and become less compassionate (for whatever reasons) the others are following suite. Historicly, during times of economic stress Europe has been less then open to immigration from certain areas of the world..Including the period during the 70's where immigrants were being attacked while working on the docks in the Netherlands and of course denying immigration to refugees in the 30's where they were shipped back to their deaths. So, where we've already discussed that it makes no sense in an economic sense to block the immigration of the very work force you will be needing to be economicly sound...what's the real cause?



*Edit to add this note: I do understand that other countries have their own issues, black spotted records and poor immigration programs but...that's really irrelevant to the thread and the reasons, cause, politics of what's going on in the Netherlands. Why can't we be as brutally frank/open when it's concerning a Europian country as we are with the U.S.? (rhetorical)

 

[Monique]

It was the minister Rita Verdonk, who proprosed the new legislation that forces cities to push out failed asylum seekers.

You must know that there was a upstir among Dutch people. The cities' legislators thought it was cruel to evict these people from their houses, and were threatening not to cooperate. Also with Dutch media, they were inviting families and demanded attention for cases of people who had been without status in this country for 6 yrs. Recently there was a demonstration of people speaking out against the legislation, among them was an Iranian man who went into hunger strike and sewed his mouth and eyes with stiches. He now has been given urgency status and his case is being reviewed again.

Again: seriously, I don't remember now who made the parallele with Hitler in the beginning of this thread, or Daniel by saying that the legislation is meant to clear this country from foreigners. This legislation simply draws a line: if you don't fall under the guidelines that says you should be granted asylum, you can't stay. As I said earlier, the cities have been looking sideways and allowed people to stay for 6-7 years, which are now the cases asked to leave.

As Kat brought up: the guidelines might not be fair that distinguish between someone that should be granted asylum and ones that should not. On the one hand there seems to be the unfairness where people only get a 48 hour window, on the other hand there seems to be the unfairness that people have to wait for several years and risking to get a 'no, sorry, can't stay'.

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by David Ben-Ariel
The Israelite Dutch should expel those who would ultimately undermine them, who are a ticking time bomb, the Islamic insurgents.

David, you are so aggressive. It is people like you who raise anger and intolerancy. I am Dutch and I don't want to expel anyone, let the islam do their prayers here in the Netherlands.

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by David Ben-Ariel
The Israelite Dutch

I have absolutely no clue what you are talking about, the Dutch have no connection whatsoever with Israel. I read your Zebulon link, but I don't believe in legends and myths. I don't even view a second generation Dutch immigrant in the US as Dutch. You are what you are brought up as, so don't claim us as Israelian. Not that I have anything against Israel.

 

[Nereid]

Monique: *SNIP This legislation simply draws a line: if you don't fall under the guidelines that says you should be granted asylum, you can't stay.

*SNIP

the guidelines might not be fair that distinguish between someone that should be granted asylum and ones that should not. On the one hand there seems to be the unfairness where people only get a 48 hour window, on the other hand there seems to be the unfairness that people have to wait for several years and risking to get a 'no, sorry, can't stay'.

As with all policies of advanced economies, there are two aspects (at least) - the intention and the implementation. AFAIK, those who write policy (civil, or public, servants; a.k.a. bureaucrats, a much misused term) - pollies don't; they just set the general idea to music - are all too well aware of what's likely to be workable and what's not, and of the high cost of having an unworkable policy.

In this case, it would seem that the intentions are clear - as Monique says, to set clear guidelines on what the grounds for granting asylum will be, and to implement those guidelines humanely (as is the Dutch way), efficiently, and effectively, while all the time allowing for exceptions.

IMHO, the 48 hours looks like a means to ensure the message is heard loud and clear; in practice it will prove difficult to implement consistently, and will likely be relaxed. However, its value is more in clarifying the intention, after years of ambiguity.

Of course, this could all be pure speculation ... I can't see inside the pollies' heads!

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by David Ben-Ariel
Now, you're making progress, as your knowledge evolves to embrace your Dutch Israelite ROOTS! www.britam.org

No, read the sentence again:
Since we ALL came out of Africa: it is now Dutch Israelite Africans, to you.
As I said, I am not going to comment any further in this thread.

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by Nereid
Of course, this could all be pure speculation ... I can't see inside the pollies' heads!

I guess it would require a federal investigation to get to the bottom of such procedures, I am not particularly educated when it comes asylum rights either :)

 

[jimmy p]

with the mass spread of immigrants (legal and illegal) arent we a "united (kingdom)" now anyway?

 

[Nereid]

Japan

I know that kat would like to limit this thread to the Netherlands, but Monique asked about Japan and its attitude to refugees, asylum seekers, and immigrants in general.

AFAIK, third generation Koreans - even those who've married Japanese - aren't recognised as full citizens, even though their ancestors' reasons for being in Japan in the first place are shameful indeed (for the Japanese). Numbers of non-Japanese taken in as refugees in the past few decades? Not even 10.

Recent immigrants include poor Philippino wives for poor Japanese farmers who don't seem to be able to find themselves a local wife.

OTOH, the amount of foreign aid Japan gives to other Asian countries is very high, much higher than the US (total, cf GDP), but not as high as the Netherlands (IIRC).

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by Nereid
OTOH, the amount of foreign aid Japan gives to other Asian countries is very high, much higher than the US (total, cf GDP), but not as high as the Netherlands (IIRC).

Would there be any page on the web that keeps up statistics like this? Foreign aid, granting asylum..

 

[Monique]

Ok, today on the frontpage of my newspaper:

The Netherlands restricts itself economically, due to too many immigration restrictions for foreign engineers and software developers. Especially in India there are a lot of complaints about the Dutch approach to knowledge-immigration. The Netherlands uses criteria that are stricter than any other European country. According to minister Brinkhorst, this problem stands separate from the Dutch asylum regulations. The same holds true for the Polish in the agriculture. (not sure what that is supposed to mean)

so.. ok.. it is true there is a knowledge exodus to the United States, and we are not getting any Americans back in return.. leading to lack of innovation.. but I guess that is another discussion.

 

[Nereid]

Monique: Would there be any page on the web that keeps up statistics like this? Foreign aid, granting asylum..

Well, http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=S%26(H%24%2FQA%23%24%0A

Some interesting http://www.undp.org/hdr2003/indicator/indic_151_1_1.html