Fighting Back

[denso13]

Which bit of "they are directly protected under the characteristic of ‘race" are you struggling with?

Which statute or act says that?

 

[Pat ex]

Which statute or act says that?

Refugees and Asylum-Seekers are fully protected by the Equality Act 2010. Migrants are protected by the Equality Act 2010. In fact, everyone in the UK is protected by the Equality Act and all that it contains.

http://reap.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Refugees-Equality-Full-Briefing-Feb-2014.pdf

 

[motorbiking]

The above guide is not law. The law you are referring to is section 4 of the Equality Act. 2010

Equality Act 2010

An Act to make provision to require Ministers of the Crown and others when making strategic decisions about the exercise of their functions to have regard to the desirability of reducing socio-economic inequalities; to reform and harmonise equality law and restate the greater part of the...

www.legislation.gov.uk

Please also read Section 9 and tell me where it includes Immigration status? Note section 9(3). Please also tell me where it excludes "British, and white indigenous" or similar, to justify...

Probably, if the asylum seekers were British, and white indigenous, they might not be protected, but they're not, and they are.

So as usual you are wrong.

Note even the guide that you cling to as law says..

In fact, everyone in the UK is protected by the Equality Act and all that it contains.

which includes British, white indigenous, whatever they are.

What is odd in the story, is the 'seekers should have had a payment card:

Asylum support

How to apply for asylum support if you're waiting to find out if you'll be given asylum in the UK

www.gov.uk

 

[Pat ex]

The above guide is not law. The law you are referring to is section 4 of the Equality Act. 2010

Equality Act 2010

An Act to make provision to require Ministers of the Crown and others when making strategic decisions about the exercise of their functions to have regard to the desirability of reducing socio-economic inequalities; to reform and harmonise equality law and restate the greater part of the...

www.legislation.gov.uk

It's a guide to the law.
i never claimed it was "the law". I referred to the Act mentioned in the Guide. You're using your usual strawman argument. Inventing an argument that was never made.

Please also read Section 9 and tell me where it includes Immigration status? Note section 9(3). Please also tell me where it excludes "British, and white indigenous" or similar, to justify...

I never said it did. I said that asylum seekers in UK would not be white British citizens, therefore they would be automatically covered by the ethnicity issue. And I asked you to imagine a scenario where a white British person would be seeking asylum in UK.
Please stop with the pointless strawman arguments.

So as usual you are wrong.

Based on your presentation of strawman arguments.?
And please point to where I have been wrong before.

Note even the guide that you cling to as law says..
which includes British, white indigenous, whatever they are.

Now you're repeating your strawman arguments, see your first and second points. But they're still strawman arguments.

If we're going to continue with this discussion, at least let's make it an honest discussion.

 

[motorbiking]

Rather than twisting and turning, why don't you get on with the task of proving that "asylum seeker" is protected by the Equality Act 2010. Nobody is arguing that Race is not protected nor disputing that an asylum seeker may have one or more protected characteristics. In fact everyone has protected characteristics. The Equality act, protects against discrimination on the grounds of protected characteristics, it does not grant a subset of people with protected characteristics de facto rights as you seem to believe.

 

[Pat ex]

Rather than twisting and turning, why don't you get on with the task of proving that "asylum seeker" is protected by the Equality Act 2010. Nobody is arguing that Race is not protected nor disputing that an asylum seeker may have one or more protected characteristics. In fact everyone has protected characteristics. The Equality act, protects against discrimination on the grounds of protected characteristics, it does not grant a subset of people with protected characteristics de facto rights as you seem to believe.

If you can find a believable scenario for a white UK citizen to claim asylum in UK, you might have a credible argument.
As you so obviously can't, you don't.
It's reasonably reliable to equate an asylum seeker in UK as corresponding with someone who does have the required characteristics to qualify under the Act.
Therefore, by deduction, all asylum seekers in UK are protected by the Act.

 

[Pat ex]

If enough people start twisting simple incidents we are all in trouble.

Like you just did?

No bus fare then you don't get a ride on the bus.

There's no report of them not paying their fare. On some occasions, they neve had the chance because the driver refused to let them on.
On the occasion in question, they offered to pay, in cash.

 

[Pat ex]

so it is totally reasonable and possible for a native English person to be persecuted and then need to seek asylum in the country of their birth.

Which would be?

Dear God!
Are we dealing with numpties?

By claiming asylum, you are asking the UK government to give you protection. This is often called international protection because the UK has signed an international agreement along with lots of other countries to protect some people who have had to leave their own country.
To get protection from the UK government, you will also need to show that you cannot get protection in your own country.

What is Asylum?

pdf/print page A new law called The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 has recently come into force. The Act has brought about significant changes to the UK asylum and immigration system. We are in t…

righttoremain.org.uk

 

[motorbiking]

If you can find a believable scenario for a white UK citizen to claim asylum in UK, you might have a credible argument.

Are you suggesting white UK citizens aren't protected by the Act?

It's reasonably reliable to equate an asylum seeker in UK as corresponding with someone who does have the required characteristics to qualify under the Act.

Do you think everyone in the UK has protected characteristics?

Therefore, by deduction, all asylum seekers in UK are protected by the Act.

Specifically, you are saying that it is unlawful to discriminate against an asylum seeker, on the grounds of their asylum seeker status, because they are not white indigenous people. Therefore you are saying that its implied that the act means to protect Asylum seekers as a defined characteristic.

Do you think this right or wrong?:
"asylum seeker" is not a protected characteristic defined in the Equalities Act 2010

 

[Pat ex]

Are you suggesting white UK citizens aren't protected by the Act?

Not at all. My apologies if the inclusion of the word 'white' gave you that impression. In hindsight the word 'white' does look superfluous.
I did include it to differentiate between Caucasians of other nationalities.

Do you think everyone in the UK has protected characteristics?

Never given it that much thought. What's your opinion?
I'd suggest that everyone is protected, at different times, and for different reasons, depending on the circumstances. For instance an old person could hardly claim discrimination from other old people on the grounds of age, or a disabled person could hardly claim discrimination from other disabled people on the grounds of their disability, or a white British person claiming discrimination from other white British people on the basis of ethnicity, etc.
For sure there could be scenarios when the above comment might not hold true, but it's a basic assumption.

Specifically, you are saying that it is unlawful to discriminate against an asylum seeker, on the grounds of their asylum seeker status, because they are not white indigenous people. Therefore you are saying that its implied that the act means to protect Asylum seekers as a defined characteristic.

NO! I am not saying that, as I've explained several times.
In addition I'm not comfortable with you assuming what I've said, and asking several different times, in several different ways but the same question, for confirmation that your assumption is correct.
Read my words:
For the umpteenth time: an asylum seeker is protected because they will be protected due to their other obvious (by deduction) characteristics.

Do you think this right or wrong?:
"asylum seeker" is not a protected characteristic defined in the Equalities Act 2010

Are you asking me for a moral judgement now?
But I'll answer anyway.
I think it's right that asylum seekers are protected due to their other inherent characteristics.
What's do you think. That's a rhetorical question because your views are already well known.[/QUOTE]

 

[motorbiking]

For the umpteenth time: an asylum seeker is protected because they will be protected due to their other obvious (by deduction) characteristics

EVERYONE has protected characteristics.

I'd suggest that everyone is protected, at different times, and for different reasons, depending on the circumstances. For instance an old person could hardly claim discrimination from other old people on the grounds of age, or a disabled person could hardly claim discrimination from other disabled people on the grounds of their disability, or a white British person claiming discrimination from other white British people on the basis of ethnicity, etc.
For sure there could be scenarios when the above comment might not hold true, but it's a basic assumption.

Do you also now understand, that it follows, that an asylum seeker's status as an asylum seeker is irrelevant to the Equalities Act? It is entirely possible for a person providing a service within the scope of the equalities act to deny or discriminate against an asylum seeker on the basis that they are asylum seekers. Do you further understand that this is not unlawful within the scope of the act?

 

[Deleted member 18243]

If you can find a believable scenario for a white UK citizen to claim asylum in UK,

I'm thinking of claiming asylum in a few weeks when the weather turns really cold and I can't afford to have the gas on. I shall either get put up in a five-star hotel somewhere down south or sent to Ruganda. Either way, nice and warm!

 

[Pat ex]

EVERYONE has protected characteristics.

Right, so we agree.
Then why all the fuss?

Do you also now understand, that it follows, that an asylum seeker's status as an asylum seeker is irrelevant to the Equalities Act? It is entirely possible for a person providing a service within the scope of the equalities act to deny or discriminate against an asylum seeker on the basis that they are asylum seekers. Do you further understand that this is not unlawful within the scope of the act?

I understand it perfectly. I think you are beginning to understand it.
Do you now accept that anyone who discriminates against an asylum seeker, will (by deduction) also be discriminating against them on the basis of their protected characteristics? (nationality or ethnicity)
Any and all asylum seekers in the UK will automatically have such characteristics that will protect them under that Act. Therefore it's safe to say that all asylum seekers in UK will be protected.
Let me use an analogy:
Suppose being disabled means that you have red hair, and only disabled people can physically have red hair. And having red hair denotes that you are disabled. Now having red hair is not a protected characteristic, but being disabled is. Thus it's safe to say that all people with red hair are protected, because, by deduction, they will also be disabled.

 

[Pat ex]

I'm thinking of claiming asylum in a few weeks when the weather turns really cold and I can't afford to have the gas on. I shall either get put up in a five-star hotel somewhere down south or sent to Ruganda. Either way, nice and warm!

Where do you intend to apply for asylum?
Do you think being cold is a protected characteristic, or grounds for asylum?
Do you think that the Equalities Act provides for accommodation for those discriminated against?

 

[motorbiking]

I understand it perfectly. I think you are beginning to understand it.

Unfortunately, you don't.

Do you now accept that anyone who discriminates against an asylum seeker, will (by deduction) also be discriminating against them on the basis of their protected characteristics? (nationality or ethnicity). Any and all asylum seekers in the UK will automatically have such characteristics that will protect them under that Act.

Completely wrong. The discrimination has to be on the basis of the protected characteristic. In the case of the first post we have no evidence and given the investigation by the police and the bus company, a fair chance that Race, Nationality or any other protected characteristic was not the basis for the refusal of service. Refusing them because they were asylum seekers (or any other non protected grounds) is lawful.

Perhaps you might have a better grasp if you read the ruling on the "Gay Cake" discrimination case.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0020-judgment.pdf

Here the claimants were gay (protected characteristics) and they were refused service. The ruling upheld the cake makers choice to refuse to make a specific cake and that this did not result in discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics.