This doesn’t surprise

Two-thirds of child refugees screened by officials found to be adults, Home Office figures show

Many will read that as two thirds of so called child refugees are not children.

No. Two thirds of those that officials suspected were not children, and thus investigated, were found to be adults.

I’m sure Bayes would have something to say about this.

52 thoughts on “This doesn’t surprise”

  1. Before we had kids ourselves, Mrs Square worked with teenagers as a guidance councillor. She told me that a great many refugees she worked with had birthdays on 1st Jan, as that was the default date for arrivals who had no papers and ‘didn’t know how old they were’.

    I saw several of these teenage boys. They were, without exception, all older looking than I was.

  2. The vile Lord Dubs and his fellow travellers including the beardy weirdy former AoC are awful disgusting people. If they had any decency, they would be pressing for major changes in the law regarding unaccompanied minors. For the main point is to prevent minors travelling – firstly, no citizenship or long term residency for minors who arrive. Secondly, no family reunion for minors to bring in their families from overseas. Both subject to reasonable waivers: child found on battlefield with no family badly injured, rescued and a decade later his relatives found for example.

    The idiotic lefties are encouraging dangerous travel by minors – the very opposite of what they claim to be against. Oh, and anyone claiming to be a minor, but found not to be, subject to automatic deportation, no citizenship, no residency, no family reunion. Criminal record.

  3. “Two thirds of those that officials suspected were not children, and thus investigated, were found to be adults.”

    Then there’s something very wrong with their investigation technique:

    “The Home Office’s official guidance states that where there is little evidence to support an applicant’s claim to be a child, “the applicant should be treated as an adult if their physical appearance /demeanour very strongly suggest that they are significantly over 18 years of age.””

    You just need to look at them.

  4. Are there any actual kids that look like they’d have belonged on the Kindertransport? Fresh faced little cherubs, desperate for parents?

    This lot look more like an African One Direction tribute band.

  5. I’d like to know the sensitivity and specificity of the ‘Adult test’. I’m guessing close to zero false positives and thus a huge % of false negatives.

  6. Using Bayesian techniques, I think that there is a very probability that the criterion for choosing whether to test or not is set a too loose a level (i.e. too many are let in without being tested).
    A central criterion would result in rejecting as adults half of those screened. The tougher a criterion, the more adults will be rejected and the higher the proportion of those tested will be found to be genuine children.

  7. I’d like to know the sensitivity and specificity of the ‘Adult test’.

    You give them a copy of The Guardian. If they want another, they’re children. 100% foolproof.

  8. And yes, the contempt in which our political masters hold us by telling us these are desperate children when they are in fact 20 year old men is absolute. They don’t even bother trying to hide it, they can brazenly lie and know they’ll get away with it. You’d have thought Brexit would have taught them something.

  9. You give them a copy of The Guardian. If they want another, they’re children. 100% foolproof.

    This is a good test for hiring staff. Leave some newspapers and magazines in the waiting room and don’t hire anyone who picks up The Guardian. Unless they are laughing out loud whilst reading it.

  10. Bloke in North Dorset

    Irrespective of how old they look I still haven’t heard a valid argument why we are duty bound to let them m in and feed and house them. And as I’m one of the softer readers on hear when it comes to refugees that’s a fairly low bar.

  11. BiND, I believe the UK is a signatory to some deal where unaccompanied refugee minors who have family in your country have a right to go there rather than claim refuge in the first safe country.

  12. Bloke in North Dorset

    DJ,

    That wasn’t the case being made in the articles I listened to yesterday. The problem with hat argument is that in the societies where they come from everyone is interrelated.

  13. Dongguan John,

    This treaty to which we are signatories, does it really define minors as being under 18? Not that many moons ago the consensus would have been 16.

  14. Dongguan John, if it is the case that these “children” have relatives here I didn’t see them waiting to welcome them with open arms.

  15. A couple of days ago there was a fellow on the R4 Today prog who was head of social services (or similar) for Kent (or similar) saying that he had various foster parents lined up for these ‘children’. He wasn’t asked why the ‘children’ would need foster parents.

    Also, the same show this morning informed that the Home Office regarded medical examination of the ‘children’ as too intrusive. I’m glad I’ve never needed to apply for disability benefits or I might have blown a gasket.

  16. Bloke in North Dorset

    “This treaty to which we are signatories, does it really define minors as being under 18? Not that many moons ago the consensus would have been 16.”

    I’ll bet there’s a very large overlap of those campaigning for those 16 & 17 year-olds to be allowed in and those campaigning for age of majority to be lowered to 16.

  17. The issue is the need to defeat and destroy the left.

    RoP crew are only the means of our intended destruction. It is the scum of the left that must be broken in order to bring about our salvation.

    That is the only point that matters in most issues of today.

  18. I don’t know the fine details. I just read that apparently some of the unaccompanied minors in that camp apparently have a legal right to enter UK because of family there. As I understand it when these unaccompanied children are being discussed it’s specifically the ones with family already in the UK, although our lefty friends would happily be intentionally vague to conflate those children with all of them, I’m sure.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/unicef-unaccompanied-children-refugees-calais-camp-closed-uk-a7340651.html
    The UK Government has made crystal clear its commitment to resettle vulnerable children under the Immigration Act and ensure those with links to the UK are brought here using the Dublin Regulation.

    Apparently it’s part of the Dublin regulation.

  19. This is a superb example of the lunacy currently infecting our political culture. Not necessarily the point that we allow refugees, but the ridiculous charade and how people react to it.

    You see photos of these people. They are clearly not children. Some of them look to be in their late twenties. Any normal and rational person looks at them and says “adult”. How can any sane person look at these photographs and believe these are children?

    So instead we have this utterly dishonest and cynical farce: the government (conservative, apparently), the civil service, the usual suspect ‘charities’, the State media and other newspapers all claiming in all seriousness that they are children, and anyone who disagrees is a racist bigot by implication.

    A couple of days ago there was a fellow on the R4 Today prog who was head of social services (or similar) for Kent (or similar) saying that he had various foster parents lined up for these ‘children’. He wasn’t asked why the ‘children’ would need foster parents.

    Yes, the government brings them in because they have ‘family’ here, yet the government is arranging foster parenting for them. They can’t even be bothered to get a simple cover story straight.

  20. I know of an Afghan asylum seeker in London who knocked two years off his age, which his English girlfriend discovered when she saw his sister’s true date of birth on her prescription (which meant he count have been born when he claimed, due to basic biology of pregnancy) and applied the age gap she’d been told between them. He admitted it and said that it made it easier for him to get settled in the UK, but also gave him a few more years of free education (GCSEs and A levels) before starting a degree (as he is unlikely to repay his student loan, also effectively for free). Entirely rational behaviour – if you were 18 or 19, why on Earth would you admit it? Why not knock a year or more off?

    What I found odd about that case was that his wealthy family were quite happy to send both him and his sister to claim asylum in the UK but didn’t attempt to follow themselves – instead, once their claims were accepted, the kids would jet back to Afghanistan to stay each summer, before returning to their foster families London in term-time to complete their education. Effectively they were using the UK asylum process as a cheap form of English-language boarding school, topped up with a free degree at the end. Obviously they did not feel insecure at home – the kids felt no threat going back each year – but I suppose it was a kind of insurance policy in case the local situation got uppity again (kids safely away unless summer seemed safe, and made a “family reunion” bolthole available in London for the parents if needs be).

  21. When will people get it through their heads that “truth”, in the culture these people come from, is not necessarily derived from facts. It’s more often what is desired for you to believe &, in the wider application, the consensus of what it is advantageous to believe.
    All is “as Allah wills it”, so there isn’t a strong sense of causality. More a presumption that Allah willed it so & if it turns out Allah didn’t – a shrug of the shoulders & “who can know the mind of Allah?”
    So, basically, you can’t trust anything you’re told.

  22. So Much For Subtlety

    If they have family here, family reunion is best achieved by deporting their relatives here and stripping them of whatever right to stay they have.

    We should not be taking more refugees. We should be undoing every arrival since the 1950s.

  23. Should ISIS be defeated, there will be lots of former ISIS people fitting the description of “people fearing for their lives and fleeing a war zone”.

    Will the SJWs be demanding we let them in the UK?

  24. Further to what I said one does have to ask oneself what sort of family member is sitting in the UK while their child or nephew or whatever is living in that camp. You would have thought they’d be going there to collect them themselves.

  25. No point to discussing how to deal with migrants until there is will and effort to defeat the gang bringing them here.

    Focus your outrage on those behind the scene. The scum of CM.

    If we focus on the migrants we will lose. There are a million ways to stop and send packing the human flotsam.

    The cause must be destroyed before the effects can be neutralised.

    The left must be destroyed.

  26. Mate of mine is a teacher at a comp that gets a lot of these ‘children’ sent to it, it only takes children up to 16, no 6th form. He had one pupil who was purported to be under 16, he had a full beard………another teacher (at the same school) ordered a pizza one night, the delivery turned up, it was one of his pupils driving the car………….

  27. Should ISIS be defeated, there will be lots of former ISIS people fitting the description of “people fearing for their lives and fleeing a war zone”.

    Will the SJWs be demanding we let them in the UK?

    Why yes, as being radicalised, trained with weapons, with a detestation of Western culture and an absolute determination to destroy it, they are “summa cum laude” as far as immigration goes.

  28. >No. Two thirds of those that officials suspected were not children, and thus investigated, were found to be adults.

    You don’t need Bayes to tell us that it doesn’t follow just from this that two-thirds of all the arrivals are adults. But there are suspicions that a lot of adults are just being waved through by officials. For years there has been a determined effort by the left to get as many immigrants as possible into the country, in the belief that it would help the left’s various causes. It appears that since Brexit this has been stepped up — they’re worried that migration might be limited in a few years, and they want to cram as many refugees as possible into the country while they can, in order to undermine ‘white patriachal oppression’, or whatever.

  29. I see no reason why we should not welcome ISIS terrorists – after all, it’s not as if they are premiership footballers or something.

  30. Pat

    Screening is not terribly accurate – and probably time consuming.

    @Anonymous coward
    Classic example of people who should be forced out of the country, banned from travel to the UK on a permanent basis. They’re not refugees, they are people taking advantage of refugee law to freeload.

  31. As one of the people who from age 11 was taken for older than I actually am – I do question whether these children are actually children or adults.
    At age 15 I could pass for 20+, age 18 I looked in my 30s.
    It happens – simply genetics and environment.

    I do wonder why we are taking children from a French camp. Where are the French authorities dealing with children? Surely they are not in the habit of letting unaccompanied children live with a bunch of adults that have been known to abuse and rape? Why do they not take the children into French legal system? Or the legal system of whichever country they are passing through in the first place – likely that France was not the first ‘safe’ place.

  32. Bloke in North Dorset

    “Classic example of people who should be forced out of the country, banned from travel to the UK on a permanent basis. They’re not refugees, they are people taking advantage of refugee law to freeload.”

    And making it harder for genuine refugees to get their case heard.

    Just wait. In a couple of years we’ll be hearing a case for their relatives, including 12th cousins twice removed, to be allowed to join them otherwise their human rights will have been abused. Then it will be the child brides being brought over and then their relatives……

    This is exactly what happened in the West Riding. First young men were brought over to try to keep the mills competitive, then when they failed the workers were allowed to stay. This was quickly followed by the process described above.

  33. Following up my own comment, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, written in 1989 and signed by most countries over the following years, states:

    For the purposes of the present Convention, a child means every human being below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.

    The Dublin Agreement refers to that same convention, so yes, 18 is the rule. Yet we allow 17 year olds to drive cars; and until recently we allowed 16 year olds to leave school. There’s no logic to it.

  34. BIND – That’s the point of these kids – they’re “grappling hooks” for the entire extended family to climb into the UK.

    So 1 kid today = 30/40 family members tomorrow.

    The agenda to destroy the west through ethnic genocide continues unabated…

  35. @Tim Newman: “You give them a copy of The Guardian.”

    And a bacon roll, don’t forget the bacon roll.

    Any who throw it away in disgust – back on the boat!

    Works every time.

  36. Tim Newman nailed it earlier: this display shows the utter contempt that the public sector has for the people that fund it.

    It’s too ridiculous to be incompetence.

    As for Brexit teaching them something, well, we’ve voted the wrong way in two straight GEs and a referendum; the public sector is getting its own back now.

  37. Actually it’s a grubby deal between the UK and French governments.
    The frogs bulldoze the camp and relocate the migrants (unpopular everywhere except Calais)
    The English hold their noses, accept a few dodgy youth, economise on miles of barbed wire.

  38. I can see that there’s a grubby deal been done, fair enough.

    But the contempt is obvious: from our public sector and France’s.

    They know we know the folks in Calais are already in a safe country. Telling us blokes that look 38 are supposedly teenagers is just laughing in our faces.

  39. The whole point of the laws on unaccompanied child migrants is that they are vulnerable and alone, which is why we let them in and not question their stories. This is an ethical and good thing. OTOH, the people taking the piss, like Anonymous Coward’s Afghans, show us that the law is being taken advantage of.

    Unaccompanied minors should automatically be denied family reunification except in the most exceptional circumstances.

    In cases where they lie about their age or are clearly just benefit tourists who are taking the piss, automatic deportation, ban on travel to the UK, criminal record, no residency, no path to citizenship. Trips back home qualify as benefit tourism and should result in severe penalties.

    If we dont do this, it just makes real refugees far more difficult to identify and help. If real refugees end up committing crimes, that might be described as a price of being humane, but the benefit tourists – basically thieves to start off with – they should be shown no clemency.

  40. “If we don’t do this, it just makes real refugees far more difficult to identify and help.”

    Indeed. The bleeding heart lefties forget/ignore this. Actually, they just don’t give a shit, so long as they get to signal their virtue at someone else’s expense.

    “If real refugees end up committing crimes, that might be described as a price of being humane,”

    A real, genuine refugee would not risk being sent back, because where they came from was so bad.

    “but the benefit tourists – basically thieves to start off with – they should be shown no clemency.”

    Spot on.

  41. A chap on the news has just made a good point. If these people are children, by law they should be in school. From a child protection stance putting those adult pseudo-children into schools is a threat to the actual children in schools.

  42. As others have said before, a feature of totalitarian cultures is not just that they flagrantly lie, but that they demand citizens are complicit in the lie, forcing them to publicly endorse what they know is an obvious untruth. Our establishment is hell bent on taking us the distance on that.

  43. A nice touch: one of the 30 year old child migrants was wearing a t-shirt with the slogan “can’t stop me”.

    Top trolling.

  44. Bloke in North Dorset

    Amusing comment about those children on one of the sailing forums: we’re so welcoming we’ve allowed 2 of them to claim the old age pension.

  45. Bloke in Costa Rica

    Rob, I think that was Theodore Dalrymple:

    “In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *