Spain rejected 70% of asylum applications last year, far higher than EU average

Spain received the most asylum requests from Syria in 2015

LAST UPDATED: 17 Jun, 2016 @ 14:05
7
SHARE

asylum seekersSPAIN rejected 70% of its asylum applications last year, new figures have revealed.

The Spanish Commission for Refugee Aid (CEAR) has warned that only three out of every 10 requests for asylum were granted in 2015, down 13% from the previous year.

This is despite Spain receiving the most asylum requests from Syria in 2015, totalling 5,724.

CEAR has said Spain’s increased border controls and inaction on granting asylum has caused a ‘serious setback’ and put the human right of asylum ‘in danger’.

While Spain granted 31% of applications last year, the EU average was 50%.

Their rate of granting refuge has fallen despite the amount of requests increasing from 6,000 in 2014 to 15,000 last year.

The UK accepted 87% of its asylum applications in 2014.

 

 

 



Gib Rocks - the magazine for Gibraltar

Subscribe: Olive Press news to your inbox

7 COMMENTS

  1. The UK can do the same. No need for Brexit as the UK already has border controls, it has control over its benefits system and health service. If the UK cannot sort these things out, like other countries do, then that is their fault and they need to stop blaming the EU for their failings. This referendum has been a horrible period, full of xenophobic falsehoods. I almost hope a new law is passed in the future to stop all media campaigning for such referendums.

  2. Even better, it would be wise to do away with referendums completely. All a country needs is a parliamentary democracy. A party publishes it’s manifesto, the public votes on it, the majority chooses the one it likes and the winner enacts that which it has promised. If it screws up, they are kicked out and another bunch has a go.
    To promise referenda as part of a manifesto, is simple cowardice, a lack of political will, a short-term electoral bribe. They are wildly disruptive and don’t produce a definitive, clear, satisfactory outcome, simply pitting one section of the population against another, causing anger and prejudice.

    • There are Problems with relying on elections and manifestos . For example all 3 main parties had
      Foreign aid at .7% . The majority of Uk population do not to give 11 billion away very year , so how can we vote against that ?

      • Wr Warner, quite simply you need to vote for a party that spends less on foreign aid. UKIP wants to spend 0.2%. You can vote for them, democracy in action. As for the concept of foreign aid, it needs to continue, but mistakes have been made, especially in the auditing of the money. Aid has been sent to some countries where it has been misspent or simply has simply vanished into the pockets of corrupt governments. Some countries have had their aid stopped, such as Mozambique, because of this. More needs to be done, but foreign aid is essential, especially if it helps stabilise countries against issues such as terrorism and mass migration.

  3. Yes Fred, the UK should do the same as Spain on this issue and the NHS needs to be tightened up too. Two key things have happened here, the EU is not fit for purpose and immigration into the UK has been too high for too long and people are sick of it. The Labour Party’s deliberate open door immigration policy has caused so much damage and the UK is paying the price. It is not the fault of the EU that the NHS has become the International Health Service and not billing foreigners/foreign health providers for their treatment (other countries always make sure they bill the NHS) and the Labour Party’s immigration “Project” was not the fault of the EU either. As it happens, most of the immigration over that 13 year period was non-EU.

    The big problem is that as soon as any UK government tries to change the benefits system, people start complaining. Therefore, the EU should have allowed Cameron a longer time period before EU citizens become eligible for UK benefits.

    We should not be in the position of having to hold a referendum but the EU’s inability to be flexible or reform has caused a great deal of resentment and it is seen as a very outdated, clapped out model. I think the timing of this referendum is completely wrong and it would have been better to wait for Greece to hit the buffers again which will probably bring about the demise of the Euro – they will probably leave the EU too.

    The EU does not have a choice, it must reform or die, it is as simple as that and it would be better if it collapses on its own without us pulling the trigger. All member states will then be on a level playing field when it comes to setting up new agreements and Britain will not be the phariah.

    • The issue of free movement was never the problem. It is the problem of people staying in the UK to live that is the problem. And why do they do that? Primarily, it is because the UK is very attractive in terms of its benefits, its health service and its multiculturalism. Other European countries are not as attractive to migrants as the UK is. There are massive differences in the benefits that migrants can obtain in each member state, just look at the differences between the UK and Spain for example. Agreed, historic migration is a problem, and it adds to the “pull factor”, but laws can be changed and it doesn’t need the EU to do this. Reform the EU yes, but reform the UK too.

HAVE YOUR SAY...