# FILE NAME: 00001584.soc
# TITLE: Should the UK change its asylum seeking policy to make it easier to enter the country? [37c7834369b7d18ef804ed13d75523de]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 3
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - The UK should change its asylum-seeking policy to make it easier to enter the country. The current system is very prohibitive and makes it very difficult for those in need to enter the country. The system is also very bureaucratic and slow, which is a problem for those who are in desperate need of help. People trying to reach the UK often take many dangerous routes to get here, and there have been many incidences of vessels capsizing, people drowning, or being kidnapped. Many of these problems could be avoided if it were easier to enter the country through legal means. The UK has a lot of resources and is a very wealthy country, and should be able to accommodate those in need. Many of the problems faced by those attempting to enter the country to seek asylum are in part due to the UK's colonial past. The UK as a country has contributed to the problems of conflict, unrest, war and genocide in places such as Kenya, South Africa, India and Sri Lanka. These have all been in part due to our actions. The UK has a lot to answer for, and has a moral responsibility to help those who are now seeking asylum. In addition, the UK can learn a lot from accepting asylum seekers
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - There should be a change in the UK asylum seeking policy to make it easier to enter the country. The current system is prohibitive and makes it very difficult for those in need to enter the country. The system is also very bureaucratic and slow, which is a problem for those who are in desperate need of help. The UK has a lot of resources and is a very wealthy country, and should be able to accommodate those in need. The UK has a lot to answer for in terms of foreign policy and its colonial past, and should be taking responsibility for the problems it has caused. The UK has a lot of skilled workers from other countries, and it would be beneficial for the UK to make it easier for asylum seekers to enter the country.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - The UK should change its asylum seeking policy to make it easier to enter the country. The current system is very prohibitive and makes it very difficult for those in need to enter the country. The system is also very bureaucratic and slow, which is a problem for those who are in desperate need of help. The UK has a lot of resources and is a very wealthy country, and should be able to accommodate those in need. The UK has a lot of skilled workers from other countries, and it would be beneficial for the UK to make it easier for asylum seekers to enter the country.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - We believe that the UK should change its asylum-seeking policy to make it easier to enter the country. The current system is very slow and makes it very difficult for those in need to enter the country. The UK has an obligation to look after those in need given its colonial history. The UK also is a very wealthy country and is a developed nation. We should open our doors to those who need them. Both of the above examples represent some evidence that the conflict that occurred in the first instance over consensus-building - where it existed - did not result from the robust and constructive debate necessary for the negotiation of consensus, but instead resulted from superficial 'contention' - the laying down of pre-defined opinions. The dialogue in the first instance was non-conflictual and did not question or challenge people's stances, but instead nodded along. This led to a final consensus statement with a lot of nice ideas but no strong argument. The dialogue in the second instance was conflictual and questions and challenged people's stances. For instance, Participant 1 highlighted the fact that there were many issues around the current system, but it was Participant 5 who asked whether the author's support for change was substantive or superficial.
2: 1,3,2,4
2: 1,2,3,4
1: 4,1,2,3