Wirral Council has accepted more refugees than their Merseyside counterparts since 2017, figures have revealed.

Europe’s refugee crisis begun back in 2015, and councils across Merseyside and the UK continue to accommodate those who have been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.

In the case of Merseyside, the refugees are mostly from Syria through the resettlement programme, helping ease what’s widely known as the largest refugee and displacement crisis of our time.

Between January 2017-March 2020 (the most recent data available), Wirral tops the list with 144 refugees taken in.

Liverpool was second with 126, with Sefton third with 115.

St Helens has taken in 112 refugees during this time period, while 71 people were placed in Knowsley.

Ewan Roberts from Asylum Link Merseyside says there can be an “us and them” mentality – but in reality people just want “peace and quiet” and to get on with their lives.

Ewan told the Local Democracy Reporting Service: “Apart from the refugee resettlement schemes, the region has seen a lot of people placed in hotels as a result of the pandemic. And it really matters where you are placed as to what services are available and how people are perceived.

“Hoylake has been fantastic with local churches and other organisations wrapping around the people there and making sure they felt welcomed and safe.

“Sadly, others have not been so well supported.

“Britain First visited all the hotels as a publicity stunt and terrified a lot of people when they gained access to the hotel in Daresbury and went door to door asking people why they were there.

“We persist with the us and them mentality, when the reality is that we all just want peace and quiet to get on with our lives.

“This is generally the experience of refugees and locals who find themselves living in the same street or area and get to know each other, finding that neither is scary or upsetting, and that finding out about someone else’s culture is interesting and fun.”

Earlier this month, the government laid out new immigration rules that will prevent people making an asylum claim in the UK if they have passed through a safe third country.

From January 1, the new rules will mean that the Home Office may not have to assess a person’s asylum claim if they have travelled through, or have a connection to, what is deemed a safe third country.

The new rules also give the Home Office the power to remove people seeking asylum to a safe country that agrees to receive them, even if they have never been there or have any connections to it.

A 10-page statement outlining the changes to the rules was published online without a press or public announcement.

However, the changes highlight a significant hurdle for the UK government: claims will only be treated as inadmissible if the applicant is accepted for readmission by the third country – or if another safe state agrees to take them.

Home Office immigration compliance minister, Chris Philp said: “We are determined to fix the broken asylum system to make it firm on those who come here through illegally facilitated routes and fair on those who play by the rules.

“There is no reason to leave a safe country like France to make a dangerous crossing. These measures send a clear message and are just one of the steps the government is taking to tackle the unacceptable rise in small boat crossings.”