International News Immigration

Oslernorth said:
Apparently, for reasons unknown to anybody. The UK Government are planning on flying asylum seekers halfway round the World to Rwanda to process their claims, rather than simply just doing it in Britain.
This is a huge, wasteful, unnecessary cost on the public purse, at a time when we’re facing the biggest cost of living crisis in 80 years!!
Not to mention the ridiculous carbon footprint it will cause!! 😡
Click to expand...

Distraction from Partygate.
 
Oslernorth said:
Apparently, for reasons unknown to anybody. The UK Government are planning on flying asylum seekers halfway round the World to Rwanda to process their claims, rather than simply just doing it in Britain.
This is a huge, wasteful, unnecessary cost on the public purse, at a time when we’re facing the biggest cost of living crisis in 80 years!!
Not to mention the ridiculous carbon footprint it will cause!! 😡
Click to expand...

People don`t like detention centres in the UK that are used for that very purpose.

According to the Beeb it only applies to single men who the authorities believe are inadmissible and the EU/French won`t take them back.

The idea is that it will reduce the numbers and break the smuggler's model if their primary customers/victims (single men) are faced with deportation on arrival.

And we are only sending those taking an illegal route, not all asylum seekers many of whom arrive and follow the correct process.

PS: I have no problem with legal migration or legal asylum seekers.

PPS: What is the alternative for the illegal, inadmissible individuals when no other country will accept them?
 
You do realise this is a one way ticket to Rwanda?

You do realise that when processed, if successful, they will be given asylum there, not in the UK, which is the destination they were trying to reach many because they already have links/family in the UK?

You do realise that Rwanda has a rather questionable human rights record already (which we're obviously trying to emulate).

And you do realise that when the liar in Chief describes Rwanda as "one of the safest countries in the world", he's talking absolute shite.

And you do realise the millions upon millions of tax payers money that will be spaffed on yet another costly Boris flight of fancy, could be spent a thousand times over on much more deserving projects.

And we'f best not mention the net benefits to the UK that successful asylum seekers bring, that we will no longer get. All in times when several sectors are on their knees through lack of production capacity through a workforce shortage.

Probably not, but hey-ho...keep swallowing.
 
Oslernorth said:
Why waste millions processing asylum claims in Rwanda, when it could just be here for a fraction of the price?
What does it actually achieve?
Click to expand...
its the millions of taxpayers £ thatll be spent on transportation that is a big concern for me
 
Sheik djibouti said:
You do realise this is a one way ticket to Rwanda for a very small percentage of people who are inadmissable.

You do realise that when processed, if successful, they will be given asylum there, not in the UK, which is the destination they were trying to reach many because they already have links/family in the UK? Unlikely.

You do realise that Rwanda has a rather questionable human rights record already (which we're obviously trying to emulate). Has or had?

And you do realise that when the liar in Chief describes Rwanda as "one of the safest countries in the world", he's talking absolute shite. Really?

And you do realise the millions upon millions of tax payers money that will be spaffed on yet another costly Boris flight of fancy, could be spent a thousand times over on much more deserving projects. Letting them in isn`t free.

Probably not, but hey-ho...keep swallowing.
Click to expand...

Sorry I missed your workable alternative, except "Let them in to keep the local car wash fully staffed and getting exploited by others"
 
Oslernorth said:
Apparently, for reasons unknown to anybody. The UK Government are planning on flying asylum seekers halfway round the World to Rwanda to process their claims, rather than simply just doing it in Britain.
This is a huge, wasteful, unnecessary cost on the public purse, at a time when we’re facing the biggest cost of living crisis in 80 years!!
Not to mention the ridiculous carbon footprint it will cause!! [emoji35]
Click to expand...

How much presently does it cost to house the 1000s that have made it across the channel( and are still making it across in their 100’s daily)

Then the cost of 4 star hotels and then provide them with 3 meals a day, a mobile phone plus spending money daily?

After all, army barracks that were good for our troops, weren’t good enough for these. Makes you think of the appeal of the rough sleepers in Calais.


If this move deters the majority, maybe they’ll think France isn’t that bad after all. The whole country will be better off…

As for Ukrainians - do many of them set sail illegally from France?
 
Last edited:
Sheik djibouti said:
You do realise this is a one way ticket to Rwanda?

You do realise that when processed, if successful, they will be given asylum there, not in the UK, which is the destination they were trying to reach many because they already have links/family in the UK?

You do realise that Rwanda has a rather questionable human rights record already (which we're obviously trying to emulate).

And you do realise that when the liar in Chief describes Rwanda as "one of the safest countries in the world", he's talking absolute shite.

And you do realise the millions upon millions of tax payers money that will be spaffed on yet another costly Boris flight of fancy, could be spent a thousand times over on much more deserving projects.

Probably not, but hey-ho...keep swallowing.
Click to expand...
Rwanda sponsor Arsenal, don't they? Always a sign of a noble, upstanding country.
 
Essexyellows said:
People don`t like detention centres in the UK that are used for that very purpose.

According to the Beeb it only applies to single men who the authorities believe are inadmissible and the EU/French won`t take them back.

The idea is that it will reduce the numbers and break the smuggler's model if their primary customers/victims (single men) are faced with deportation on arrival.

And we are only sending those taking an illegal route, not all asylum seekers many of whom arrive and follow the correct process.

PS: I have no problem with legal migration or legal asylum seekers.

PPS: What is the alternative for the illegal, inadmissible individuals when no other country will accept them?
Click to expand...
Get on with processing their claims. It’s what the Home Office is paid to do. If there’s a backlog, increase the number of staff.
Those fleeing Oppression, War or Famine, get granted asylum. Those who aren’t, are returned to the country of their citizenship.
If the Home Office was doing it’s job properly, there would be no camps in Calais, and no dangerous channel crossings.

Also, there isn’t now a legal route for Asylum Seekers. You can’t claim asylum unless on UK soil. And as soon as they do that, they’ll be carted off to Rwanda!
 
Essexyellows said:
Sorry I missed your workable alternative, except "Let them in to keep the local car wash fully staffed and getting exploited by others"
Click to expand...
"keep the local car wash fully staffed"

You're the only one mentioning that....and you clearly got a pretty low opinion of "them"

Normal lazy right wing casual racism we've come to expect from Tory doormats I guess[emoji2369]...right on message[emoji207]
 
Sheik djibouti said:
"keep the local car wash fully staffed"

You're the only one mentioning that....and you clearly got a pretty low opinion of "them"

Normal lazy right wing casual racism we've come to expect from Tory doormats I guess[emoji2369]...right on message[emoji207]
Click to expand...

Where do you think illegal, undocumented migrants end up?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom