Sending U.K. refugees to Rawanda

growstuff

Aveline

If, somehow, processing of asylum seekers who arrive in boats (I've heard them called 'rubber taxis'!) was speeded up it seems likely that many would become the 'failed asylum seekers' that we hear about. What would happen to them?
I'm very struck by comments from people who live on the south coast. It's easy for us up here to complain about their attitudes but it must be very worrying for them.

Very worrying for the people of Rwanda too, if they have thousands of unwilling, disaffected young men dumped on them.

I live on the south coast. People seeking asylum have been part of our life for ages. It makes not a jot of difference, not remotely worrying.

I would just like to see it all done in a civilised way, by giving them safe passage, humane accommodation whilst their application is being considered and the Home Office a kick up the ass to get their house in order.

I have had the misfortune to work with the Home Office in the past and they are notorious for their incompetence.

But ... hey ... let's just offshore our problems to a poor, overcrowded developing country, despite being one of the wealthiest countries in the world.

What would happen to them?

What do you think would happen to them Aveline?

Clue: Same as happens to them today, but quicker.

This policy is red meat to all the racists, who are now crawling out of the woodwork.

Aveline

If, somehow, processing of asylum seekers who arrive in boats (I've heard them called 'rubber taxis'!) was speeded up it seems likely that many would become the 'failed asylum seekers' that we hear about. What would happen to them?
I'm very struck by comments from people who live on the south coast. It's easy for us up here to complain about their attitudes but it must be very worrying for them.

Very worrying for the people of Rwanda too, if they have thousands of unwilling, disaffected young men dumped on them.

Urmstongran

Me too JenniferEccles.

I think the problem with the laws concerning migrants is that they were drawn up in an age that no longer exists. While persecution and oppression have always exisited the ability to relocate across the globe has become increasingly achievable even for relatively poor people - some of whom fall prey to organised gangs. Someone from a village in Bangladesh with no education or English who aspires to a better life can be in say, Sheffield in a matter of a few months. He will find his countymen here, a legal aparatus to keep him here, communciations to keep in touch with his relaitves and friends back in his village and a black economy to top up his UK state support. There is no requirement for him to learn English or integrate. He can even watch TV channels in his language via satellite. He can live with the belief that soon his friends and relatives will be able to join him and they can live the good life supported by a 'host' people he has no need to engage with while his Bangladesh is on the edge of Peak district

Except that the majority of people attempting to cross the Channel by boat have never been anywhere near Pakistan.

They're coming from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sudan, South Sudan and Yemen. It doesn't take more than a cursory glance of the media to realise that conditions exist in all those countries to give people real reasons for wanting to leave.

If, somehow, processing of asylum seekers who arrive in boats (I've heard them called 'rubber taxis'!) was speeded up it seems likely that many would become the 'failed asylum seekers' that we hear about. What would happen to them?
I'm very struck by comments from people who live on the south coast. It's easy for us up here to complain about their attitudes but it must be very worrying for them.

Whitewavemark2

This from todays Times

So true. Great letter from the Revd.
Thanks for posting.

Well if implemented as presented it will lead to a dramatic reduction in the small boat flotilla and put both trafficking gangs and dodgy lawyers out of business.

Secondly it will put Labour in a no win situation. If it is working it will be massively popular with the typical Red Wall voter. If Labour policy is to repeal it, they will then lose votes in big numbers. If Starmer doesn’t pledge to repeal it he will lose the support of his activists and the entire intellectual left.

Genius really.

JenniferEccles

Surely whatever your views, everyone must agree that something must be done to destroy the business model of the people smugglers.
That’s not going to be easy of course as it’s a very lucrative business.
I’m all in favour of this latest scheme and hope it works

Could we not try and have the government be both practical and efficient first? This government has turned from a "hostile environment" (which T May grasped with glee) to an overload of administration and too few workers to process it. They have made a rod for their own back. Sorting out a short but efficient legal system for entry would immediately cut the numbers with a legitimate claim but no other route here.

Surely whatever your views, everyone must agree that something must be done to destroy the business model of the people smugglers. That’s not going to be easy of course as it’s a very lucrative business. I’m all in favour of this latest scheme and hope it works.

The government and their apologists have made you believe that the biggest issue as regards immigration is the “business model of the people smugglers.” This country issued over a million long stay visas last year. 28,000 people crossed the channel in little boats. About 13,000 of them fit the criteria for being sent to Rwanda. So the government are victimising about 1% of the migrants to this country, just to make people think they are being tough on immigration and that this will solve the problem. It has also been explained that far from “destroying the business model of the people smugglers” it could exacerbate the issue because they will be incentivised to smuggle families, who are not likely to be sent to Rwanda. Yet.

There are many other ways to “destroy the business model of the people smugglers” some described on this thread, but again and again we hear about how there’s only one way of doing it, and nobody else has any ideas.

I notice you say “I’m all in favour of this latest scheme and hope it works ”, not “I’m all in favour of this latest scheme because I think it will work. ” We can all decide for ourselves what that implies.

MaizieD

^Why would we not mention "Germany and the Jews". It is the best and most recent example we have of the use of propaganda that is similar to that the Johnson government's are employing.^

You know, DaisyAnne, I think we have another example to mention; far nearer in time, in fact, contemporary. Putin's Russia with Putin's intention to eradicate the Ukranian 'race' and culture.

We have some huge fans of state repression on here

I agree Maizie. That is sadly the most recent attempt at an attack on liberal democracy. I feel as if Ukraine is fighting for the whole democratic world. However, when one country starts a war, against your country's wish for liberal democracy, it is obvious - dreadful but still obvious.

What we saw under Trump, what we see here, is the gradual erosion of our democracy. That is where I see the comparison with 1930s Germany (not the later years). In Russia, the small shoot of democracy had shown but Putin already had control of his own country.

I also don't think that Johnson and "friends" intend to make war with other countries. He believes he can con, trick, lie, dupe and deceive his way to financial success for the particular social group he relates to. That doesn't mean no one will die but I don't believe it will look like a war in the usual sense.

But you are right

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Surely whatever your views, everyone must agree that something must be done to destroy the business model of the people smugglers.
That’s not going to be easy of course as it’s a very lucrative business.
I’m all in favour of this latest scheme and hope it works

This from todays Times

Even Channel 4’s Fact Check facility has the good grace to concede: “The terminology can be tricky in this debate. The words “migrants”, “refugees” and “asylum seekers” are sometimes used interchangeably, although they mean different things.”

And it admitted: “It’s impossible to know for sure how many people who claim to be refugees are really economic migrants instead.”

Message deleted as it quotes a deleted post.

I’m shocked.

This thread has been a sickening revelation to me. It is also very obvious despite claims to the contrary, that Brexit was based on racism. Oh and ignorance. What on earth a well established Pakistani community (brought here by the UK government to work) has to do with terrified people fleeing Eritrea or Syria is unclear, other than the elephant in the room that they all have brown skin

Maudi

I forgot in my previous post, mention the racist card to stop debate.

So what do you say to someone who is using prejudiced or antagonistic language toward others on the basis of their race or ethnicity?

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

I’ve just read an opinion about the Rwanda policy and think it correct.

“It is state sponsored trafficking”

There's another thread asking why people without grandchildren join GN. I'm tempted to say "for the high standard of debate and respect for other people's opinions."

I'd be lying, though.

I have always suspected by reading posts that they support the sort of behaviour you so often see emanating from white supremicists, fascists and Nazi supporters, but quite honestly I still find it shocking when it is there in black and white.

I hope with all my heart that this sort of attitude is very much in the minority.

Why would we not mention "Germany and the Jews". It is the best and most recent example we have of the use of propaganda that is similar to that the Johnson government's are employing.

You know, DaisyAnne, I think we have another example to mention; far nearer in time, in fact, contemporary. Putin's Russia with Putin's intention to eradicate the Ukranian 'race' and culture.

We have some huge fans of state repression on here