Sending U.K. refugees to Rawanda

Whitewavemark2

Germanshepherdsmum

They are not all asylum seekers wwm. A great many are economic migrants who have no qualifications to enable them to work here and don’t speak English. Do you have an alternative method of stopping people smugglers whilst providing a safe route for people who are fleeing war and persecution rather than just seeing us as a soft touch?

You are allowing yourself to be brainwashed by this rabble.

These people are being shipped to one of the most dreadful places on this earth BEFORE anything concerning their status has been established.

This is a fascist policy.

Don’t support it.

I do support it and will continue to do so. It isn't a fascist policy. I have mentioned upthread the gangs of non-English speaking young men in my nearest city and what they do. I would like to see an end to it.

I think Rwanda is an unworkable idea but there should be a safe humane place where migrant can stay safely while identities are checked

Maybe Alderney would fit the bill, that would make the UK a much less attractive destination

I live in an area where there are a lot of empty houses. There is an RAF base and an Army base and they, apparently, don’t want to live in these houses.
Tax the rich, that would provide millions/billions for our own people and to help those from other countries.
When I read this on the BBC news I thought, “just when you thought things couldn’t get any worse ….” This government is disgrace, as are those whose support them, whatever they do.

Who would have thought that lovely jolly cuddly Johnson would push his dead cat theory this far. It is, unfortunately, going to make him very popular with some of the electorate, though, the bring back hanging mob. And now we know why he keeps Patel as Home Secretary. She’s probably the only one vile enough to do this. I’m so ashamed of my country.

Pritti Patel's parents were economic migrants who came here before yhe Ugandan Asians were driven out in the 1970s

Rosalyn69

Unpopular opinion I know but we can’t possibly keep on allowing huge numbers of illegal immigrants into the country.

What have any of the immigrants done which is illegal?

Coastpath

Yesterday I spent a lot of time thinking how people who describe themselves as having a Christian faith can support the lies and cruel policies of this government. This Rwanda concept has made me question this even more today.

All faiths from Humanist to Hindu (that's you isn't it Pritti) set great store by the importance of kindness to others from any country, especially those in need.

I have no faith but for anyone interested here's what the Bible says about immigrants. Hard to tally with some opinons on here.

“When a stranger resides with you in your land, you shall not wrong him. The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as one of your citizens; you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt” (Lev. 19:33-34).

Do you know, I was going to post something similar but decided against it.

I really don't think someone who hadn't realised there was a party gong on his back garden is equipped to deal with the complex nature of migration or human trafficking.

Germanshepherdsmum

They are not all asylum seekers wwm. A great many are economic migrants who have no qualifications to enable them to work here and don’t speak English. Do you have an alternative method of stopping people smugglers whilst providing a safe route for people who are fleeing war and persecution rather than just seeing us as a soft touch?

You are allowing yourself to be brainwashed by this rabble.

These people are being shipped to one of the most dreadful places on this earth BEFORE anything concerning their status has been established.

This is a fascist policy.

Don’t support it.

They are not all asylum seekers wwm. A great many are economic migrants who have no qualifications to enable them to work here and don’t speak English. Do you have an alternative method of stopping people smugglers whilst providing a safe route for people who are fleeing war and persecution rather than just seeing us as a soft touch?

I live in the north west. Our hotel chains are housing young male middle eastern men. There have been local schoolgirls aged 12 + harassed on their way home from school by groups of these young men.

It has zero to do with the cost as it is going to cost much much more following this fascist policy than if we acted as a civilised nation and dealt with these asylum seekers in the proper manner.

Maudi

No problem if they are genuine asylum seekers they will be allowed to stay in the UK if they are not genuine I don't particularly care what happens to them. I just hope that word will get around that the UK is now not a soft touch and you can't bypass the system and pay money to a smuggler gang to get here.

These men and they will only be men, are not going to be allowed to come back here from Rwanda - a place famous for genocide. If they are found to be genuine they will be "helped to settle" in Rwanda. It's a one-way ticket. They are a new generation that will learn what "Arbeit macht frei" or "Work sets you free" means.

I’ve been listening too and fully support what he’s trying to do - stop the people smugglers and provide only a safe and legal route into the UK with those who are genuine refugees and asylum seekers at the front of the queue.
Btw apologies if I misheard 600 as 6000 but it’s still a heck of a lot of smuggled people in one day and that has to end. Nobody seems to have produced any other ideas in all the time this been happening.

From the BBC

"Last year, the UK government itself expressed concern over "continued restrictions to civil and political rights and media freedom" in Rwanda at the United Nations, calling for independent investigations into "allegations of extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, enforced disappearances and torture"."

Yes good idea if we can stop illegal immigrants getting into rickety unsafe boats and paying a fortune to traffickers. But is this the best answer? I’m going to read up on it and find out more.

volver

My prediction - it won't happen.

They are getting close to the end of the parliamentary session and there are lots of amendments to the bill. They also have to get it through the Lords, and so they could run out of time.

Then they will say that they tried to do something about immigration but the toxic wokeflakes prevented them

You heard it here first.

It will certainly get the votes in the local elections. One reason why it has happened now, I would guess.

I have just listening to Johnson's speech on this. Talk about "forked" tongue. No doubt a journalist somewhere will go through it forensically but facts, as always, will make no difference to the irrational denialists.

I've got past the "I could weep" stage. I do weep.

So these victims arrive in Rwanda.

Will we be providing them with any money, suitable clothing?
Advise about health?

Will they all be receiving appropriate vaccines?

Yesterday I spent a lot of time thinking how people who describe themselves as having a Christian faith can support the lies and cruel policies of this government. This Rwanda concept has made me question this even more today.

All faiths from Humanist to Hindu (that's you isn't it Pritti) set great store by the importance of kindness to others from any country, especially those in need.

I have no faith but for anyone interested here's what the Bible says about immigrants. Hard to tally with some opinons on here.

“When a stranger resides with you in your land, you shall not wrong him. The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as one of your citizens; you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt” (Lev. 19:33-34).

MaizieD I would be all for spending £1.4 billion on shaking up the Home Office.

It says 600

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61097114

There is £1.4 billion allocated to this scheme, apparently.

The reason that asylum seekers are still languishing in hotels, for months and years, is the the Home Office is incredibly inefficient and slow when it comes to processing their applications (and let's not forget that 82% of asylum applications are granted, so stop it with this nonsense about 'economic migrants' and 'illegals' and any other nasty fascist trope).

Additionally, the asylum seekers aren't permitted to work while waiting for their application to be processed. They have no option but to be depending on the meagre crumbs they are offered.

In view of this, it might be a better option to spend the £1.4 billion on the Home Office. Shaking up it's processes, better staff training, employing more staff etc.

But, as this government works on pandering to xenophobia and racism, because, sadly, there are lots of votes to be gained from xenophobes and racists, reforming the Home Office isn't going to happen.

Heard on BBC news this morning.

volver I think it’s a typo as the BBC said 600 migrants arrived by boat into the U.K. yesterday.

JaneJudge yes, we have a relative who had to do the same.

a great many of the young men arriving here via the Channel (*6000 yesterday*)

That's not true, is it?

I'll be charitable and say that you made a mistake.