Sending U.K. refugees to Rawanda

Kandinsky

That’s great LauraNorderr
But did you enter any of these countries in a dingy at 3 in the morning? Having paid a criminal £££££ for the pleasure?

I might have had to if I hadn’t been made welcome and if the legal route had been impossible to get through.

Kandinsky

That’s great LauraNorderr
But did you enter any of these countries in a dingy at 3 in the morning? Having paid a criminal £££££ for the pleasure?

What kind of desperation leads people to take these risks? Significant desperation

Your family could speak the language, doubtless had skills to offer and could support yourselves Laura. I have no objection to those who are similarly in a position to be of good use and benefit the U.K. I assure you the gangs of young men I referred to upthread are anything but. They are criminals and an absolute menace.

Why the ‘desperation’ Iam? Why not keep the money in their pockets and claim asylum in one of the safe European countries they have travelled through?

We didn’t speak Fijian. My father had skills that may well be shared by the young men you speak of. We will not know what they can do or learn to do until we ‘process’ them.

I have a feeling there’s quite a few ‘lurkers’ on here delighted with this surprise announcement today.

I doubt if many grandmothers would be 'delighted' at this announcement - even the most ardent of right-wingers who might think it sensible, or a good idea, would surely balk at such blatant inhumanity.

Delighted... at this proposed treatment of desperate people?

Germanshepherdsmum

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.

In what way is it illegal to cross the Channel?

Germanshepherdsmum

Why the ‘desperation’ Iam? Why not keep the money in their pockets and claim asylum in one of the safe European countries they have travelled through?

Why should they? It's a myth that they have to stay there.

Many have friends/family in the UK and speak English. In any case, many of them do stay in other European countries - far more than the UK.

It’s illegal to enter the country without the requisite permission, or attempt to do so.

LauraNorderr

Kandinsky

That’s great LauraNorderr
But did you enter any of these countries in a dingy at 3 in the morning? Having paid a criminal £££££ for the pleasure?

I might have had to if I hadn’t been made welcome and if the legal route had been impossible to get through.

How is crossing the Channel not legal?

It is liiegal to enter the UK without permission - a visa

Illegal

Germanshepherdsmum

It’s illegal to enter the country without the requisite permission, or attempt to do so.

No, it isn't. They have a legal right to claim asylum the moment they land. They're not "illegal" until/unless asylum is denied and they stay. As a former solicitor, I would have thought you would have known that.

Katie59

It is liiegal to enter the UK without permission - a visa

No, it isn't.

LauraNorderr I bet they called you an ex pat ...thats an immigrant who doesn't believe they are one who thinks they have riights way above everyone elses .
Scotland welcomes immigrants WE need them just the same as England does but we're happy to say it and accept them .I can genuinely say I have never heard anyone speak about refugees or immigrants the way they are spoken about on here and I am saddened and shocked at the attitude of people who are old enough to know better

Under international law, they have the legal right to claim asylum the moment they set foot on UK soil.

Katie59

It is liiegal to enter the UK without permission - a visa

Try again.

fullfact.org/immigration/can-refugees-enter-uk-illegally/

They can't stay without a visa, so they claim asylum, which does give a legal right to stay until the application is processed. They do have the right to enter the country.

Thank you volver. I was being too lazy to look up a link to the law.

growstuff ✔️

The other thing that strikes me is that people state with absolute certainty that you can do this, or you can’t do that, and that this or that is the law. Based on no idea whatsoever of what they are talking about.
Is this because the papers have told them so? Or Johnson makes them think that? Who knows.

LauraNorderr

We didn’t speak Fijian. My father had skills that may well be shared by the young men you speak of. We will not know what they can do or learn to do until we ‘process’ them.

Exactly.

Recently on the local TV news there was a report from the Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel about a group of refugees/asylum seekers, who as we know are not usually allowed to work until they have been processed and that can take years, literally. Crazy.

This group was part of a special scheme that fast-tracked and allowed them to work as Health Care Assistants whilst they did further study/training to upgrade their overseas qualifications. They were nurses, a doctor and something else from various 'hot-spots'. What other much-needed skills are we missing out on.

Where there's a will there's a way.

The hundreds of people who arrive from France at Dover throw their passports and any form of ID away so officials here can't tell who they are or where they come from. I don't understand why people on this thread can't see that it is the people who currently live in UK who are inconvenienced by all this happening unabated. It is the taxpayer who has to foot the massive bills for all of them put up in hotels in UK, and we are having to also put up with housing being built all over the countryside to house them, while your young children and grandchildren can't get affordable houses for themselves. Then the gov puts the men in schools where, because they can't tell their age, they cause trouble with the kids who we do know the ages of. None of this is right.

Kagame, President of Rwanda isn’t a despot, he is an authoritarian ruler and does not tolerate political agitation, in the last 20 yrs it has become one of the fastest growing economies in Africa, it’s one of the safest places to travel. It’s one of the few countries where women have a majority in parliament.

No they don’t have the freedoms we have but they are a model that many countries could well follow.

The is an authoritarian ruler and does not tolerate political agitation

Bit like Russia than?

Do you have proof they throw their passports away Zorro? Or did you just read about it?

Don't you care about international law?