Sending U.K. refugees to Rawanda

Chestnut

Coastpath

Chestnut So those people don't agree with the proposal/policy. They are thumbs downers.

It is that simple.

I think every single poster on here believes something radical needs to be done.

But not every single poster believes people have to be turned away. They want to help everyone who wants to come here which is not possible.

We can help everyone who comes here. But we may decide that some of the people who come here have to go back to their own countries. Its a myth that everyone who thinks we should treat migrants better thinks we should welcome them into this country irrespective of their back story.

I think that's what some people think, that we're saying we should just take everybody, and support them and their families for ever more. That's not what we're saying.

My son who is a student has a car too and so do lots of his friends. He doesn't have Romanian wife and two small children as far as I know but tbh I don't know anything about the people who live in my road other than passing pleasantries with them. I certainly don't make moral judgements on them or their accommodation..

Coastpath

Chestnut So those people don't agree with the proposal/policy. They are thumbs downers.

It is that simple.

I think every single poster on here believes something radical needs to be done.

But not every single poster believes people have to be turned away. They want to help everyone who wants to come here which is not possible.

Chestnut So those people don't agree with the proposal/policy. They are thumbs downers.

It is that simple.

I think every single poster on here believes something radical needs to be done.

Coastpath

But Aveline, the thumbs up message was an invitation to put one emoji up, no dialogue, no unpleasantness, just a vote to get the message across. Only one person did this.

It was straightforward.

It is not straightforward. You might not agree with the Rwanda proposal but agree something radical needs to be done.

?.

?.

But Aveline, the thumbs up message was an invitation to put one emoji up, no dialogue, no unpleasantness, just a vote to get the message across. Only one person did this.

It was straightforward.

I'm not falling for that again....

volver

A car? Shocking. What next? Mobile phones and flat screen TVs?

Must be an offshore worker then. Or maybe he's in the SAS!!

I posted this a few days ago and got ridiculed for it. But I'm tough, so I'll post it again. There are 250,000 empty homes in England alone. That's a policy choice.

And there are 227,000 already homeless in the UK, probably more by now, so that covers that number of homes already. You cannot just give homes to people without the consent of the owner. If the owner chooses to leave the property empty that is their choice, or do you want to take these properties by force?

My 19 year old grandson affords a car and he is a uni student who works part time at Maccas. There’s cars and then there’s cars. He earns $25 an hour.

I'm getting heartily tired of the "we keep quiet for fear of the nasty lefty echo chamber" excuse.

Stand up for what you think or take the consequences. Right wing racists aren't renown for being shrinking violets.

And yes, I am aware of the irony of what I've just said.

Thank god for the young.

How on earth have a few of you become so hard, uncaring, and self centred.
Has life been so bad for you, if so, I’m sorry for you. You probably didn’t deserve it, but show some humanity to others in terrible situations.
The majority on this thread are appalled at this dreadful proposal.
This has been one of the saddest threads I’ve read on GN.

I suspect that there are far more ? than the vociferous echo chamber suspect. Plenty of Grand stay away from threads that can turn so unpleasant. Life's not straightforward. We don't all agree.

Can a fruit picker afford a car?

Fruit pickers earning £20 - £30 an hour.

www.countryliving.com/uk/wildlife/farming/a36724667/british-farmers-help-fruit-picking-pay-more/

Cross post Casdon

A car? Shocking. What next? Mobile phones and flat screen TVs?

Must be an offshore worker then. Or maybe he's in the SAS!!

I posted this a few days ago and got ridiculed for it. But I'm tough, so I'll post it again. There are 250,000 empty homes in England alone. That's a policy choice.

In November 2021, there were 238,306 homes in England classed as long-term empty homes. This means that they have been left vacant for more than six months.

www.bigissue.com/news/housing/how-many-empty-homes-are-there-in-the-uk/

volver

^Just one example of working the system: A woman from Romania near me has two little girls 3 and 5. She can't speak English and doesn't work so has no income. She has been given a really lovely two bedroom ground floor flat with use of a garden. Her children get free education, she gets free healthcare. The father drops by every so often for a weekend stay, so what he does and where he lives who knows.^

Perhaps he's in the Army and is defending our country?

Perhaps he works offshore?

Perhaps he is a fruit picker and lives in a caravan during the week and only manages to see his children on the odd weekend?

You can create excuses all you like. Having seen him none of these apply. He drives a car, can a fruit picker afford a car? The woman is certainly not struggling, she manages very well. The flat was allocated to her by the council because she has two little children.

This country already has a desperate housing shortage. House building cannot keep up and our green belt is disappearing fast. Transport is another big problem, we have so many cars on the road and dreadful congestion especially when something goes wrong. Our schools and hospitals are struggling to cope with the number of people. And yet you still want to bring more people into the country. Where do you propose to house them when we don't have enough homes already?

volver

I try not to comment on people's appearance because its not fair.

But if you want to see the face of a smug, self satisfied bully, here it is.

When you are young you have the face your parents gave you. When you are 50 you have the face you deserve.

Priti Patel born 29 March 1972

It is in line with the fact that the Home Office is in my view a failing department.

It is the legislation which has failed to provide what Patel promised Parliament it would. The Home Office (civil servants) can't do anything unless the legislation is there.

I try not to comment on people's appearance because its not fair.

But if you want to see the face of a smug, self satisfied bully, here it is.

Germanshepherdsmum

Casdon - your link emphasises the influence of the smugglers on country of destination.
Growstuff - I have never said that the law requires asylum to be sought in the first safe country. That fewer asylum seekers or economic migrants come to the UK than France or Germany is totally irrelevant. I assume you didn’t see pictures of riot police dealing with people in the Calais camps because they were causing trouble and stealing? People were only there because they were waiting to get to the UK in the back of a lorry or on a boat -not via lawful channels - rather than seeking asylum in France or a previous safe country.

So why did you ask "Why are they desperate to get to the UK when they are already in a safe country?"

It's irrelevant that they're already in a safe country. For one reason or another (and it can't be the benefits because they're almost non-existent), they want to come to the UK and they have every right to apply for asylum in the UK.

varian

Priti Patel is under pressure to apologise after being accused of misleading parliament over a central claim relating to her deeply controversial proposals to change immigration law.

The home secretary told MPs that the widely criticised nationality and borders bill would create new safe and legal routes to the UK for asylum seekers, suggesting that new routes would ensure that people no longer need to risk their lives trying to reach the UK.

During a parliamentary debate last November – held the day after 27 people drowned in the Channel as they tried to cross from France – Patel assured MPs that the bill “does create safe and legal routes”.

However, the Home Office has now admitted that the proposed legislation, which is due to go back to the House of Commons this week, in fact contains no provision to provide safe government-backed routes for asylum seekers.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/17/fury-as-patels-borders-bill-found-misleading-on-safe-routes-for-migrants

Yes I saw that.

It is in line with the fact that the Home Office is in my view a failing department.

Germanshepherdsmum

I agree with you Chestnut. And I suspect many will support this policy. There may well be plenty of supportive people reading who hesitate to post because of the accusations that will be levelled at them but I can’t imagine anyone who doesn’t support it hesitating to post.

This point about 'hesitant supportive lurkers' was made by Urmstongran at 14.31 on Thursday. She asked for a straw poll of thumbs ups from people who supported the policy.

In the days and many pages since then there have been 3 thumbs up, 2 of which were from Urmstongran.

Not plenty.