Court of appeal supports asylum seekers challenge

Well, you might like to think so G.

It’s just been pointed out by Mike Galsworthy that the Rwanda scheme isn’t the democratic will of the people because it wasn’t in the 2019 manifest (not that that’s worth the paper it’s written on….)

MayBee70

It’s just been pointed out by Mike Galsworthy that the Rwanda scheme isn’t the democratic will of the people because it wasn’t in the 2019 manifest (not that that’s worth the paper it’s written on….)

MPs can make laws other than what is in the manifesto.

Freya5

MayBee70

It’s just been pointed out by Mike Galsworthy that the Rwanda scheme isn’t the democratic will of the people because it wasn’t in the 2019 manifest (not that that’s worth the paper it’s written on….)

MPs can make laws other than what is in the manifesto.

True. But it’s wrong to say it’s the ‘will of the people’ if the electorate haven’t been given the opportunity to vote for it? Or am I missing something here?

Whitewavemark2

Oreo

Germanshepherdsmum

Oh, spare me. They come here from France. A safe country. They have also crossed other safe countries. And many are economic migrants.
Answer - I want it as unattractive as possible.

Just what I was thinking

For someone who worked in the law, I’m surprised at you not understanding the law relating to asylum seekers.

Can't make as much money doing that Whitewave.

Definitely wouldn’t have done human rights stuff, no. Certainly not sufficiently lucrative and I wouldn’t have got on with the clients. Not my bag.. That’s for the lefties (pick the bones out of that, surely sufficient for many a post). But strangely I do understand the relevant law - hence my saying First identify the asylum seeker.

Nicenanny3

12:27Iam64

The asylum seekers I met when working were people who showed initiative to get here. They wanted to work and we should encourage this.

*They paid criminal people smuggling gangs to get here is that what you mean by showing initiative*

I try to avoid giving personal details but - someone with children whose father was shot because he opposed corrupt government. The mother and children were helped out of the war torn country by ‘kind white men’. I wondered if these kind white men were mercenaries this mother paid money to. Resourceful woman with a good moral compass, 3 languages and desire to work.
Family who fled their country because dad was on the government hit list. We’re given asylum. Both teachers, children at university, actively involved in supporting community initiatives.
I could go on but don’t expect ‘some posters’ believe there are decent people in need of sanctuary. Many from former British colonies or protectorates. English is often their second language. I loathe demonising, othering people who do what I expect many of us would do in their shoes. We’d do our best to get our children to safety

We are talking on this thread about stopping the boats and the Rwanda plan, I've no doubt their are genuine asylum seekers and this country has a long history of welcoming them, but paying criminal smuggling gangs to get here is not the way to go in my opinion.

Nicenanny3

We are talking on this thread about stopping the boats and the Rwanda plan, I've no doubt their are genuine asylum seekers and this country has a long history of welcoming them, but paying criminal smuggling gangs to get here is not the way to go in my opinion.

There are no safe routes available to most asylum seekers.

Perhaps you could tell us how they can bypass the smuggling gangs?

(And please, no nonsense about 'first safe countries')

I’m waiting for the answer to that question MaizieD

Safe and Legal Routes Policy Paper updated 11 May 2023
www.gov.uk
Should help?

MaizieD

Nicenanny3

We are talking on this thread about stopping the boats and the Rwanda plan, I've no doubt their are genuine asylum seekers and this country has a long history of welcoming them, but paying criminal smuggling gangs to get here is not the way to go in my opinion.

There are no safe routes available to most asylum seekers.

Perhaps you could tell us how they can bypass the smuggling gangs?

(And please, no nonsense about 'first safe countries')

I'm no expert on this but there clearly are some safe routes available to asylum seekers.

44%. of applications this past year were small boat arrivals.

Which means 56% weren't.

So you think it's OK to pay thousands of pounds to the smuggling gangs then, seems its only people with money who can reach our shores by dinghy. Seems you are in favour of continuing the prosperity of these evil gangs then. Why is it nonsense that people who are supposedly fleeing for their lives and pass through numerous countries and could settle in these countries without paying thousands of pounds (which surely they could use to help them start their new lives) to criminal gangs to get here to the UK, seems they want to pick and choose where they live, well I'm sorry perhaps I'd like to go and live in Australia or perhaps Florida (yes I quite fancy going there😊) but surely any port in a storm should do. No the illegals (yes I choose to call them by that name) are mostly perhaps not all economic migrants and mostly fit young men and in my opinion it's naive to think they are not. Some have been waiting in France for months even years to get here, why not settle in France.

Safe routes are only available to asylum seekers from specific countries and even then may only be to some who fit a certain criteria.

Beyond that I'm afraid I have nothing to say in response to xenophobic rants. We've been over this topic time and time again on Gnet, haters will go on hating no matter what evidence is presented.

Louella12

MaizieD

Nicenanny3

We are talking on this thread about stopping the boats and the Rwanda plan, I've no doubt their are genuine asylum seekers and this country has a long history of welcoming them, but paying criminal smuggling gangs to get here is not the way to go in my opinion.

There are no safe routes available to most asylum seekers.

Perhaps you could tell us how they can bypass the smuggling gangs?

(And please, no nonsense about 'first safe countries')

I'm no expert on this but there clearly are some safe routes available to asylum seekers.

44%. of applications this past year were small boat arrivals.

Which means 56% weren't.

Please note my careful use of the word 'most'. In view of your figures perhaps it should have been 'many'.

Do you have a source for those figures, though?

Yes I do have a source, thank you. Reputable one as well.

Seek and you shall find

Louella12

Yes I do have a source, thank you. Reputable one as well.

Seek and you shall find

I do love a helpful fellow poster...

I'm not sure how this iniative will deter smugglers. They have a very successful business model going, and aren't concerned with what happens to their customers once delivered, are they?

If the customers know what’s going to happen to them they may not be so happy to part with their money.

Germanshepherdsmum

If the customers know what’s going to happen to them they may not be so happy to part with their money.

Are you working for Braverman?

Obviously the poster either doesn't have a source Maizie, or it's a very ify source. Or the were just born rude. What other conclusion can you reach.

Yes I do have a source, thank you. Reputable one as well.

Seek and you shall find

Seriously?

How did you guess, wwm?

Just seen a report that says that the vast majority of asylum seekers are fleeing armed violence.

So would I, especially if I had children.

09:45MaizieD

Safe routes are only available to asylum seekers from specific countries and even then may only be to some who fit a certain criteria.

Beyond that I'm afraid I have nothing to say in response to xenophobic rants. We've been over this topic time and time again on Gnet, haters will go on hating no matter what evidence is presented.

I beg your pardon, that's the standard left/remainer stance resort to calling other posters/people who don't agree with you names, pathetic grown up

This ludicrous idea that if you send a few people off to Rwanda then the boats will stop coming has to be challenged. Of course they wouldn't. The boats would come at times when they would be unlikely to be seen (at night), they would land on out of the way beaches, and the people they carried, instead of becoming part of the UK asylum process would become the puppets of gangmasters and criminals, to be trafficked, traded and exploited.