Asylum seekers to the UK sent to Rwanda

[Dodie66]

What do you think about the governments plan to send all asylum seekers that come to the UK to Rwanda to be processed. I think this is inhumane. A lot of them have come from places like Syria, Iran etc and travelled across the channel with all the associated risks only to be sent 6000 mile to be processed. What about the cost to do this? I think it’s a big mistake

Here, it used to be one of the richest islands, plundered and mined, and with no where to turn but do this for Aus. Media very unlikely to get access.

www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/10/a-short-history-of-nauru-australias-dumping-ground-for-refugees

Howard may have done well in the election, but at what cost?

This is from the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants:

“We know from Australia that offshore detention causes untold harm, with UN investigators describing detainees held on Papua New Guinea and Nauru as among the most traumatised people they had ever encountered. The policy cost 6 billion Euros, delivered unimaginable suffering, and did not even meet its stated aim of 'deterring' people from seeking refuge in Australia.”

www.jcwi.org.uk/unspeakably-cruel-new-plans-to-send-asylum-seekers-to-rwanda

The same article also debunks the “it will reduce human trafficking” argument, which previous posters have been concerned about (apologies for shoehorning it in here).

“The deal will also fuel the smuggling trade, as people make new journeys to safety. A similar deal made by Israel with Rwanda in 2013 led to refugees being detained, beaten up in prison, and ultimately paying smugglers to escape Rwanda and make a new journey to safety.”

In terms of cold hard climate refugee numbers, I guess you’d have to look at the vulnerable populations of at-risk areas and have different models for different levels of sea rise/rates etc. and plans ahead of time for rehoming people. I can’t imagine how traumatic it will be to not only lose your home but also have to resettle in a country you may have no cultural connection to, or no language in common and know that you can never go back. With refugees from war they may be a hope that you can go back at some point in the future if there’s a positive regime change, but to not even have that is awful to imagine.

Human rights lawyers will be very busy - cases will be tied up in courts for years with the immigrates kept in limbo

UN investigators describing detainees held on Papua New Guinea and Nauru as among the most traumatised people they had ever encountered. It is mind-blowing to me that people can do this to other humans knowingly, I'm so saddened that the UK is going down this path.

If the British ever have to leave and become refugees nobody will take you in I guess though 🤷‍♀️

I'm curious.

The idea is that this is going to be a deterrance to the people smugglers.

So if it does deter the people smugglers, then we won't see people trying to cross the Channel and so there won't be 10s of 1000s of people crossing the channel and then being sent to Rwanda as Johnson claims.

Of course, if there are 10s of 1000s of people going to Rwanda, that will mean the policy is not working and is not detering people. So the safety argument fails.

Ive always thought the tories give huge amounts of fucks about human trafficking. Patel especially, seems like such a caring soul. A woman of substance and heart.

Let us praise our kindly overlords, take time in your day to feel gratitude.
We are so lucky to live in such a progressive and generous country, where the most unfortunate have access to help, low cost housing and fair wages. It makes me feel proud, to be honest if i think about it tears form in my eyes. I will be voting for more of this come the next general election.
It's things such as this, how we welcome refugees of all stripes and skin tones, and how compassionately we treat asylum seekers that makes me well up with pride on a daily basis.
If only other countries could learn from us.

:/

I absolutely love the unfettered racism that runs rampant on Mumsnet.

"Oh it's such a great idea. It would discourage the people traffickers and the smugglers."

They couldn't give a single shit about people traffickers or smugglers. They just don't want the foreigners here. What a joke.

@BewareTheLibrarians

Howard may have done well in the election, but at what cost?

This is from the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants:

“We know from Australia that offshore detention causes untold harm, with UN investigators describing detainees held on Papua New Guinea and Nauru as among the most traumatised people they had ever encountered. The policy cost 6 billion Euros, delivered unimaginable suffering, and did not even meet its stated aim of 'deterring' people from seeking refuge in Australia.”

www.jcwi.org.uk/unspeakably-cruel-new-plans-to-send-asylum-seekers-to-rwanda

The same article also debunks the “it will reduce human trafficking” argument, which previous posters have been concerned about (apologies for shoehorning it in here).

“The deal will also fuel the smuggling trade, as people make new journeys to safety. A similar deal made by Israel with Rwanda in 2013 led to refugees being detained, beaten up in prison, and ultimately paying smugglers to escape Rwanda and make a new journey to safety.”

In terms of cold hard climate refugee numbers, I guess you’d have to look at the vulnerable populations of at-risk areas and have different models for different levels of sea rise/rates etc. and plans ahead of time for rehoming people. I can’t imagine how traumatic it will be to not only lose your home but also have to resettle in a country you may have no cultural connection to, or no language in common and know that you can never go back. With refugees from war they may be a hope that you can go back at some point in the future if there’s a positive regime change, but to not even have that is awful to imagine.

Yes huge costs.

The article was an eye opener

It is mind-blowing to me that people can do this to other humans knowingly, I'm so saddened that the UK is going down this path.

I am angry because we have Johnson running round now like a latter day Churchill and we like to go on and on about how we won the war. Yet we were fighting a regime which treated some people as though they were sub-human, untermensch was the term, yet we are doing exactly the same. Justified by excuses like the "country is full."

No, it's a blatant piece of racism, and just because Priti Patel has a brown skin doesn't mean she can't be a bigotted racist.

I wonder what would happen if someone turns up claiming they are seeking asylum because they are being persecuted in Rwanda?

I presume they won't even bother to ask. Brown skin - off you go.

@VladmirsPoutine

I absolutely love the unfettered racism that runs rampant on Mumsnet.

"Oh it's such a great idea. It would discourage the people traffickers and the smugglers."

They couldn't give a single shit about people traffickers or smugglers. They just don't want the foreigners here. What a joke.

What do you suggest to stop the people smugglers, and people drowning in the channel?

I doubt Rwanda will happen, I don't think it's legal.

What do you suggest to stop the people smugglers, and people drowning in the channel?

Providing safe routes is the obvious answer

I think it’s a completely ridiculous idea.
This government is looking more like a bunch of jumped up schoolboys making up their own rules every day……….oh wait…

I don't think it's legal.

This Government thinks its above the law, and so far they seem to be getting away with it.

Seems completely impractical and unethical. Awful idea all round.

ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_19_6301

[quote Justanotherlurker]Seems completely impractical and unethical. Awful idea all round.

ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_19_6301[/quote]
Yes.

The EU have given funding to support refugees who have fled to Rwanda from other countries in Africa.

Doesn't mean that we should send people who apply for asylum in the UK to Rwanda

Reading further, it's a transit mechanism

Mimica has announced a €10.3 million support package to the UNHCR's Emergency Transit Mechanism (ETM) in Rwanda, which provides a life-saving avenue out of Libya for people in need of international protection, with a view to their further resettlement.

I am not sure if sending people from the UK to Rwanda is a transit mechanism?

What do you suggest to stop the people smugglers, and people drowning in the channel?
I doubt Rwanda will happen, I don't think it's legal

how brown can ones nose get? I get it though, it's much easier to convince oneself that our repulsive gov truly gives a shit.

From one of the news channels on Twitter - it has now been confirmed that the Home Secretary issued a “ministerial direction” to get Rwanda policy through. That means the most senior figure in the Home Office- the permanent secretary - objected to the policy.

Inhumane and illegal.

Inhumane and illegal.

It isn't.

@Justanotherlurker

Inhumane and illegal.

It isn't.

Of course it’s inhumane- how could anyone think otherwise? As for illegal, the Courts will decide.

I am not sure if sending people from the UK to Rwanda is a transit mechanism?

In geopolitical legal speak it is,

It is now for those opposing it to offer a solution other than using emotive language as most people can see through that now.

The talk of immigration, illegal and legal is the hot topic now across the west, hence why the EU has opened facilities and france will be coming on board via the back door of the UK Rwhanda deal, its for those opposing it to offer suggestions as to how to handle the situation better especially considering they openly admit it will get worse, in the age of a cost of living increase where we are struggling to even find accomodation and spending huge amounts of money, simply trying to pull on an emotive angles is not going to work, it isn;t illegal and the immoral argument is subjective as is the nature of the term immoral.

It's now on those to offer a solution that isn't 'immoral' to some.