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

[quote lollipoprainbow]**@cakeorwine* maybe people will still have the same opinion which is perfectly allowed no matter how much you or @BewareTheLibrarians* keep going on about it and trying to change peoples minds. Just a thought. [/quote]
Maybe they will

Of course, it usually helps debate when people are given more facts and information about a subject and sometimes people do change their mind when presented with more information.

Then again, facts that go against people's beliefs don't usually change people's views.

Opinions and facts and changing opinions is a complicated thing to do.

www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/words-matter/201810/why-people-ignore-facts

@BewareTheLibrarians

Also I wouldn’t say that I’ve trying to change people’s minds. More like correct obvious mistruths so people can make a decision/have an opinion based on facts rather than hyperbole.

The obvious mistruth is who this is aimed at. It's also unclear as to what happens to people who

a) Have a successful asylum claim when they are in Rwanda
b) Don't have a successful asylum claim when in Rwanda

It's very easy to have an opinion on something. Whether it is an informed opinion is a different matter.

@midsomermurderess

Cost less to send asylum seekers to Rwanda? You think? This from today's Mirror: 'MPs previously heard Australia’s offshore processing system cost $1bn a year for just 300 people - or £1.9m per refugee per year. Tory ex-minister Andrew Mitchell warned last month: “It would be much cheaper to put each one in the Ritz and send all the under-18s to Eton.” And where is this eye-watering amount of money per person in going?

Agree and also am very very concerned about what the conditions would be like at a site in Rwanda Concerned for crimes committed against refugees and by the possibility of crimes committed by corrupt guards

The Australians abandoned the project

If you read the official document here www.gov.uk/government/publications/memorandum-of-understanding-mou-between-the-uk-and-rwanda/memorandum-of-understanding-between-the-government-of-the-united-kingdom-of-great-britain-and-northern-ireland-and-the-government-of-the-republic-of-r

Take a look at section 16, anyone who is hoping that this despicable policy will mean a reduction in immigration will be disappointed that's we've agreed to take on immigrants from Rwanda.

@Calmitdownkermit

What they need to do is put facilities to process asylum claims in calais. If people are being dealt with before they try and cross the channel they'll be less likely to try, and there will be far less need for desperate people to pay people traffickers.

There's plenty of women and children on those inflatable dinghys. I've seen them with my own eyes. Even if it was young men, are they less deserving of asylum because they're male? Bit sexist isn't it? I thought we had moved on from the days of the titanic where it was women and children first.

What if a white person came along to calais claiming to be from ukraine but with no papers. Would the uk let them skip the queue because they're white? Or would they be sent to rwanda with everyone else? Is it just brown and black people who would be going to rwanda?

Its a fucking terrible idea. There are far, far more cheaper and effective ways of stopping the channel crossings but this racist government want to send them halfway across the world to placate racist voters. In the meantime they're happy for people to die.

I'm stunned and saddened by all this What far cheaper and more effective ways of stopping the channel crossings would you suggest we could impose?

I dont understand why the criminals cannot be targeted. How difficult would it be to stop the illegal crossings ?

@Ilovetheseventies

I dont understand why the criminals cannot be targeted. How difficult would it be to stop the illegal crossings ?

The government could stop them tomorrow if they wanted to, by opening safe routes.

[quote BewareTheLibrarians]**@ChoiceMummy* Just to correct you here as it’s important that people know this - according to Home Office paperwork, it’s not just for single males - it’s for everyone except unaccompanied children. So single men, women (including pregnant women seemingly as they haven’t made that an exemption), and families including children.*

It’s vital that people know what they’re supporting here.[/quote]
I think that it's very important to correct your scaremongering there. The pilot scheme will solely focus on single men arriving on boats or lorries.

After this is reviewed, we will only know then based on results and review.

Givne that 70% of those arriving illegally by boats, are male, so it makes absolute sense to focus on this majority for the pilot.

Not a safe route to travel, in case that was not clear, but a safe route to apply www.jcwi.org.uk/briefing-safe-routes-to-the-uk

@HalfShrunkMoreToGo

If you read the official document here www.gov.uk/government/publications/memorandum-of-understanding-mou-between-the-uk-and-rwanda/memorandum-of-understanding-between-the-government-of-the-united-kingdom-of-great-britain-and-northern-ireland-and-the-government-of-the-republic-of-r

Take a look at section 16, anyone who is hoping that this despicable policy will mean a reduction in immigration will be disappointed that's we've agreed to take on immigrants from Rwanda.

Legal immigrants that have been vetted.

Very different swap.

I am personally feeling extremely vengeful towards those who are so despicable towards refugees. I would like to deport Farage and Patel to Rwanda, I really would.

Let's be honest, if you were a genuine asylum seeker, the first Rwanda offering a home would be a God send. Or, one of the many other European countries they have skipped through en route. If Rwanda and these countries are not to their palate, then are they really so in need of asylum? Or rather wishing for a more positive economic future?

@ChoiceMummy on a practical level what difference?

Will they cost less?
Will they have less requirement for homes and food and work?
Are they guaranteed to be delightful people who will be law abiding and community minded?
Do they relinquish any future rights to explore bringing family members to the U.K?

Why is it better for Rwanda to give us their vulnerable immigrants than for us to keep our own?

@ChoiceMummy

Let's be honest, if you were a genuine asylum seeker, the first Rwanda offering a home would be a God send. Or, one of the many other European countries they have skipped through en route. If Rwanda and these countries are not to their palate, then are they really so in need of asylum? Or rather wishing for a more positive economic future?

People go where they have family connections often.

It is the same with Ukrainians - the ones coming to the UK have a link. Most are in neighbouring countries.

It is amazing how little you know @ChoiceMummy, I always find it intriguing when people post repeatedly but clearly have never read anything about the topic.

@ChoiceMummy

Let's be honest, if you were a genuine asylum seeker, the first Rwanda offering a home would be a God send. Or, one of the many other European countries they have skipped through en route. If Rwanda and these countries are not to their palate, then are they really so in need of asylum? Or rather wishing for a more positive economic future?

Ah yes "the fist safe haven" which would explain why Tommy Robinson /Stephen Lennon/whatever he's calling himself these days went to Spain when he felt under threat rather than Ireland where he would have also been safe.

People go where they have family, friends or can speak the language.

Also I am always at people posting stuff like this if you were a genuine asylum seeker - if they are not genuine asylum seekers, why does the UK government grant most of them asylum seeker status?

Because they are genuine asylum seekers, that is why.

Let's be honest, if you were a genuine asylum seeker, the first Rwanda offering a home would be a God send. Or, one of the many other European countries they have skipped through en route. If Rwanda and these countries are not to their palate, then are they really so in need of asylum? Or rather wishing for a more positive economic future?

Totally agree

@ChoiceMummy Scaremongering? No, it’s taken from the government’s own fact sheet. (It might give some people pause to see how easily the government’s own policies can be criticised as “scaremongering”.)

Here’s the quote from the government factsheet, link below.

Every person who comes to the UK illegally, or by dangerous or unnecessary methods from safe countries – including those arriving by small boats, hidden in the back of lorries and found in the UK without leave – will be considered for relocation to Rwanda.
Any person who has arrived in the UK in this way since 1 January 2022 will be considered for relocation to Rwanda.

homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2022/04/14/factsheet-migration-and-economic-development-partnership/

If you have a link from official documents to show that they have since reversed this decision, I would be very happy to see it. Genuinely, not snark - I’m only one person and can’t keep up with everything. As you’ve accused me of scaremongering you must have some pretty strong evidence, and it would benefit both of us for you to show it.

@carefullycourageous

I am personally feeling extremely vengeful towards those who are so despicable towards refugees. I would like to deport Farage and Patel to Rwanda, I really would.

Why? Liberals have been saying things like this since it was in the news. I genuinely think liberals are among the worst. At least with dyed in the wool right wingers you know where you stand.

@Calmitdownkermit Someone actually put this very aptly on social media the other day: If fleeing war / crisis zone please ensure that you are white.

Oh good Lord. Not even vaguely comprehending why African asylum seekers might not be safe in certain African countries is a new low.

@VladmirsPoutine what do you mean 'why?'

I think the policy is abhorrent, genuinely disgusting. I would therefore like those who think it is OK to experience it. When it came to it I wouldn;t be able to do it because I belive in human rights, so I'd be a bit useless at vengence really.

I'm not sure who you mean by 'liberals', possibly the same group the Tories refer to as 'the left' because Johnson considers himself a 'liberal'. Others call them 'snowflakes' or 'woke'. Or 'virtue signallers'.

I would like to deport Farage and Patel to Rwanda, I really would.

Again why? Why does anyone think this an appropriate thing to say at all? I should be shocked but I'm really not.

@carefullycourageous

Also I am always at people posting stuff like this if you were a genuine asylum seeker - if they are not genuine asylum seekers, why does the UK government grant most of them asylum seeker status?

Because they are genuine asylum seekers, that is why.

Exactly this and the whole 'well it's mostly men' thing. Do we value men as less human? Can you really not comprehend that many of the places these men are fleeing are more likely to kill men than women? Or that there is a higher possibility of a young healthy male surviving the trip and therefore being in a position to later support his remaining family members he had to leave behind.

What far cheaper and more effective ways of stopping the channel crossings would you suggest we could impose

Putting a processing centre in calais to process applications for asylum. I said that. Then genuine asylum seekers needn't risk their lives unnecessarily. There's no way on earth that wouldn't be cheaper than sending them to rwanda.

There was a big furore about Ukrainian refugees arriving at calais and being expected to turn around and go to Paris to go to the British Embassy to be processed. But its alright for other refugees to have to go to Paris (if they can get there).

France wants a solution to the refugees in calais too.