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

@notanotheroneagain

Asylum seekers? As in people running away from war/abuse/hostile environment etc?

Does that include Ukraine?

What do you think?!

This is absolutely ridiculous and indefensible.

Johnson is supposedly going to spin this in his announcement as an effort to dissuade migrants from crossing the Channel for their own safety. If they were genuinely concerned for the wellbeing of desperate people, is the best they could really come up with to fly them to a distant country AFTER they have already successfully negotiated the Channel?

This is yet more naked Dogwhistle shite from the HO and this utterly reprehensible government.

@Confusedmonkey

Seems completely impractical and unethical. Awful idea all round.

It's so awful that I'm not sure it's going to play out the way they hoped in trying to get voters to forget the terrible week they are having.

It might appeal to a certain type of tory voter, but I don't think it has the wider appeal they are hoping for. There's only so many times you can play the illegal immigrant card before you overplay your hand.

@AlexaShutUp I also work with unaccompanied asylum seeking children and just wanted to echo what you say 100%. I think a couple of people on this thread need to read your post a few times and get their heads around what children (and women, and men) actually go through before and while travelling to the UK, rather than gleefully welcoming sending them on to a country known for its human rights abuses against asylum seekers.

I imagine its another way for them to fuck with figures. Like the disability figures of the unemployement figures or the poverty line

most of the channel migrants are young healthy men who are economic migrants, not women and children.

@osprey24. Just a couple of things.

1. do you work with asylum seeker support groups to know that for a fact or is it speculation?

2. can you understand that “young healthy men” can be at risk of persecution, torture and death, which is why they’re fleeing their country?

3. are you aware that in some regions, women and children seek asylum in a closer/neighbouring country, but would be in camps, and/or often unable to work? Therefore “young healthy men” (who, let’s remember, are also at risk) seek asylum in countries further afield as they are often the only ones who can physically cope with the journey, and earn money to support their family? This strengthens the narrative that only “healthy young men” are arriving but doesn’t tell anything like the full story.

4. are these “economic migrants” flocking to the UK for the extravagant sum of £35 per week, and a hotel room or shitty barracks deemed unsafe for human habitation?

Rwanda has a horrific recent history but it's relatively safe and stable now, isn't it?

I'm not condoning this strange plan but just pointing out that Rwanda isn't a war-torn cesspool. It's developed a fair bit since the conflict.

most of the channel migrants are young healthy men who are economic migrants, not women and children.

Coming to a country which can't get staff to pick fruit and vegetables, so we stop young healthy men working?

For all those who agree with this - I hope that you are never in a position where you have to seek help
Our lives can be turned upside down in the twinkle of an eye. Many of those asylum seekers come from countries which we have helped destroy with our interference. So please spare me all the nonsense about economic migrants
It is highly unlikely that this will ever go through . However, this government has showed itself as having a lack of moral compass.
I honestly don’t know how anyone can vote for Boris Johnson and the rest of his cronies.

Detestable. Why can't the UK, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, do it's part for those less fortunate. These are asylum seekers - if they aren't entitled to asylum, they will have to leave. If they are entitled to asylum then they have fled situations where they would not be safe to live. People need to find some empathy and stop equating asylum seekers with economic migrants. (Although personally I can quite see why someone who didn't have the good fortune to be born in a wealthy country like the UK might want to find a way to try and come and earn some money here).

Nevertheless, it's probably just Petty Patel trying to make some headlines that will gain the Tory party some popularity among its more selfish and racist voters. It's already been challenged by human rights lawyers and will probably go the same way as her plan to send asylum seekers somewhere near the Falkland Islands.
If only we could send her there.

Our lives can be turned upside down in the twinkle of an eye. Many of those asylum seekers come from countries which we have helped destroy with our interference. So please spare me all the nonsense about economic migrants

Indeed. How many posters two months ago would have even known where Ukraine was? Never mind knowing that there was likely to be a war there with people fleeing for their lives.

It is highly unlikely that this will ever go through . However, this government has showed itself as having a lack of moral compass. I honestly don’t know how anyone can vote for Boris Johnson and the rest of his cronies.

I hope you are right, it's an absolute stain on this country's reputation.

And of course, it's Priti Patel doing her bit to take the spotlight off the two senior Government members fined for being lawbreakers.

For all those who agree with this - I hope that you are never in a position where you have to seek help

I hope they are!

@Summerhillsquare

It would be against international law.

Australia does it iirc do you know if it is against international law in that case? What’s the outcome if so, it seems to be still ongoing

Does the policy go down well in Aus does anyone know

Op it doesn’t sound good to me

Good solution to break the people trafficing gang business model. Australia and Denmark have similar policy and it works. True and deserving asylum seekers should be offered sanctuary but illegal economic migrants barred.

@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?

Yes this. It is an inhumane and extremely expensive policy, designed to appeal to a certain group of voters who are both thick and nasty.

@osprey24

most of the channel migrants are young healthy men who are economic migrants, not women and children.

I never know if this level of ignorance is genuine, or if it is said in full knowledge that it is bollocks but designed to fuel anti-immigrant sentiment for political reasons.

I guess I am cynical as I find it hard to believe people know so little about reality, so I just assebit is deliberate nastiness.

I've been to Rwanda, it's lovely. You'll probably find they get better facilities there than they would here

Nothing this government does surprises me anymore but this is a new low.

Most asylum claims are granted and therefore can be assumed to be legitimate. Rwanda's record on human rights is far from perfect and some refugees come from there in the first place - we're going to send them back??. This scheme will be expensive. It's a terrible idea on all counts. It's so clearly designed to distract the people who still think this government has a shred of plausibility from what is unfolding elsewhere.

I cannot see it acting as the deterrent they claim. People smugglers aren't going to be sent to Rwanda and those they prey on are vulnerable enough that they will still want to come anyway. I can't see how it addresses the problem it claims to solve, it's just nasty and vindictive.

We are currently still pretending to have a world leading response to a massive refugee crisis unfolding on our doorstep. We don't, by the way, in case you missed the memo. - Homes for Ukraine is broken and people are left in limbo.

I hope they've misjudged the public mood on this. I hope that the willingness of people everywhere to welcome Ukrainians translates into a broader acceptance of other refugees and an understanding of the problems they face. I hope we all tell this disgusting bunch of feckless chancers to stop doing this in our name and to demonstrate just one shred of decency about something for once in their hopeless horrible careers.

What I don't understand it's always seems to be boats and boats of single males early twenty's.

where are all the kids, women and middle age people .

I think it's to stop economic migrates just claiming there refugees which does happen .

Sadly I can see this going ahead. Denmark has outsourced prison to Kosovo for (im)migrants who commit crimes. They'll be deported back to their birth countries after their sentence.

The countries have worked carefully together to not break any international laws.

The prison will be run by a Dane, and officers will be Kosovars. I suspect this saves a lot of money in wages. I can see similar being done in Rwanda too. They're not going to be paying staff at UK levels and they're not going to be sending out a full brigade of Brits to staff it, especially with cheaper labour locally.

Pushed send too early.
So basically the running costs can't likely be compared to Australian running costs (as they had only Australians there), or to British ones.

@rwalker

What I don't understand it's always seems to be boats and boats of single males early twenty's.

where are all the kids, women and middle age people .

I think it's to stop economic migrates just claiming there refugees which does happen .

Yes, I can not understand why small children are not travelling thousands of miles in extremely dangerous circumstances

They are not economic migrants. They are fleeing war. It is very hard for mothers and children to make this incredibly dangerous journey. People send their sons as they can take the risk.

Again, I find this kind of ignorance hard to believe.

I think it’s disgraceful. But this government doesn’t give a shit about anyone and immigrants are bottom of the list as far as they are concerned.
Am ashamed to be British right now.

Am ashamed to be British right now

I know how you feel and it is very hard. I love Britain, and it breaks my heart that this Conservative government have made us an openly corrupt country led by criminals, with policies that neither have moral justification or make logical/economic sense.