Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

Are we going to be sending Ukranians to Rwanda?

105 replies

IsraelAndRoo · 17/04/2022 12:05

If Rwanda goes ahead, or is it just other nationalities we will be shipping there for processing?

I don't support the Rwanda plans at all but surely this is hugely xenophobic if it's the case?

OP posts:
Icecreamandapplepie · 17/04/2022 12:07

I agree Confused

Twentypast · 17/04/2022 12:07

No. It's just people crossing the channel illegally. No one entering legally as an immigrant will be sent there.

MikeandDave · 17/04/2022 12:09

The Rwanda plan is disgusting but no we are not sending Ukrainians there because they are all coming in with UK visas either for the sponsor scheme or a family visa. The people being potentially sent to Rwanda would be refugees who enter the country with no visa and then apply for asylum.

GeorgiaMcGraw · 17/04/2022 12:12

@IsraelAndRoo

If Rwanda goes ahead, or is it just other nationalities we will be shipping there for processing?

I don't support the Rwanda plans at all but surely this is hugely xenophobic if it's the case?

Probably not as it's the single male migrants illegally crossing the channel that this is aimed at, and the Ukranian men have largely stayed behind to fight for their homeland.
KyieveMii · 17/04/2022 12:15

No, because Ukrainians are not refugees. They have no refugee rights. They cannot apply for asylum under UK guidance. They cannot enter the UK on solely humanitarian grounds. They have no future rights to stay and claim a right to stay in the UK on indefinite leave to remain. They are not in anyway recognised as refugees under UK law.

They are displaced people temporarily here on extended family visitor visas or modified sponsor visas. They must return when these expire.

Theoretically though if one did apply for asylum I guess they could be sent to Rwanda before they lost their case. It would be stupid though. The guidance says they will not get asylum as some areas of Ukraine are considered safe and they can resettle there.

Also the whole scheme is probably legal nonsense, making it even more unlikely.

DeeplyMovingExperience · 17/04/2022 12:16

Is it possible to force people onto a plane to fly to Rwanda? I thought that if a person is flying against their will and likely to kick off then the pilot can refuse to fly due to safety?

Original poster
IsraelAndRoo · 17/04/2022 12:18

So why are we not processing refugees from other countries in the same way we are processing Ukranians - and letting them have the option to travel with visas from Europe?

OP posts:
KyieveMii · 17/04/2022 12:18

Also, I guess if a Ukrainian male did cross the channel on a boat, and without family or a sponsor in the UK, they could be sent to Rwanda. No reason why not in law.

Likewise a Syrian could apply for a family visitor visa for their mum or dad if they lived here, or sponsor a friend if they had a business here. Just like all non-EU people including Ukrainians (though the family visa would be 6 months usually, that’s what we as Ukrainians used to apply for to see our parents here).

KyieveMii · 17/04/2022 12:20

@IsraelAndRoo what, giving ALL refugees no right to stay here or refugee rights? No opportunity for indefinite leave and sent back after 3 years. That would be a bit shit if you were example Syrian- the war has been going on 10 years so a temporary visa wouldn’t be a good solution.

KyieveMii · 17/04/2022 12:21

@DeeplyMovingExperience they restrain people with handcuffs etc if necessary. It’s inhuman

LightSpeeds · 17/04/2022 12:23

@Twentypast

No. It's just people crossing the channel illegally. No one entering legally as an immigrant will be sent there.
Surely, this will just be the start though... Hmm

It will be a slow creep until they're sending everyone there!

RetrainRetrain · 17/04/2022 12:24

"Probably not as it's the single male migrants illegally crossing the channel that this is aimed at, and the Ukranian men have largely stayed behind to fight for their homeland."

  1. This is not stated anywhere in the actual policy. Anyone applying for asylum in the UK can be transported against their will.
  1. It is not illegal to travel to a country and request asylum. This is the only way for most refugees to request asylum in the UK because our govt will not permit them to apply while abroad.
emuloc · 17/04/2022 12:33

@RetrainRetrain

"Probably not as it's the single male migrants illegally crossing the channel that this is aimed at, and the Ukranian men have largely stayed behind to fight for their homeland."
  1. This is not stated anywhere in the actual policy. Anyone applying for asylum in the UK can be transported against their will.
  1. It is not illegal to travel to a country and request asylum. This is the only way for most refugees to request asylum in the UK because our govt will not permit them to apply while abroad.
This. Time to stop calling refugees "illegal".
cakeorwine · 17/04/2022 12:37

Probably not as it's the single male migrants illegally crossing the channel that this is aimed at, and the Ukranian men have largely stayed behind to fight for their homeland

It's aimed at anyone who enters the UK using "dangerous means"

So Afganis fleeing the Taliban could come under this.
Syrians fleeing Syria
LGBT people fleeing countries where LGBT people face persecution including the death penalty for being gay

Original poster
IsraelAndRoo · 17/04/2022 12:39

We don't know the war in Ukraine is not going to go on for ten years.

We didn't offer what we are offering for Ukraine to Yeman, Afghanistan, Syria within those first few weeks did we?

If the issue is the channel crossings and the safety of those crossing why are we still making them cross? Why not set up processing centres in Europe like has been done for Ukrainians.

OP posts:
Original poster
IsraelAndRoo · 17/04/2022 12:40

This. Time to stop calling refugees "illegal".

Agreed.

OP posts:
KyieveMii · 17/04/2022 12:46

Processing centres? Eh?
Really, read up.

JuliaDomna · 17/04/2022 12:46

Just a point. The Government have been picked up by the Law Society about their use of the word illegal. It is NOT illegal to cross the channel and apply for asylum. Refugees can arrive by any means possible, so dinghy, back of a lorry, plane, train etc. Also the Geneva Convention 1951 states that refugees should not be returned to countries where their lives are in danger.

The Government's whole narrative on this stinks. What it needs to do is provide safe means for refugees to apply for asylum. So greater investment in the Border Force and Foreign Office to process applications. Shipping desperate people to Rwanda which is a dictatorship and tortures and imprisons its own people is not the answer. The UK Government itself recently raised concerns about human rights in Rwanda but now seems to conveniently portray the country as a safe, up and coming nation. And the flow and refugees is only going to increase with climate change.

Also the Government have lied about this country taking more than its fair share of refugees. Sweden, Germany, Greece, France and Italy all took many more than the UK. Source: Statistics on Migration to the EU 2020.

KyieveMii · 17/04/2022 12:46

I see also you will ignore every above point too

Original poster
IsraelAndRoo · 17/04/2022 12:52

@KyieveMii Yes they've set up visa processing centres abroad for people fleeing Ukraine... were you unaware of this? Perhaps it is you who should be reading up.

OP posts:
cakeorwine · 17/04/2022 12:53

Also the Government have lied about this country taking more than its fair share of refugees. Sweden, Germany, Greece, France and Italy all took many more than the UK. Source: Statistics on Migration to the EU 2020

I think people would be surprised how many refugees countries host

Turkey has nearly 4 million refugees, mainly from Syria

Turkey continued to host the largest number of refugees with just under 4 million, most of whom were Syrian refugees (92 per cent). Colombia followed, hosting over 1.7 million displaced Venezuelans. Germany hosted the third largest population – almost 1.5 million, with Syrian refugees and asylum-seekers as the largest group (44 per cent). Pakistan and Uganda completed the top-5 hosting countries, with about 1.4 million each

Source:

www.unhcr.org/flagship-reports/globaltrends/

KyieveMii · 17/04/2022 13:17

@IsraelAndRoo I’ve read up. Because many of my family have left Ukraine and I’ve been the sponsor. Also, I have applied for my own visas and their visitor ones in the past. It’s not just a passing social media point for me.

Firstly- applications are now online for anyone with a biometric passport already. No centre.

Secondly, for others without passports they are using existing visas application centres largely. Ones like Warsaw have massively stepped up staffing (finally) but still have issues. They are run by private companies. The only difference is previously you would collect your visa from Lviv or Kyiv, now as they are closed they have moved this to neighbouring countries. This is normal in these situations, that visas are handled in neighbouring countries when necessary. A few attempts at pop up ones have been attempted, they aren’t always even open and are rumoured closed.

So far on the sponsor visas not far over 1000 have entered the UK. There’s not some wonderful world of large scale European processing places. It’s not working at all.

You have an image and a point in your head, you aren’t realising that EVERY option is shit. Stop arguing and nitpicking about the tiny things one gets over another and shout about a fair system for any refugee.

KyieveMii · 17/04/2022 13:18

The UK has about 1% of the worlds refugees, they haven’t even managed that for Ukraine. There’s no point in patting themselves on the back for any of it

Original poster
IsraelAndRoo · 17/04/2022 13:19

And you are not realising that Ukranians have had options created for them that haven't been for other countries - and thus, are not at risk of being sent to Rwanda.

So whilst I get things are shit, and obviously feel for anyone in this situations, it's coming across as incredibly xenophobic and racist to me (from the UK Government)

OP posts:
KyieveMii · 17/04/2022 13:24

Whilst English isn’t my first language, I’ve checked and xenophobia is the dislike of people from other countries. So I don’t understand? Ukraine is another country? So are all refugees.

Syrians can apply for asylum, should I start posting it’s unfair Ukrainians can’t? Fight to have their very tiny rights taken away? No- because I’m not horrible and don’t want that