Are we going to be sending Ukranians to Rwanda?

[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?

Ok, breakdown question.

• can a Ukrainian just come here?

No. 0.02% of all leaving with sponsors have entered the UK. Most cannot legally enter the UK on any route. Most do not have a sponsor.

-can they claim asylum?
No- guidance has said no

-can they stay if they get in?
No, they get a 3 month entry visa on a letter. Then a 3 year visa from the post office

Are there processing centres?
No, existing visa centres in Europe are taking appointments

I can answer any direct questions

@KyieveMii I am not here to share what I have been through - you don't like the question, move on - you don't see the issue, move on - you've stated it enough times.

There is an issue that has emerged (and is still emerging) in many people's eyes.

I wish your family well but won't be responding to you on this thread any further; you've put your opinion across and I've read it, but don't agree with it.

@Jewel1968 she hasn’t said ‘should we not be sending people to Rwanda’
She said
‘Are we going to be sending Ukrainians to Rwanda’
That’s why, if you are a Ukrainian or just decent, reading this, you find her distasteful. She’s point scoring an idea by suggesting a group aren’t being treated as badly enough

‘Move on’
That’s the whole point. Some of us don’t put down the phone and forget about it all. You can move on and not reply as it’s not personal, it’s not affecting you and you feel entitled on parading your views whilst others are affected by your words.
I will, regardless of direct replies, keep highlighting the impact of your views and your views.
You are weighing and measuring the rights of people suffering for fun on the internet and I don’t see why you should be so comfortable in it.

As I understand it, No. Just some of the people who enter the country without permission.

@GucciBear Thank you, that's now I understand too (thanks to some great posters in this thread).

The left: immigration is wonderful for countries; the people fleeing France war zones will make a contribution to society.

Also the left: let's prevent those doctors, engineers and lawyers from being moved to a safe country that is asking for skilled, working age people.

Also, it’s not being sent to Rwanda while their claims are processed, it’s being transported to Rwanda so they can claim asylum in Rwanda. One way ticket.

@MatildaJayne I honestly missed that bit. It’s the effective removal of a right to apply for asylum?
I hope it’s just simply unworkable in terms of international law.

@GucciBear it would apply to any nationality entering without permission? If they couldn’t get it? Theoretically?

The Ukrainians generally aren’t trying to sneak over on dinghies. They are going through the proper channels. This plan is for what is known as “illegal” immigrants that try and by-pass that.

KyieveMil I understand that nationality has nothing to do with it. It will be reserved for some of the people arriving illegally across the channel.. I must say that I don't understand why the illegal boats are not stopped before they land. Surely it is not beyond the wit of man to devise some way of doing this, safely.

Isn't the point or asylum to be safe? So what's wrong with Rwanda?

Will have to look it up, but the UK were only last year complaining about human rights in Rwanda.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rwanda-asylum-deal-home-office-uk-b2058273.html

An asylum-seeker is a person who has left their country and is seeking protection from persecution and serious human rights violations in another country, but who hasn't yet been legally recognized as a refugee and is waiting to receive a decision on their asylum claim. Seeking asylum is a human right.

What this Govt has done is to remove all practical routes to seeking asylum which is why they are making the drastic decision to try & cross the Channel in a dingy!

As a Country we need doctors, nurses, social care, hospitality - all these areas are understaffed - why are we not giving those seeking safety & a better life the opportunity to come & do those things?

Instead we are going to spend millions (probably billions) of pounds to fly them 4000 miles to Rwanda!
I don't care where they come from they deserve a chance!
(And you can bet the people getting the contracts to fly & house these people in Rwanda are the same bunch of people who provided unfit PPE, Test & useless Trace now that the Covid cash cow has come to an end)

@leotardrock the idea of private firms making millions is probably the only certainty

So it looks like you apply for asylum by:

a) Telling a border force officer you are applying for asylum
b) Telling them as soon as possible after you arrive that you are applying for asylum

www.gov.uk/claim-asylum/screening

I guess you can't just get on a ferry or a plane that easily to the UK and apply for asylum. Maybe you can?

And if you turn up and tell someone that you are applying for asylum if you have entered via a dinghy or lorry, then that's 'illegal' and you are off to Rwanda possibly

So how do you practically apply for asylum here?

It is illegal to enter the UK without permission. Thus those who arrive in small boats, in lorries, etc without permission (generally a visa) are, indeed, 'illegal' arrivals. It is not illegal to claim asylum here, nor would it have been to claim asylum in the first safe country the person entered.

Despite what PP said, applications for refugees to come here are being processed abroad all the time. It is not true that they are not allowed to apply from abroad - they are encouraged to.

I suspect that this is a huge red herring designed to take our eyes off all the political trouble that's going on here.

I agree @BigFatLiar
The problem is people will engage and bicker like the OP. Instead of an overall challenge. It’ll be deflected into a disagreement about colour and picking details between groups. Divide and conquer

The Prime Ministers announcement of this scheme was like a dog whistle to the ex-UKIP Tory voters, Brexit Voters and those new Red Wall constituencies that turned blue in the last election ahead of the local elections.
The rhetoric around controlling the borders, 'politically motivated lawyers' trying to stop it etc etc was all out of the Nigel Farage handbook!

Surely there isn't a person left in the UK that believe he & Priti Pritel give one single shit about how many people die crossing the channel!

If people are interested, this is the Government statistics on asylum claims

www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-statistics-year-ending-december-2021/how-many-people-do-we-grant-asylum-or-protection-to

The overall grant rate can vary for a number of reasons, including the protection needs of those who claim asylum in the UK, along with operational resourcing and policy decisions. Grant rates vary considerably by nationality as the protection needs of specific groups or individuals differ, usually depending on the situation in their home country. Of nationalities that commonly claim asylum in the UK, Sudanese, Eritreans and Syrians typically have very high grant rates at initial decision (96%, 97% and 99% respectively), while nationals of India, for example, have low grant rates (5%; see Figure 3).

It looks like there is a bit of a backlog in asylum claims

No, just blacks, OP.

@LocalHobo

The United Kingdom population is equivalent to 0.87% of the total world population so, when considering the UK has about 1% of the worlds refugees we are doing pretty well imo.

Well if every country was taking refugees, I think it is pretty obvious that some countries are the ones refugees are fleeing from. Do you think the Ukraine is currently taking refugees, or Syria, or Yemen. So we aren't 0.87% of the countries that can take refugees.

Statistics, God help us.