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?

Statistics, God help us

Maybe China should help? We all know how welcoming they are....

I have just read the Home Office report in Eritrea
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1020555/ERI_CPIN_National_service_and_illegal_exit.pdf

You can see why people would want to leave there.

@roarfeckingroarr

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

From lbc site. In a statement in July 2021, made by the UK’s international ambassador for human rights Rita French, she expressed "regret" that Rwanda was not conducting "transparent, credible and independent investigations into allegations of human rights violations including deaths in custody and torture".

The statement continued: "We were disappointed that Rwanda did not support the UK recommendation to screen, identify and provide support to trafficking victims, including those held in government transit centres."

I think most people on this thread are saying that no refugee should be sent to Rwanda. I think some are in favour or shipping people who are fleeing war and strife to another country. Not sure why they are in favour but I might have missed that.

You want to read the US report on Rwanda human rights

www.state.gov/reports/2021-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/rwanda/

Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: unlawful or arbitrary killings by the government; forced disappearance by the government; torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by the government; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary detention; political prisoners or detainees; politically motivated reprisals against individuals located outside the country, including killings, kidnappings, and violence; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; serious restrictions on free expression and media, including threats of violence against journalists, unjustified arrests or prosecutions of journalists, and censorship; serious restrictions on internet freedom; substantial interference with the rights of peaceful assembly and freedom of association, including overly restrictive laws on the organization, funding, or operation of nongovernmental and civil society organizations; serious and unreasonable restrictions on political participation; and serious government restrictions on or harassment of domestic and international human rights organizations.

@KyieveMii this is my thread, I can engage with who I want - I have not bickered, I do not agree that you don't see there's an issue with this in terms of discrepancies of nationalities of people fleeing war zones - it is you who is bickering. I asked a question, and am reading all the responses - you can start your own thread, but it's perfectly reasonable I engage with those who respond to my question.

@cakeorwine it's terrifying isn't it? I read that earlier - I just don't understand how this can be happening lawfully. I can't understand how it has even been suggested and the fact it could be happening in weeks is just horrific.

I really hope it's stopped.

It’s probably an evil genius move. Give groups all bad, but varying levels of bad, deals. Watch the left eat each other arguing over the crumbs of the pie whilst attracting lots of Tory and UKIP voters.
The left are totally preoccupied whilst the right grow, in two quick schemes that’s actually do very little by any measure.

@Jewel1968

I think most people on this thread are saying that no refugee should be sent to Rwanda. I think some are in favour or shipping people who are fleeing war and strife to another country. Not sure why they are in favour but I might have missed that.

I think it is something to do with the island sinking otherwise, 'them' coming to destroy our way of life / Christian country, they should stay in France, are some of the gems on one of my local MP's FB page when he made his announcement.

They blame the ills of the country on the "illegal immigrants" whilst applauding the current government.

I didn’t ask you to respond. I just said I’d highlight divisive posts and those who drag down others with misinformation. You don’t need to comment.
It’s like someone arguing that we’re getting worked up over adequately fed Afghan girls education whilst girls in Yemen starve. That’s how crass your line of posting is. Measuring refugees up and people who have less than you for point making. Just say if if you have an issue with Rwanda. Don’t suggest that people fleeing Ukraine should be sent, because the nutters latch on to posts like that . And then it becomes real. That’s why stuff like this needs calling out. It’s where things start.
I’d have no issue if you made accurate statements and just said you disagreed with Rwanda as an asylum solution. Because I disagree with it.

I have very clearly said I disagree with Rwanda proposal several times.

My thread was not about agreeing (or not) with that - it was about which nationalities were going to be put forwards for it; Ukrainians are exempt it seems given the current set up.

@WhiteFire Ah I see. And so ship people to Rwanda so that this doesn't happen. Do we know what Rawanda intend to do to support refugees fleeing war?

‘Exempt’ so my cousins 19 yr old child can rock up and just say ‘Hi, I’m a white Ukrainian’ and they’ll be let in?
You see I’m having quite a bit of trouble with this one, I can’t apply for family visas as they are over 18 and I can’t sponsor with an overcrowded house.
Can you please link me to the exemption rules as it would be really useful.

@KyieveMii

‘Exempt’ so my cousins 19 yr old child can rock up and just say ‘Hi, I’m a white Ukrainian’ and they’ll be let in? You see I’m having quite a bit of trouble with this one, I can’t apply for family visas as they are over 18 and I can’t sponsor with an overcrowded house. Can you please link me to the exemption rules as it would be really useful.

I suspect that anyone who tries to enter the UK via 'dangerous' methods could be sent to Rwanda

I don't think it would play well in the British press if we started to hear stories of people fleeing Ukraine and being sent to Rwanda.

@amicissimma

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.

This is untrue. You can check the government's own pages on claiming asylum. Current govt policy is that you have to present your claim once in the UK.

There have been very limited exemptions in the past and if our government were sincere in wanting to stop people smuggling, they would allow claims to be submitted and assessed from abroad.

the pilot can refuse to fly due to safety

True.

Bet those pilots do not want to be part of the government's disgraceful "solution"

@IsraelAndRoo
“ 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. ”

That is not true. You have referred frequently to Syrian refugees, who apparently not received as good treatment as Ukrainian refugees, please have a look at the source I am posting below from UNHCR.

www.unhcr.org/uk/news/latest/2021/3/6059f1fd4/the-uks-syria-resettlement-progamme-looking-back-and-ahead.html

UK have accepted over 20000 Syrian refugees on the resettlement scheme, which means they had their refugee status processed before coming to the UK.
In the UK they received housing ( from the government, not host families), right to the medical care, benefits, local authorities paid schools £11000 per a child placement. As far as I understand their right to remain here has no time restrictions.

Can you please point me to the government source stating that they will do the same for 20000 Ukrainians?

I am not supporting the government policies and I do not think they are doing enough, but you stating that Ukrainians are getting preferential treatment because they are white, is rubbish.

In fact they are getting a lot less than other groups from previous conflicts.

All this government has done for Ukrainians was to tell us: “ You want us to help Ukrainians, you house them. And of course you must first find a refugee to house first, because we are not going to help you with that either.”

With regards to the people smuggled here on the boats. According to international law, they are asylum seekers, not refugees.
They will become refugees if their claim to asylum is successful. Therefore, to have their paperwork processed before coming to the UK, they would have to claim asylum in another safe country.

Just like 20000 Syrians did, and just like Ukrainians are doing now.

You also do not seem to understand the sheer enormity of the war in Ukraine.
13 millions of Syrians have been displaced over ELEVEN YEARS.
10 millions of Ukrainians have been displaced over SIX WEEKS.

There are over 40 millions Ukrainians, being attacked by one of the most powerful countries in the world. So of course, there will be more Ukrainian refugees around Europe, but the colour of their skin has nothing to do with it.

Firstly I want to say I completely disagree with the Rwanda scheme.

Secondly, I really wish people would stop comparing the response to Ukraine with Syria. Syria is a civil war, Ukraine is an invasion. That is why they have had different responses from our government, and Ukraine has been more of a quick and intense reaction because it has been invaded. Also all the refugees are mainly woman and children as men between 18-60 are not allowed to leave Ukraine.
You cannot compare the two.

Thank you @danio01 for trying to explain

The popular social media view is gaining traction in the face of facts, I think it’s genuinely raising the risk of harm for those seeking refuge with the anger it stokes. It’s important to challenge it with facts

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!

^ this is the crux of it.

I agree OP. It seems if you're in a white nation and get invaded you'll be provided with a legal route to enter the UK. If you're in a black or brown nation going through long term oppression and threat to life, you'll be sent to Rwanda.

@ WTF475878237NC

Quite the opposite actually.
16500 Afghans have been airlifted to the UK since the last August.
White nation, who got invaded, can only come here if they find themselves a sponsor with a spare room.

The Afghan invasion happened in 2001 - it took us twenty years to start welcoming Afghanis; and then believe it or not - we were very selective of who we took.

@Timeforausernamechange22 Syria has had several invasions by foreign countries (via air strikes mainly) over the last few years including Russia (and others).

Twenty fucking years it took. Case in point. Thanks for detailing it so well Danio.

The answer to your question is no. Ukrainians are all part of an asylum programme. Their papers are checked so they are known to be genuinely Ukrainian and they arrive here with somewhere to stay. They are mostly women and children.

Ditto the Rwanda proposal does not apply to any Syrians resettled u dear other schemes.

The Rwanda proposal is for people who pay human traffickers to put them in dinghies on the French side of the channel. It looks like they would have their case triaged first before being sent to Rwanda. So it would not be all of them.

I don’t think it will happen. Maybe a token few aeroplanes with a couple of dozen people with lo be sent there, but there will be lots of legal wrangling.

There is undoubtedly a problem with young adult male economic migrants to Europe at the moment. The Rwanda proposal is unlikely to change that, though it might stop some making the last leg of the journey, which is what the gov wants.

For people from Africa the answer is a change in trading arrangements and investment to allow those countries to develop high end branded products that benefit from value added profit, instead of only being able to sending cheap raw material to Europe for us to turn a profit on. Without a decent economy there is nothing to stay for. Iran is a more difficult one. I don’t see international relations thawing any time soon. The nationality responsible for the largest share of illegal migrant crime (especially rape) is Afghanistan. I can’t even begin to work out how you know if someone from a chaotic country like that is a genuine refugee or a chancer who secretly supports the Taliban. You probably can’t. So you have to make choices about margins of error. Are you more comfortable with unintentionally sending home genuine asylum claimants or keeping bogus ones? To what extent should the burden of proof be on the claimant to prove their case is genuine or the country to prove it is not? How much funding should they receive to fight their claim or appeal the result? Should we prioritise those who arrive illegally over those who follow formal channels available in refugee camps? Lots of questions I can’t answer and for which there is more then one answer that can sound reasonable.

20% of the Afghan population were displaced from ‘78-‘92 alone, the story is beyond your British bubble. My family remember the impact and hurt from neighbouring areas.

You are just cherry picking random facts you know, or rumours you hear, and holding them up to justify your ingrained belief without engaging. You ignore completely facts, just as the fact that in 5-6 weeks as many have left Ukraine as left Syria in 10 years. Still though, it’s not a poverty or suffering competition for privileged people to weigh up.

You have a belief, and you are sticking to it. You don’t care about decency or upset caused either in how you express yourself. You don’t want to work together with ALL refugees, you want to cherry pick nuggets and divide people.

I hope, that despite those digging in for inaction due to past failures, that we can start to actually look at with cool heads, the bits from each scheme that work.

I really hope though they don’t expand the Ukraine home scheme for vulnerable women and children refugees, people who’ve faced rape or torture even, and make them advertise on social media for British men to offer homes for. One charity is claiming that already 10% of homes for Ukraine placements have broken down, with many women saying they’ve had sexual advances from hosts.

@Genevieva I appreciate your points about identity from some countries.
Whilst Ukrainians have faced difficulties getting documents such as rent papers, passports, utility bills etc translated and online I can’t imagine how hard the system is for someone coming from long term poverty and chaos.
Having a lifestyle nearer to the western one certainly makes the system more accessible

@IsraelAndRoo agree with your interpretation - its only brown and black
people that will be considered for being sent to Rwanda (if these misleading scheme, I mean wonderful chance (says JRM) ever takes off) Sickening playing-off people against each other and stirring up civil hostilities, race riots to distract from the economy falling apart, hunger and poverty.
PS agree fully that UKR should be given a right to remain, and better treatment of refugees in general.