I know, why don't we send them all to Rwanda?

[Weighnow]

Does anyone else think this sounds like a suggestion someone made as a joke, to liven up a dull or fraught meeting and somehow, someone decided to run with it?

Did any of the Rotherham men arrive in dinghies, were they even recent imigrants?

No One is denying Rochdale but it has no relevance to what we’re talking about! The vast majority of abuse is happening by white British men, please say what that has to do with sending 200 asylum seekers to Rwanda??

We're not Australia are we? Different geography, different international agreements, different refugees. Quick look at map will help you.

I don’t need ‘help’ thanks

I know Aus well

I also know that your suggestion of safe routes doesn’t get to something that works. Which is why no country is suggesting it.

So it’s a decision people will have to make. Working means hardline otherwise it’s high numbers

I mean uou seem to be struggling with basics of Rwandan governance and demography. So I'm not sure what else you might struggle with...

Nope again. Insults are coming in fast but it’s not doing much

It always happens when posters realise safe routes are not the answer

It’s not my doing it’s just the issues we face with increasing migration pressures

On boats, not overall

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/money/article-13317021/Australia-100000-immigration-milestone-housing-cris.html

https://theconversation.com/australias-asylum-policy-has-been-a-disaster-its-deeply-disturbing-the-uk-wants-to-adopt-it-172141

My understanding is the illegal immigrants switched to planes and student visas.

The current agreement is 1,000 over the next five years.

I didn't say they are "the answer". But I don't think this is "the answer" either.
But I do think people need to be honest and understand exactly what it is they are condoning. So much repetition of how safe and wonderful Rwanda is, but very selective in who they think deserves to be sent there...

Five years. £600 million.

That doesnt include the 100 plus million spent here.

Kagame is laughing all the way to the bank... those refugees will "disappear" as fast as his opponents

Exactly andt it hasn’t actually worked in Aus. There has been a significant cost to the public purse and other policies came into play simultaneously so difficult to say. I any event 2000 of the 4000 people sent away are back!

That’s fine I’d like people to face up to the increasing migration pressures and be more realistic when they say of course they want it to stop

That takes hardline policy, or if not then high numbers

That decision is down to the individual but there’s no easy way to deal with it

That depends if you think illegal migration is actually the most pressing issue we should be dealing with. I personally do not. It is a very small portion of total migration, and is only going boom if we continue to do nothing about climate change and keep stoking conflict.
Also not sure how you think the Rwanda plan has the capacity to be a "hardline policy"? A small impoverished country, and a hefty bill for every migrant? How hardline can that really be. Be realistic.

Australia's policy was actually much harsher than the Tories are planning - they turned the boats around, back to their country of departure. Or sent them to pacific islands and held people in detention centres indefinitely, in appalling conditions . I'm in no way suggesting this is what the UK should do - but that is more of a deterrent, I would think, than sending them to Rwanda (where, apparently, they'll have a great life....).. As we're not planning to meet the boats and turn them back.. I don't think we can look at Australia and say it will work here because it worked there, when their system was, in effect, very different to what ours will be. So, no, this is not good supporting evidence that this policy will work..

I’m posting mostly about Aus policy which is afaik is one of the few countries to reverse boat numbers drastically. If people want a similar chart for crossings it’s not going to be safe routes, increased aid or faster processing that does it, those are the posts I think are far off.

You can say you don’t mind increasing numbers, do you have a point where it feels too high?

It’s likely to be destabilising though which is why migration is used as a tool against the west atm

It won't cost that much per person - the ETIF (Economic Transformation and Integration Fund) payment (£370 million?) is a fixed cost, 'responsible for the economic growth and development of Rwanda. Investment so far has been focused on areas such as education, healthcare, agriculture, infrastructure and job creation' - it's not really any different to giving overseas aid.

Are Labour promising not to increase the overseas aid budget and/or not send the money to a different African country for development aid?

Are you aware this isn’t too far removed from the Madagascar plan?

I think the payment terms with Rwanda are quite complex.

There is the ETIF which is £370 million pounds.

But in addition - "The UK government
has also agreed to make ETIF payments that are dependent on the number of
individuals relocated:
• £120 million once 300 people have been relocated; and
• payments of £20,000 per individual relocated"

And there is a 5 year processing and integration package of up to £150,874 per person - we've already paid £20 million towards this.

And - "As at February 2024, the Home Office had incurred costs
of £20 million, which it expects to rise to £28 million by the end of 2023-24.
The Home Office estimates that it will also incur further costs of approximately
£1 million per year in staff costs and £11,000 per individual for flight costs. It will
also incur costs to escort individuals to Rwanda. These include training costs of
£12.6 million in 2024-25 and £1 million per year thereafter in fixed costs, plus
further escorting costs which are dependent on the number of flights require."

This doesn't seem to include the costs of building or servicing detention centres.

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/investigation-costs-ukrwanda-partnership-summary.pdf

Then you don’t understand economics.
None of the costs associated with childhood, schooling, etc.
All of the productive labour years.

Notonthestairs
And there is a 5 year processing and integration package of up to £150,874 per person

That doesn't seem too bad to me considering the stats up thread;

People who have been granted asylum in the UK have a disproportionately low employment rate of 51 per cent, compared with economic migrants who have an employment rate of 88 per cent.

Although it gets a smaller, a gap remains present even after more than 25 years of residence in the country.

It is demeaning to use Rwanda as some kind of threat. Patronising, as if we are any better.

There is no answer to these boats coming. Just watched BBC News and a 100, mainly young men, were fighting French police with hand made weapons to get on an overloaded dingy. Then 5 people immediately died, with a child being one of them. When a boat reached them, 58 people still tried to carry on before a British boat towed them to Britain. They carried on after seeing 5 people die in front of them.

The deaths are shocking, particularly the children. But seeing mainly young men, some of them violent men, trying to get here illegally, when they have passed through many other safe countries, is not to our benefit as a country. Who are they? Are they going to enrich our lives or further diminish it? We have a violent society already, the ones fighting the police are not law abiding citizens who are going to miraculously change when they get here. What do they think they are going to get here? They cause resentments against migrants, not fair on those who apply to come here legally.

In the same BBC report they now say that a growing number of Vietnamese are now swelling the ranks at Calais, escaping gangsters to whom they owe money to in Vietnam. They have now largely replaced the Albanians. Why should we receive people involved in crime in their countries with open arms. We have our own grown criminals to contend with already.

I know what I have said will not land well but we can't keep receiving them without sending them back again. The Rwanda policy is just an election teaser because the Tories know that their action on this has been woeful, like it is on every other thing. God knows why anyone wants to come here anymore anyway. Not so much as a melting pot here, it's now a shithole.

In isolation maybe not. But it's not in isolation and I rather assume the Government intends to send a lot more than 300.

We still don't know what they are planning to do with the 40,000 asylum seekers barred from applying for asylum here.
Are they sending all of them to Rwanda?

I'm sorry but where did I say that Rotherham didn't happen? the problem is that you and people like you seem to think that only foreigners behave in this way, as I pointed out home grown indigenous Brits also carry out those acts not because they are white or British or anything other than the fact that they are sick men and unfortunately in some cases women.

That’s exactly what it sounds like to me. Absolutely bonkers.