Just when you think this government can't get any worse - now they are going to send asylum seekers to Rwanda

[daimbarsatemydogsbone]

I didn't vote for this shower. The problem with people arriving (if they make it) in small boats needs addressing but AIBU that sending them on a one way trip to Rwanda isn't the answer?

To be fair, the genocide was a while ago. The problem is how Rwanda actually is now. There was genocide in Yougoslavia around the same time, and I go on holiday to Croatia every year and have done since 2006.

Has anyone considered that a lot of this movement is actually human trafficking/organised/financial crime?
By removing the asylum seekers from UK soil, they are being protected from further exploitation and possibly being given options and opportunities that would not be available had they remained on UK soil?
It will be interesting to see if this move results in a significant reduction in refugees/asylum seekers.
Obviously a better final destination might have been desirable & the cost is ridiculous.

Options and opportunities in Rwanda? To do what? Do you know that part of the world? Most won't stay there anyway, when Israel tried this they didn't stay. The ones who stay, are they to be given options and opportunities not afforded to the local population? Like healthcare? If so, how will that go down with the locals?

It would be the very opposite of protecting them from exploitation, to give people "options and opportunities" in a country where most people have under £2 a day to live on.

Unless you keep them all in a camp away from the local populace of course...now where have I heard that idea before...

I'm so angry upset and appalled by this, what is the best way to protest it besides writing to my crap MP?

This is appalling, unfortunately we have no effective opposition in this country. I‘m sick to death of the Tories but they never ever seem to be held to account for all the shit they do.

Single male economic migrants only.

@cansu

So vulnerable people will be sent to a place with a terrible record of human rights abuses. Yes that sounds a really good idea. Ffs this is awful. You could not make it up.

Not vulnerable people. Single men who came for a better life. Not people in genuine danger.

People sent to Rwanda will leave there, unless they are actually detained. Many would probably make their way to South Africa, where there is also quite serious prejudice against migrants, as well as massive pressure on public services.

Single male economic migrants only.

The exact wording from the announcement was "mainly" males and that "mainly" is important because it gives them the option to expand it and send others.

Reports in the papers say men and women.

How are they going to determine that someone is an economic migrant and not eligible for asylum, in five days? Answer, they can't. And from what I have read in places, they won't even try.

If it will only be economic migrants who want to earn money to send home then surely any country that can provide this should be ok Rwanda included?

Why can’t these asylum seekers seek asylum in France? What is it about this country that makes them travel through Europe and pay huge sums to gangs to get to us?

@FelicityFlops

Has anyone considered that a lot of this movement is actually human trafficking/organised/financial crime? By removing the asylum seekers from UK soil, they are being protected from further exploitation and possibly being given options and opportunities that would not be available had they remained on UK soil? It will be interesting to see if this move results in a significant reduction in refugees/asylum seekers. Obviously a better final destination might have been desirable & the cost is ridiculous.

Unfortunately the human trafficking doesn’t start in Calais, it starts where the asylum seekers are coming from. Libya for eg, where a lot of asylum seekers will cross to Europe from, is a hotbed of slavery, taking advantage of the desperation people have to get to safety. This scheme sadly won’t do anything to combat that.

@cushioncovers surely you can see that is a ridiculous question?

@BeinBedEarly that’s already been answered on this thread, see my response to Zerrin a few posts upthread.

@BeinBedEarly maybe read the thread? Main reason is joining family. And contrary to opinion propaganda most migrants/refugees don't try to get to the UK, they go to other places.

@mrziggycoco

Single male economic migrants only.

Nope. The Home Office documents state it will be men, women and families. It’s thought only unaccompanied children will be allowed to stay in the Uk.

Ahaha 🤡

@longwayoff

The only thing missing from this policy stolen from 1930s Germany is somebody sporting a small mustache.

Too true. The nazi's wanted to send Jews to Madagascar to get rid of the "problem". Look at how that ended ......

And this

A numpty minister called Pursglove calls Rwanda a "progressive country". Well yes, it is, in the sense that it has progressed and improved since being the site of a huge genocide, sure.

As others have said, this is a distraction from 'Partygate' and a potential sweetener for people who may want to see 'action' being taken on 'illegal immigration'.

However, even as a distraction, the racism and inhumanity of the people who propose this is apparent. Certain 'migrants' will be sent to Rwanda. Others fleeing from war will be offered sanctuary. To put is another way, brown or black people fleeing from war and atrocity, will be sent to a place infamous for past genocide, current human rights violations and people trafficking. White European people fleeing from war will be invited into our homes.
How will the government distinguish between the man from Afghanistan who is fleeing for his life, and the man from Afghanistan who is fleeing for a better life?
I know this is not a Tory-bashing thread, and I do have a great deal of respect for Conservatives, but this government (whatever it is) completely mismanaged the Coronavirus situation, leading to a large number of preventable deaths (especially among the disabled); they lied completely about Brexit (a 'done deal' still very undone) and they broke the laws with little more than a petty fine.
Boris is hiding behind a situation of atrocity, by playing some kind of (ineffective) superhero, whilst showing he cares very little about people who do not serve his purpose. This proposal is racist to the core.