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?

New YouGov polling shows 69% of voters have an 'unfavourable' view of Johnson, and 71% for Patel.

So much for a 'leftie bubble'.

@Unphased

BewareTheLibrarians I think the government are doing a good job, trying everything they can to stop them coming here, but are hindered by the small minority trying to stop them, What do you think is a population figure that you would call the U.K. full, 75 million, 80 million, I am just wondering what figure is sustainable in the UK

I think the government are doing a good job, trying everything they can to stop them coming here, but are hindered by the small minority trying to stop them

Eh?

We've had a Tory government since 2015 and a Tory led one since 2010. So you are saying that for 12 years they have been trying "everything" but some "small minority" has stopped them being in any way effective.

Just who are these people who can somehow stop the government being any use?

daimbarsatemydogsbone
I pretty sure the boat invaders have only been a nuisance for a few years,

@Unphased

daimbarsatemydogsbone I pretty sure the boat invaders have only been a nuisance for a few years,

Any increases are due to the current government’s policies. (As has been said before but I am always happy to help.)

Can we think of any current or previous conservative policies that have made the situation worse?

Brexit = we’re unable to return asylum seekers to the EU (as easily, if at all) due to Brexit.

Brexit = we’re unable to have a “border” in France, and now can’t act until asylum seekers are on UK soil/water.

Any more?

Patel in the commons now saying the government "has done more than any other in recent history to support those fleeing persecution, conflict, or instability."

Not even the most insane tory believes this, so why even pretend?

But that's the problem, isn't it? If broad statements like this are fair game for lying why bother ever telling the truth?

“Boat invaders”

Please grow up and discuss things sensibly without resorting to idiotic insults.

BewareTheLibrarians
What else do you call people landing on the beach uninvited, unwanted, causing problems,

Patel is asked in the commons straight up how this new scheme will stop the boats coming, or deter asylum seekers in general. She is unable to answer.

You call them asylum seekers, like a grown up.

Also, I asked you earlier what opportunities asylum seekers where taking away from British people. One might start to wonder why you’re ignoring that and resorting to insults.

BewareTheLibrarians
The first boat invaders arrived late 2018, I must presume the government were doing a good job before then, or is it just thanks to Merkal letting anyone from anywhere in?

BewareTheLibrarians
Not insulting anyone, what would you call people that forced their way into your house and wanted to live there without your consent?
The children that are from deprived areas that are in and out of school, if they are in school have different teachers or are just forgotten in the system

"Not insulting anyone, what would you call people that forced their way into your house and wanted to live there without your consent?"

A country is not a house. If you have to resort to such crap analogies maybe you just have a crap argument.

@Unphased

daimbarsatemydogsbone I pretty sure the boat invaders have only been a nuisance for a few years,

Indeed they have - according to you the government can't deal with this issue not due to their own policies or uselessness but because of some unspecified "minority" - who are these mysterious people who have managed to prevent our glorious Tory government from being any use?

@SleeplessInEngland

Patel is asked in the commons straight up how this new scheme will stop the boats coming, or deter asylum seekers in general. She is unable to answer.

Indeed because it won't.

SleeplessInEngland
Same principle, not asked to be here

BewareTheLibrarians
I’m still waiting for you’re answer to what you think the max population should be in the U.K. for it to be sustainable

@Unphased Why are you trying to deflect by making me answer a question? I asked you for your answer.

Your question is irrelevant anyway as I never once suggested increasing the population or that we needed a “maximum”. In fact, my ideas were about reducing the number, but that seems to have completely passed you on your haste to throw disgusting terms about.

@Unphased

BewareTheLibrarians Not insulting anyone, what would you call people that forced their way into your house and wanted to live there without your consent? The children that are from deprived areas that are in and out of school, if they are in school have different teachers or are just forgotten in the system

Without consent? Wrong again!

“Countries that have ratified the Refugee Convention are obliged to protect refugees that are on their territory in accordance with its terms.”

What’s more:

“Refugees shall be treated at least like nationals in relation to

freedom to practice their religion (Article 4)
the respect and protection of artistic rights and industrial property (Article 14)
rationing (Article 20)
elementary education (Article 22)
public relief and assistance (Article 23)
labour legislation and social security (Article 24)”

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees

The UK has ratified the 1951 convention, by choice, so yes, asylum seekers have consent to be in the UK.

BewareTheLibrarians
I was on about in your house without consent from you

You call them asylum seekers, like a grown up.

Then why haven’t they sought asylum in France? Italy? Switzerland? Germany? Belgium? Netherlands? If they’re so desperate for asylum and safety, those countries are all perfectly safe and you don’t need a boat to get there if you’re already in mainland Europe…

@AngeloMysterioso That’s already been answered on this thread. These threads are good like that, they do have a lot of information that counters the misconceptions. Possibly too much if people are having trouble finding the relevant info despite reading the thread (I bloody hope they’re reading the thread anyway!) Give me a second…

Here you go:

UNHCR info here:

“In the year ending September 2021, Germany received the highest number of asylum applicants (127,730) in the EU+, followed by France (96,510). When compared with the EU+, the UK received the 4th largest number of applicants (44, 190 – including main applicants and dependents). This equates to 8% of the total asylum applicants across the EU+ and UK combined over that period, or the 18th largest intake when measured per head of population.

Germany, France, Spain and Italy accounted for around 70% of all first-time applicants in the EU-27. These figures include all asylum applicants, not just main applicants (i.e. including children and other dependents).

World-wide around 85% of all refugees live in developing regions , not in wealthy industrialised countries, and 73% of refugees displaced abroad live in countries neighbouring their countries of origin.

That above is all from the UNHCR website.

For your second q, why the UK? Shared language - hard to get a good job in France if you don’t speak French. No job = no house, no food.

They may have a family member (this is spouse or child only) although the number of family reunion visas isn’t that high.

They may have been lied to by people traffickers (who want their money after all!) that the UK will give you free benefits and a house as soon as you arrive. When you’re in a tent in Calais that the police keep burning down, that probably sounds quite good.

I’d imagine none of those sound like good enough reasons in some people’s eyes. But the UK is a developed “rich” country and has responsibilities as a signatory to the 1951 refugee convention. And those responsibilities add up to… 8%. It’s not “overwhelming” in a numbers term, but must feel overwhelming when the government does nothing to stop places in Kent for eg being overwhelmed, does nothing to speed up asylum claims to save money on accommodation etc.

That bad feeling is all caused by government mismanagement, but they do nothing to fix it. Why?

@lameasahorse

Yes when you are fleeing for your life, maybe had your house burned down, you make sure to have all your papers carefully in your possession. Honestly I have never read anything more stupid in my life.

I have heard from a reliable source that some migrants used to destroy their papers so they couldn't be returned to where they originated from

Right. @woodhill If that happens, can you understand why some people have to do that? Let’s say (just making up some numbers for balance, I have no idea!) 50% destroy them for shits and giggles and the other 50% destroy them for a valid reason. Can you imagine what that valid reason is? (I can due to my job, but I’m curious if people with no knowledge can work it out.)

@Unphased

BewareTheLibrarians

Why don’t you care more for the people already in this country that will now be struggling with price rises, children that in poverty and haven’t had good access to education, that could go on to be plumbers etc if they had the same opportunities that are given to some migrants

But they do! In fact, they have better opportunities in the shape of free education (including free plumbing courses!), to say nothing of free health care, subsidised or free school meals, etc etc.