How have the court of appeal allowed the Rwanda thing to go ahead?

[rwandanothanks]

This seems extremely costly, very bad for the climate change challenge in terms of flights and staggeringly lacking in humanity.

How have the court of appeal allowed these flights to go ahead?

I guess if we rewind from the the real question is how and why on earth are our government pushing this awful idea?

Courts can only rule on matters of law. They don't decide whether something is right or moral.

If the government have done this legally then the courts can do nothing.

It's morally wrong but legally allowed

I’m not sure there is much the court can do

I feel sorry for the Rwandan government who have bent over backwards to make it welcoming for the refugees/migrants.

I can't see what's wrong with it myself. We need to stop people from risking their lives crossing the channel, stop the exploitation from the traffickers, and stem illegal economic migration. Not everyone coming here in a boat is a refugee!
Sky news showed the accommodation in Rwanda, it was clean with decent facilities, computer suites, shops etc. People are free to come and go as they wish - it's hardly a prison.

The court is there to rule on issues of law, not whether it’s a nice policy, or whether they agree with it, or whether it’s a good idea. If the policy is lawful, however unattractive, then they can’t stop it.

@ImAvingOops agreed, it all looks beautiful better then what they are being offered here I bet.

It is so morally wrong. I am appalled to live in a country that thinks this is an appropriate way to deal with people.

10, 000 people so far this year. None presumably on the list of desired occupations, or they could just apply and be welcome.

Every other thread on here is about the housing crisis, the NHS crisis, the GP shortfall. Where do you think the uninvited 10000 are going to live? Whose taxes are going to feed and clothe them? Who is going to teach them English? How are they going to work when the overwhelming majority are illiterate even in their own languages?

We have got to do something to reduce the pressure on this tiny, already overpopulated island. Discouraging the people traffickers and their dreadful trade is a start.

What, specifically, is so dreadful about Rwanda?

How have the court of appeal allowed the Rwanda thing to go ahead?

Because there is no legal reason not to. This is what courts are for. It's not a moral or political judgement, it's a statement of legal facts.

You really don’t need to, because they haven’t.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people/asylum-seekers-resettled-rwanda-eu-scheme-abandoned-poverty/

“Asylum seekers in Rwanda have said they have been left in a “traumatising” poverty-stricken limbo for years, barely able to afford clothes and constantly in fear of the country’s brutal security forces, an investigation by The Telegraph has found.”

Oh so the EU housed migrants there first? Why weren't we kicking up a fuss then I wonder?

what would be your solution then

If the courts repeatedly found against the government, then the law would be changed to make sure they could not.

Why morally wrong?

They are economic migrants trying to get into the country illegally.

We don’t have enough housing, hospital, schools, doctors or dentists for the people that are already here. What do you suggest we do with them?

news.sky.com/story/rwanda-first-glimpse-inside-the-centre-which-will-house-channel-migrants-12589911

Sky news seems to think a bit beyond the PR block....... "it's really about what we DIDN'T see"....

Looks like they are being put up much better there than they would be here.

Also we have to do something to stop the boats for safety reasons and no the answer to that is not just let everyone and anyone walk on in.

”illegal economic migrants”

Yet over 75% of asylum claims are approved meaning they are in fact real asylum seekers and not economic migrants, who don’t tend to risk their lives in dangerous boat crossings when they have other safe options.

What do you think is wrong with it?

Many of the complaints seem to be based on a real lack of understanding of Rwanda, with people thinking it’s a war zone or a desert. It’s safe, peaceful, has nice weather, and suitable infrastructure.

Get a better government that doesn’t rely on austerity for the population while lining their own pockets?

They’re busy making sure that you blame a small powerless group rather than the government in charge that could actually improve things.

Totally agree with the above. Humans are such hypocrites. Anyone who objects to the policy can offer to house, feed, educate & pay for healthcare for these 'refugees' for the rest of their lives. I am yet to hear that anyone has offered this.

This makes no sense - how can it be both a lovely experience that anyone would be happy to have and also and at the same time a deterrent that people will be so desperate to avoid that they won't consider crossing the channel?

@LondonWolf their human rights record and their treatment of LGBT+ people.

www.nationalworld.com/news/world/rwanda-human-rights-record-rwandan-genocide-gay-rights-uk-asylum-seekers-refugees-be-safe-3655117

www.gov.uk/government/publications/rwanda-country-policy-and-information-notes/country-policy-and-information-note-rwanda-general-human-rights-may-2022-accessible#human-rights-overview