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?

Oh behave!

@HardbackWriter , the deterrent is that they won't get to stay in the UK, so no point in paying traffickers or risking their lives to get here.
We can't just keep on letting tens of thousands of people cross illegally into the country!

But still presumably safer than the country they have fled from. As PP has said, if we say France isn’t a safe country then where on earth is other than the UK?

Are you really saying we should just let them pick whichever country sounds nicest? Sounds a bit choosy for people supposedly fleeing for their lives.

Why is it immoral? Genuine asylum seekers should seek asylum in the first safe country, which is not the UK.

Genuine asylum seekers are entitled under internaitional law to seek asylum in ANY safe country. 'First safe country' is an internal EU rule and nothing to do with the UK.

They could be used to reduce numbers if that’s what the government wanted to do, yes.

They would also mean asylum seekers would be spread more evenly around the UK, to councils that weren’t overwhelmed. As they government doesn’t currently have any functioning resettlement schemes for the Middle East, this has increased the number of boat crossings, which means the burden falls on places like Kent to house people. That’s completely unsustainable for Kent and its residents.

It’s within the government’s control to reduce the strain on Kent, but they don’t seem willing.

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.

Is it? I thought these refugees were being sent to Rwanda as a deterrent, to stop boatloads of them trying to cross the Channel.

If Rwanda is actually marvellous, won't that be counterproductive and encourage more in Calais to come here to get that free plane to Rwanda?

Isn't the whole point of this grubby little exercise that Rwanda is not a good place to be sent to?

Absolutely they should be allowed to seek asylum in a country of their choice, why shouldn't they?

If they come to the UK and their asylum claim is unsuccessful then they will be repatriated, but they should absolutely be able to request asylum wherever they choose.

Why shouldn't refugees go to countries where they already have relatives that are willing to house? Is it one rule for taking in refugees for the richest countries in the world and another for poor ones who already have to house millions of them?

The naivety !! You assume they are coming to stay with relatives ! Wake up, we have a massive housing crisis in this country, do you really think we can sustain this level of migration??

Unbelievably cruel act of an already disgraceful government.

Priti Patel was on Question Time a few years ago saying how she wanted to bring back hanging.

It’s on YouTube for all to see and I’m surprised more people don’t know about it. She’s the Home Secretary. It wouldn’t surprise me if she tried to bring back the death penalty if they win then next election.

@MongoOnlyPawnInGameOfLife Do you think children should stay in a country where they get beaten by the police? Did you read the rest of that Twitter thread I posted (TW rape)? Do you think their only alternative should be to go back (how?) to a country they’ve had to leave for their own safety?

The “young men of fighting age” trope again!

I know. It's like people are being deliberately obtuse. We see it in Ukraine, young men of fighting age either being rounded up and murdered or forceably conscripted and used as cannon fodder by the Russians. And yet people apparently can't understand why families put every penny they have into getting their sons out of conflict zones.

I hope the people being sent to Rwanda have fully completed their vaccinations as recommended by the Goverment for other travellers to the country ?

Has anyone found out how many vulnerable refugees from Rwanda we are taking in return ?

So let's make safer legal routes to claiming asylum! Not make it so that the ONLY way to claim asylum in the UK for most people is to enter illegally.

Well it's almost impossible to apply legally to the UK so how are people to be checked? .

I would think it a great idea if we applied a little retrospection and sent some of the people who shunned closer safer countries to come here in the past, you know like Print Patels parents.

Bewarethelibrarians it doesn't sound like those schemes actually reduce the numbers. Wouldn't we just be creating additional routes which bring in the same people (but more of them would be "legal") while others still cross on boats?

As to Kent, I agree these areas bear a disproportionate burden short-term but spreading a big volume of migrants around the UK every year doesn't address the longterm infrastructure issues people are raising.

12 year of a Conservative government but blame refugees

@lollipoprainbow One of the asylum seekers getting sent to Rwanda tonight is a 19 year old who has a sister settled in the UK (confirmed by his lawyers). Rather than house him with his sister, they are sending him to Rwanda.

This is what you’re cheering on. But as long as you’re ok! And when they’re done with the asylum seekers and come for the disabled people, slash benefits for carers, slash SEN budgets for children with autism,
you’ll wish that someone had stood up against this shit.

But they would reduce the power of the people traffickers. So those who are found to have a claim for asylum can begin to build a life here and those who aren't successful can be sent back home. Every single refugee that I have met actively wants to work, support themselves and contribute to society. Can only be good for the UK.

@DuncinToffee Wait, 19 yr old asylum seekers don’t control our housing market? They’re not the ones giving the directors of housing companies multi million pound bonuses? Maybe the Iranian policeman who was tortured for refusing to shoot unarmed protesters is the one who’s really forcing the government to not make rental properties for for human habitation? God Lord my mind is blown!! 😉

If they are seeking asylum and fleeing from war torn countries surely anywhere has to be better than what they fled from and left behind? There also has to be some sort of deterrent to stop the trafficking that is going on, if it's not so appealing to get your pick of where you want to go hopefully people will stop trying to cross the channel.

No, but I know that France is a safe country in terms of international agreements on refugees. It’s why we don’t accept refugee applications from French people fleeing France.

You aren’t going to be taken seriously if you are claiming that France is not a safe country; it just suggests that your objections are not reality-based.

Yes sorry, silly me, I got confused with Russian oligarchs...

“Come on son, I know your house got destroyed and your relatives killed, but here you’re only homeless! And you only get beaten by the police a few times month! Can’t keep whinging all your life!”

Absolutely agree - we are often talking about Syrian doctors or engineers for example

people with families, houses, careers and lives who had to give it up due to war

and many are a damn sight more educated and literate than folk here

what an ignorant statement by that pp

You are coming across as unhinged there. They will “come for the disabled” if you and your dippy friends don’t stop this program?

It’s weird how you seem able to view the UK as some sort of human rights black hole yet want to have your chosen people come to live here.