Flight to Rwanda

[lbab1702]

I’d love to get a flight to Rwanda. Beautiful country and people ( I’ve been there before) but I don’t understand why refugees to the U.K. should go there.

don't trust this Government one little bit. I want the protection of ECHR thanks

Well you can kiss goodbye to that, because the one thing that will come out of this is a massive overhaul of how the law is delivered in this country.

Huh. Detained is nothing. We wrongly deported 11 people for the crime of being black and then they DIED abroad before they were able to overturn this injustice and return home to their friends and family.

There’s a lot of low key racism in having laser focus on the failures of non-white countries while ignoring the failures of rich white countries.

I am living for the parallels that people are drawing between the (current) UK and Rwanda with absolutely no awareness at all of what that means😁

”The asylum system here is just as shit as in Rwanda!”

”Police brutality here is just as bad as Rwanda!”

”Yes I’ll continue to vote conservative why are you asking?”

Yes. What is your point?

I’ve never voted Conservative in my life.

Because they don't want to deal with economic migrants any more than we do. The problem would cease immediately if they were just sent back after a bath and a good meal.

Yep, everyone I know who works in refugee and immigration law thinks his is a bad idea which will not address how the criminal gangs work. It’s going to cost us more money at a time when children and vulnerable adults are going hungry.

"This was always the plan. Create a system so obviously illegal that various bodies overrule it, then the government gets to start another Brexit war (never mind that the ECHR has nothing to do with the EU)."

Absolutely. A lovely distraction from poor government, fuel prices, food prices, economic outlook, NHS backlogs, PM lies etc.

And yes, anybody unaware of how the ECHR came into being needs to get out their history books. We had a huge role in its creation.

1. Rwanda is a beautiful country, there are many worse places to live. They are not held there, they are free to return to their home country or a third option of going to another country of their choice.

2. This may act as a deterrent and be helpful to both France AND the UK, because only official channels can be used going forward, therefore decapitating the human traffickers steady income.

3. It will hopefully mean many lives will be saved in the channel

4. It will clear our immigration centres for those that are truly vulnerable and in need

5. A policy that actually works and is efficient and has been proven to work in other countries such as Australia and Israel. I didn't hear very much protest about it there.

6. No one has an alternative.

Or ee could put them all up in AB Welby's house of course or send them to Highgrove and Buckingham Palace where PC will be only to happy to host them apparently.

‘Where are your alternative solutions to reduce channel crossings?’
They are here:
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rwanda-asylum-refugee-deal-solutions-b2060940.html?amp

And here:
refugeecouncil.org.uk/latest/news/why-the-governments-approach-to-channel-crossings-fails-people-in-need-of-protection/

And here:
www.refugee-action.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Refugee-Action-Asylum-Vision.pdf

I’ve got several more links and threads from experts I can share. Happy to share. But please don’t say there are no alternative solutions.

crackdown on criminal gangs, stronger action w France to stop boats (not 20% cuts to NCA)
This simply has never worked. The UK have poured millions and millions into France for decades now to try and tackle the gangs and it has made no difference whatsoever

France stops 100s of crossing each and every week, around 600 migrants were prevented from crossing last week.

...and of course, under EU law, we could have sent back any economic migrants, a tiny little detail brexitiers aren't too keen on acknowledging.

No idea where you get your ideas from.

Good help Jewish children if people with this sort of outlook had been around at the time of Kindertransport.

This outlook WAS there. That's why they only took the children and left their mothers and fathers to be slaughtered.

I've seen nothing that shows that flights to Rwanda will solve asylum seekers crossing the channel.

It will solve Johnson's ratings - and that is all that matters to him and his cabinet.

I think a good compromise is to do something like the Ukraine scheme where those rabidly in favour of allowing as many economic migrants/ asylum seekers as we can into the country should be the ones who sponsor them and are responsible for them.

That isn't how the Ukrainian scheme works. But then, you knew that.

This may act as a deterrent and be helpful to both France AND the UK, because only official channels can be used going forward, therefore decapitating the human traffickers steady income.

A lot of of outright nonsense in your post, but of all the fantastical crap you don’t seriously believe this bit, do you?

@Freerangechildren what official channels can someone who is seeking asylum in the UK use?

ECHR has nothing to do with the EU

Technically the ECHR is separate from the EU the institution but it is part of the court system in Europe as a whole. We were the founding members, and in fact were responsible for most of the initial human rights laws which were borrowed from our Justice system and statutes - people often forget we are a leading light in the world for law and order and human rights.

All of this was entirely expected from the hearings in our own supreme court and ECHR, and we will now see the changes need for the Rwanda policy to continue as it is the British parliament that makes the laws in the country, not Strasburg or any other institution.

@Freerangechildren - what makes you think the Israel policy was successful? Many, many people who were relocated under that policy have been shown to have almost instantly fallen back under the control of human traffickers and many were trafficked back to Europe. How does this fit with your concerns for making things safer?
www.law.ox.ac.uk/research-subject-groups/centre-criminology/centreborder-criminologies/blog/2018/10/moving-under

The NHS currently has hundreds, if not thousands, of vacancies that it can't fill. Only a very small proportion of those are for doctors.

France stops 100s of crossing each and every week, around 600 migrants were prevented from crossing last week

They do the absolute rock bottom bare minimum as we have seen from the recordings when Sky were sent there a few months ago. It is in the interests of France to get rid of as many migrants as possible...

It feels like a very costly and not very well thought out plan.

500k for an empty flight, goodness know's how much spent on security to move a few people from one place near Heathrow to an airbase in Wiltshire, millions to the Rwandan government and then very little detail on the reciprocal arrangement where we take other more 'vulnerable refugees' , who will all need housing, healthcare and access to education at some level, in return.

I wonder how much it would cost to set up somewhere in France or another European country, to process asylum applications before people arrive ? Or how much it would cost to employ more people to deal with the claims in this country so that they can be processed quicker ?

Minutes before take-off, the first flight to send asylum seekers to Rwanda was cancelled. The plane, chartered at an estimated cost of £500,000, should have left at 22:30 BST on Tuesday but by 22:15 all passengers - up to seven in total - were taken off the aircraft, and it returned to Spain. This was the result of a series of legal challenges in London courts that had been triggered after a late ruling from European Court of Human Rights - part of the Council of Europe, which still counts the UK as a member. That ruling had halted the deportation of one of the men, who raised concerns about the government’s five-year £120m trial in which some asylum seekers will get a one-way ticket to Rwanda

Great.
What a shambles of a policy, a huge waste of taxpayers money and all to be expected from this morally bankrupt government. Was this the type of policy they got drunk celebrating on their lawbreaking party Fridays?

And that's just the flight costs. According to the news this morning, the Home Office is apparently furious that this has been stopped after they've spent "millions" of pounds on it.

The reality is that they always knew it was bound to be stopped. So they quite deliberately spent millions of pounds of our money on what is, essentially, a political stunt designed to make Mail readers foam at the mouth and, they hope, come back to the fold in Tiverton and Wakefield. It's utterly corrupt.