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.

Anyone that was in London the day of the terrorist bombs will know that the need for a system to check and know the people arriving here are safe

Aaaand there it is, the explicit racism

Three of the four bombers were born in Britain. The fourth was born in Jamaica but lived in the UK from age 5. They were not asylum seekers! They were British.

As someone whose hometown was the site of the worst terrorist attack in history, how fucking dare you use these devastating events to justify your ignorant xenophobia.

So why not add safe passage for refugees to those schemes? None of the schemes you refer to allow asylum seekers to apply from outside the UK.

Rather than looking for consensus or solutions you are a small bunch of boris bashers and its rather tiring. The polls suggest there is voter confidence and support for the new policy, it is substantial.

It is interesting that the government are 'keeping it on the table' with regards to withdrawing from ECHR.

I am not going to waste my time reposting the answers to your questions brave There are established schemes and resettlement schemes that migrants can apply to legally as you well know. PP published the latest numbers of arrivals here already. marsha posted the Australian figures as I believe she is at least partially or connected to Australia. I don't know what else you want.

We have to come up with a solution to those coming here illegally. End of.
So far Labour has not managed this, and nor has anyone on here.

Of course we would all love to end world wide poverty, but it has to be realistic

The solution to people traffickers, or at least a more likely way to prevent them, is to have legal routes for people to claim asylum before travelling or a legal pathway to allow them into the country to claim.

but that doesn’t play as nicely into the hands of the people who don’t think we should be helping others.

By voting in the government that was an active proponent of the EHCR and one of the first signatories to it. In the same way as we voted in successive governments that have signed us up to various other treaty obligations. This is basic stuff, for goodness sake. Do you seriously imagine the ECHR appeared out of nowhere and suddenly decided to start ordering us around?

The day we decide to send a signal to the rest of the world that the UK can't be trusted to comply with treaties we sign is the day we become a pariah state.

Tbh I had to look them up I’ve been in the U.K. for a while

But I was interested in whether Labor ran recently on changing the approach and I think it didn’t which suggests bi-partisan views

And I’m wondering how much we’ll see that replicated as time goes on - policies introduced and parties to the left can’t run on changing them back

Idk it’s up for discussion, but I think we’ll see more marked change due to climate over next however many years

The solution to people traffickers, or at least a more likely way to prevent them, is to have legal routes for people to claim asylum before travelling or a legal pathway to allow them into the country to claim

Can I ask you why if a migrant were in desperate need, why not stay in closer countries to their home country? Why travel half way across the world to the UK? You can be safe virtually anywhere in the world. Please enlighten me.

Oops, no, this immigration policy hasn't been heard or settled in any supreme court (and we only have one, by the way). That part of the dispute hasn't been adjudicated on yet.

Rather than looking for consensus or solutions you are a small bunch of boris bashers and its rather tiring. The polls suggest there is voter confidence and support for the new policy, it is substantial

And there we have it
There has been any number of suggestions to you about a way forward but you cherry pick who you answer and who you don't
Please link to sources that prove support for this policy is 'substantial' because nothing I see indicates that

If this ever happens, the number of Rwandans exchanged for a few asylum seekers will soon put paid to any support

This is a convenient vehicle with bi elections coming up and of course to bury partygate. Won't work

Why is it bollocks? Is our NHS not at full capacity? Or are you saying that has been a lie this whole time? (which I can believe)

We all know the vast majority of people arriving here are NOT in fact in peril, they are here to earn more money than they can elsewhere, enjoy our generous and free services and obtain free housing and crucially because we are warm and tolerant nation.

And Everyone knows it. These people have no need for resettlement schemes or are able to provide evidence of real persecution, because they are here for financial reasons.

The French often say how annoying it is, and can we please make the UK 'less attractive' is that something you are keen on?

well ignoring the fact that people will have personal reasons for deciding to travel elsewhere do you really feel it’s fair for the countries who border these places to have to take responsibility for helping everyone?

It's exactly the same number of judges as every other country involved. That's the way international organisations work.

If we withdrew from the ECHR, it has very wide ramifications, not least with the US. Pissing them off and sacrificing trade deals with them purely to pacify the more racist element of our population would be just a tad short-sighted.

personal reasons for deciding to travel elsewhere

Personal reasons?!
You are going to need evidence to back up a claim here, personal reasons will not cut it and nor should it - you can't just decide to go and live in someone else's country because you feel like it.

The polls suggest there is voter confidence and support for the new policy

Voters who have any confidence in this government clearly haven't been paying attention.😆😆😆

The Rwanda policy didn't work out for other countries, it was never going to work for the UK. It was always a big, expensive pile of shite designed to placate racists, xenophobes and put money into the pockets of friends of Tory ministers. It is the opposite of an intelligent solution.

And yet you're claiming that this policy will help with that situation. Which manifestly it will not.

@Freerangechildren Who is the @brave that you’re referring to? Can’t find them in the latest posts .
Do you mean me? Are you refusing to answer my questions while pointing me towards figures that I posted, that debunked your “hundreds of resettlement programmes” and “hundreds of thousands” of resettled people? (Where the correct answer turned about to be “about 5” and “less than 5000”?)

I also wonder if an earlier post (not mine) confused you that referenced the number of legal migrants vs the number of asylum seekers. Legal migrants are here on government-authorised visas - work visas, spouse visas, student visas etc. The numbers are controlled by the government. That number far outweighs the number of asylum seekers, and I wonder if you’re conflating these two things when you talk about “hundreds of thousands” of people.

Thanks for asking what more I want. I want people not to post false, unverified, misleading info about numbers of asylum seekers and resettlement schemes, and mistruths about asylum seekers. Then I shall rest 😊

What US trade deals? Seriously!

If we are to become actually independent it is going to involve Washington being told to keep their beaks out of our business.

You are getting a little boring now, but to keep you happy brave

14,734 people
The UK offered protection, in the form of asylum, humanitarian protection, alternative forms of leave and resettlement, to 14,734 people (including dependants) in 2021. Of these: 81% were granted refugee status following an asylum application ('asylum')

Last year's figures and it is expected to be much bigger this year.

Flippin'heck, that has been explained time and time again on here
Do you ignore certain posts because they don't fit the narrative?

Dang, the list of countries we want to have good relations with is getting really, really small.

(I'm old enough to remember when the mythical US trade deal was a major pro-brexit talking point, but hey-ho.)

Seriously people, there is no point engaging with posters who are just spamming the thread with mistruths.

As has been pointed out here, and easily googled, about 80% of asylum applications in the UK are eventually approved. That is our Home Office which is incredibly strict in these cases agreeing that they are in peril.

So when people have had this pointed out to them, and they still insist that asylum seekers are all economic migrants, they are not arguing in good faith. They are just ranting their own xenophobic beliefs. Which means there's no point arguing with them. They are impervious to facts that do not match their view of the world. It's a waste of time.

Why just Afghans and Ukrainians? Why not people persecuted in other states? Seems just a tad racist.

There were 1,311,731 visas granted in 2021, 59% less than 2019 as a result of the global pandemic, but 36% higher than 2020. Of the visas granted in the latest 12 months, 33% were for study, 31% were to visit, 18% were to work, 3% were for family, and 14% for other reasons.3 Mar 2022

And here are the other types of arrivals via visas given. So I don't think anyone can accuse us of not being welcoming!

Collectively it is a lot of arrivals no? But that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Now we should consider the number arriving illegally, not just on boats but by other means and then the picture really widens -
It is estimated a staggering and eye watering number actually:

Every year, an annual estimated average of 87,000 people become irregular migrants. They arrive in different ways and live without any official immigration status

That is every single year.

news.sky.com/story/record-migrants-cross-channel-but-numbers-are-dwarfed-by-unauthorised-people-in-uk-12383928

We all know the vast majority of people arriving here are NOT in fact in peril, they are here to earn more money than they can elsewhere, enjoy our generous and free services and obtain free housing and crucially because we are warm and tolerant nation

Lol not based on the garbage you post we are not.

As for Australia, conditions on the Island camps they were sent to involved sexual abuse, beatings, mental illness, suicide.. one poor person set themselves on fire to draw attention the cruelty of the system... and you support this.