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.

"This has all been worked out, and understood, measured and it is a good deal."

So there is a clear financial assessment and evidence of cost savings? Can you link please.

£120 million? For how many and how long?

16.1 The Participants will make arrangements for the United Kingdom to resettle a portion of Rwanda’s most vulnerable refugees in the United Kingdom, recognising both Participants’ commitment towards providing better international protection for refugees

And why wouldn't we wish to do that? Highly vulnerable people, perhaps very ill or needing specialist healthcare, they are exactly the types of people we should be helping! And not the very fit and very able migrants looking for a meal ticket.

I think you consider anyone that wishes to have some control and care taken over our borders and policies to be a heartless racist tory when it could not be further from the truth. I would gladly accept the very vulnerable and I hope we can help them.

It is a trial at this stage of one thousand people, the cost has been agreed based on what you have posted and I have read, and over a life time clearly this is a good deal. You can do the maths, I don't need to do it for you! However I would say the point of the policy is deterrence. Perhaps consider that point.

So you acknowledge the reciprocal arrangements?
Any idea of how this will save us money?

21 pages and 40% of the posts are from one poster. This must be close to a forum record.

You can't provide a clear costs assessment because there isn't one. Or if there is one it's well hidden. Wonder why.

You are welcome sleepless 😉
Although you are running a close second...

I have got covid what is your excuse?

21 pages and 40% of the posts are from one poster. This must be close to a forum record

It must be almost like a full time job😀

So somehow we have absorbed almost 15 million people.

You do know that populations increase for reasons other than immigration ? What with you being on a site called Mumsnet ?

Having covid is not a full time job the last time I checked lonely sadly for me. Thanks for your get well wishes.

The ratio of women having children has declined year in and year out wrong so extra births is definitely not the reason. If anything our birth rates are plummeting.

The birth rate in 1968 was 2.6 in the UK, it is now 1.7

The ratio of women having children has declined year in and year out wrong so extra births is definitely not the reason.

You believe that the gradual increase in population size over the last 50 years is entirely down to immigration ? People having babies has played absolutely no role in the increase ? And don't quote the first time since 1976 , 2021 figures at me where deaths have outnumbered births, because I think most people can figure out the reason for that anomaly !

There's a little matter of the Abba party which no-one has investigated yet, for reasons no-one can fathom. How long would it take to investigate that? To say nothing of the Parliamentary standards investigation into Johnson's repeated lies to Parliament.

There is support for the policy, which is precisely why Johnson is making such a big thing of it and throwing all that money at it. He sees it as the only way to win the Wakefield by election.

That doesn't change the fact that it's an immoral and cruel policy which anyone with a brain cell or two can see won't achieve what he claims it will. And he knows that perfectly well. He is, quite simply, operating a cynical con trick on his supporters.

It's been pointed out, but you ignore, that there are only three resettlement schemes and that it is not possible to apply for asylum from outside the country. Details of the research showing the ineffectiveness of the Australian scheme have been posted, but you choose to ignore that too. It's a pretty obvious and recurrent theme with you.

That one's already been answered several times, as you well know. You're yet again ignoring the inconvenient stuff, and revealing yet again that you have no response to the realistic solutions to trafficking that people have offered.

The NHS's main problem at the moment is short staffing, having lost so many people due to Brexit. It could really do with more immigration, not less.

@AmaryIlis I agree with you about the support and the policy being an attempt to win the Wakefield by-election.

Sending people to a country where there was a genocide in recent memory.

And you do know, don't you, that if they can't establish that they genuinely qualify for asylum, they don't qualify for any services or housing? I know the Mail likes to perpetuate the myth that illegal immigrants get councils queueing up to offer them free houses, luxury cars and mahoosive TVs, but surely we don't need to perpetuate it on here?

If you need to apply for asylum, you are allowed to apply to the country where, for instance, you already have ties and sources of support, or where you already know the language.

That'll work well ...

Even Boris isn't stupid enough to try that.

A significant reason for our increasing population is that people are living longer. Even if everyone had 2 children, the population would continue to grow.

It is not every country in the world for starters. Right now we seem quite happy to admit Ukrainians. In 5 years time it will be different countries to those seeking asylum now. At no time did I state that this was a matter for just the uk to solve, but the uk has stopped doing its bit just like the USA , and that is not helping. Some actions to improve the situations in countries people flee from do not have to cost billions. And beside the Rawanda scheme is not exactly good value for money- it is costing an outrageous amount of money
You have to fix the root cause or the problem will never go away…threatening people will not work

Exactly.

So not all economic migrants, as you claimed.

From full fact: There is some UK domestic law which allows the government to refuse to consider an asylum application if it is judged that the person could have claimed asylum elsewhere. Refugees who arrive in the UK after passing through another EU country can, under certain circumstances, also be returned to the first EU country they entered, under an EU law known as the Dublin Regulation.