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.

People who keep posting ' why don't they stop in the first safe country' need to

A. Read the responses in this thread

B. Just type that question into a search engine.

What you will find is the following:

• A huge percentage do stop in he first country, which is why we are way down the list in numbers received.
• English is the most widely spoken second language
• They feel safer from their pursuers or people wanting to do them harm if they are on an island
• They have relatives and friends here.
• It's hard to believe, but the UK was once thought of as a welcoming safe place, with opportunities to work and study, instead of the hate filled bigoted place it is now.
• Because they are allowed to , and if you had been through what these people have, you would want to put as much distance as you can between you and your former life.

If don't want more brown people in this country, just admit that and own your racism, don't try and dress it up as immigrants and asylum seeker being unreasonable and entitled.

@ginghamstarfish please read the article I linked to above. I’ll repost it here

https://fullfact.org/immigration/refugees-first-safe-country/

It covers a lot of the points you raised. It’s worth knowing as well that while France and Italy are doing their best (ish) they do have a shortage of housing for asylum seekers (hence the camps in part in France), they “push back” asylum seekers (physically) to the borders rather than process their claims, and there are reports of police violence including against minors. (All of these points backed up by authorities, journalists and support workers in France and Italy, not just testimony from refugees.)

So yes, safe countries for the likes of you and me, but not necessarily from an asylum seekers perspective.

Cash support
You’ll get £40.85 for each person in your household. This will help you pay for things you need like food, clothing and toiletries

Your allowance will be loaded onto a debit card (ASPEN card) each week. You’ll be able to use the card to get cash from a cash machine

Other than that, yes refugees will get accommodation costs paid, but that will line the pockets of someone else.

www.gov.uk/asylum-support/what-youll-get

@Suzi888

Asylum Seekers get £40.85 a week

www.gov.uk/asylum-support/what-youll-get

Oh I tell a lie, a pregnant woman and children 3 and under will get an extra £3-£5 per week and there is maternity grant available. Such riches.

That’s not all they get.
I’ve worked in benefits and housing for many years.
Each human costs way more than this random £40.85 figure.

What will be, will be. Resources will run out due to there being too many humans. Hopefully I’ll be king gone by then.

@Suzi888 are you thinking of refugees perhaps? When asylum seekers’ claims are granted, they become refugees.

Asylum seekers cannot access benefits.

Refugees can, as their claims have been granted and they are no longer asylum seekers.

Marsha, here are some concerns the UK had only last year.

What keep saying 'too many humans'?
What is the point of that?
Do you want a one child policy like China had until fairly recently?
Covid wiped out a fair few?

What do you want to do about 'too many humans?'

I don't think it is a valid point if you don't think you are one of the 'too many', actually.

I don't think there are too many anyway.

Half the humans on the planet consume too much. Not me, I have got mine way way below UK average and below the level indivdiuals need to be at to live sustainably on the planet - because I am not a hypocrite. I used to be a hypocrite about consumption up until about 15 years ago, then I started to get pissed off with myself.

Nothing, what can we do apart from keep housing and feeding people. I’m just saying resources are finite. The more people, the more land is needed to raise cattle and grow vegetables. Resources will run out. Perhaps not in your life time, but it will happen.

@carefullycourageous I do count myself as one of the too many. So I maintain my valid point.

What are you suggesting I do exactly? 🧐Remove myself prematurely?

I’m vegan. I don’t condone rearing deformed animals for me to eat. I wfh. I rarely use public transport, I drive rarely. I work full time, I pay my taxes, I donate to charity.

You make no sense. Your point is just... pointless. I do not agree it is valid.

If you do not think we have to tackle the 'too many' then presumably we can mitigate. If we can mitigate... there are not too many.

This is overly simplistic. In all societies as they develop the birthrate drops.

Why do you not think that will continue to happen?

There seems to be such polarised views.

If you’re concerned about the impact of immigration you’re suspected to be racist or outrightly called racist.

On the other hand, there are people who seem so detached from humanity and without a shred of empathy for asylum seekers, no doubt some will be racist and some will just have selfish ‘us first’ motives.

Its nice to read balanced realistic views that don’t rely on lazy polarised reasoning.

Brilliant!

Well, obviously. Once it's approved they can legitimately take employment and are essentially on the same footing as British citizens. But bear in mind that the system is currently very inefficient so that are regularly left for 18 months or more on £40 a week. The accommodation is often things like shared rooms in fairly squalid B&Bs and hostels, so hardly the height of luxury.

Slap Sirzy's wrist. It's actually a whole £40.85 a week. That extra 85p makes all the difference in the world.

www.gov.uk/asylum-support/what-youll-get

What, nobody can see a GP or a dentist. Hyperbole. - Not really.

And yet, when I had a problem recently I was able to see a GP on an urgent basis that day, and was referred to a specialist hospital to be seen also that day. Is it really hyperbole?

They aren't coming here illegally, they are coming as refugees. There is no rule that people must claim asylum in the first safe countries they reach - indeed, it would be unworkable as otherwise countries like Poland, Romania and Pakistan would be absolutely overwhelmed.

The point about young men has been asked and answered upthread. Why on earth do you come on a thread and claim that people "never ask" something when you haven't bothered to read it?

You wouldn't be able to live in Canada without going through their immigration processes unless you were an asylum seeker. As I assume you aren't, your point is absolutely irrelevant.

Do you really lack the imagination and empathy to put yourself in the shoes of refugees? Imagine, you've been happily settled for years, then suddenly you have to abandon everything because your town is being bombed and people are coming to rape and kill you. You have to leave everything behind. After all the risks and privations of getting out of the country, you have the opportunity to go somewhere where you already speak the language and perhaps have friends and relatives. Is it so wrong to want to opt for that?

And free accommodation so no rent or mortgage to pay, no council tax to pay, not utility bills to pay so costing the equivalent of more than the basic pension (which people have paid years of tax and NI to get) and £40.85 per week as spending money. And they have never paid into the system. I think they are pretty lucky to live in such a generous country that will give them all this even before they have had their claims actually looked at.

There is no rule that people must claim asylum in the first safe countries they reach - indeed, it would be unworkable as otherwise countries like Poland, Romania and Pakistan would be absolutely overwhelmed.

There is actually an EU rule called the Dublin Regulation that requires people to claim asylum in the first EU country they reach and that the acceptance/rejection of their asylum application then counts for all the EU. So if you are rejected by Italy, you can’t then try in Spain for example. It is to prevent asylum shopping which is a real issue and the primary reason many people seeking asylum destroy their identity documents.

I have posted it and the link to it on this thread already. As the U.K. has left the EU in 2020, this rule no longer applies to us. But as you mentioned two EU countries in your sentence- Romania and Poland- it is necessary for me to correct you. There is such a rule and it applies to Romania and Poland (and the rest of the EU).

@lonelyapple , I'm sure asylum seekers appreciate the help they get, but how lucky would you feel if, having been hounded out of the only home you have ever known, you then fetch up having to share a room with a total stranger in a hostel where you also have to share a bathroom with several more, have no control over the heating, noise levels etc, and have barely enough money to cover food?

Frankly, the way your post implies that it's disgusting that they get all of this "having never paid into the system" is quite breathtaking. Are you seriously suggesting that this means that they shouldn't get the incredibly basic help that they do get, or that it somehow makes it the height of luxury? It's hardly their fault that they haven't paid in to our system, is it - if they've been paying into their own system they've lost all the benefits of that, including things like pensions and insurance. Most would be happy to work to pay for their keep but aren't allowed to. Once given asylum, many go on to become productive, taxpaying members of society, as do their children. It's not as if you can claim the same for every British citizen, is it?

But it is irrelevant as it doesn't prevent people who have landed in, for instance, the overcrowded refugee camps of Poland from applying to the UK.