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.

But for the 80% who do get their asylum approved, the support offered them post approval is much more generous than our neighbouring countries support to refugees. It is also substantially more generous than what all other immigrants to the U.K. get.

There is a definite financial incentive both to come to the U.K. and to try to do so as an asylum seeker (even if you know you don’t qualify).

@lonelyapple An excellent way for the government to save money there would be to reduce the amount of time it takes to process a claim. The target is 6 months, but some recent claims are taking 18 months - 2 years. That seems like something the government should be - but aren’t - prioritising.

They don’t have to pay council tax and utility bills, but also can’t work until their claim is approved (potentially 2 years) so are in limbo where they can’t earn money, pay into a pension or integrate into society.

Accommodation is free, but it’s a toss up whether you’ll be in a hotel or barracks. If barracks, the conditions are pretty substandard. A hotel is better but I think I would go stir crazy stuck in a hotel for 2 years in a place I hadn’t chosen, with not enough money to travel, not able to work or build a life for myself.

So, yeah. For every “Free accommodation? Lucky buggers” argument there’s the detriment to mental health argument.

What can we expect from such an elitist and corrupt government. That had to be lobbied by footballers during the pandemic to help with free school meals for the poorest children.

That were able to magic up millions for useless contracts for their cronies.

There would be enough, like there is in Germany, to help with childcare, housing, education and asylum seekers.

Please don’t blame asylum seekers for their ineptitude as leaders.

It is not “irrelevant” to correct your misinformation.

And I’m not sure what you mean by people in a refugee camp in Poland applying to the U.K. for asylum? There are very few channels to claim asylum from outside the U.K.- the Ukraine settlement scheme, the Afghan one, and the family reunion visa- these account for the minority of asylum seekers.

Most people who find themselves in a refugee camp in Poland will have to apply for asylum in Poland.

@carefullycourageous
I honestly don't care if people who are foolish enough to 'double down' do that.
I am not responsible for other people being ignorant of facts. They are being played like fools.

Then sad to say, I think you're the fool. You don't like these policies but they're driven by those people who are scared and threatened. If you help them to see how they don't need to be, and you don't do that by sneering at them, then you stand a chance of getting them to support a rational and humane immigration system. But with your attitude, I don't see anyone,being won round.

Does it matter if we give genuine refugees something approaching adequate support? They're not on a level with other immigrants because they haven't had a choice about leaving their homes.

Kind of funny that earlier in the thread talking about how can Rwanda possibly house refugees decently, I mentioned that the accommodation for refugees here is really poor- family of 5 in one bedroom, walls running with water, damp/mould, rats, exposed wires- and was roundly told off, told that refugees obviously have it much better here than they ever could anywhere else but especially in a (gasp) African country.

Yet here we are pages later and when it’s about how much does it cost to support a refugee in the U.K. the narrative gets turned on it’s head and the same posters that disagreed with me are now falling over themselves to say how little the refugees get and how, yes the accommodation is actually a bit shit.

He was reinstated. In fact he was a judge in April on Larusson v Iceland. And in May on the case Boldyrev v. Russia. And maybe more? I don't know.

And I’m not sure what you mean by people in a refugee camp in Poland applying to the U.K. for asylum? There are very few channels to claim asylum from outside the U.K.- the Ukraine settlement scheme, the Afghan one, and the family reunion visa- these account for the minority of asylum seekers.

I didn't suggest that people in refugee camps are applying for asylum.

That's very naive. They get a lot more than that, just not in physical cash.

Is it more generous than our neighbours though? Here’s Germany:

“What Benefits Do Asylum Seekers Receive In Germany?

The benefit provided to a single adult asylum seeker in Germany is €354 per month. €219 of this is intended for food, rent, clothing, health, and other personal items, and €135 is "pocket money”. This amount only applies to those who are being housed outside of an accommodation centre. Those in accommodation centres only receive €135 per month.”

So those living in accommodation centres get £10 less a week BUT clothing and essential personal items are provided. And those living outside accommodation centres get £75 a week.

One major difference is that in Germany, asylum seekers are allowed to work after 3 months which makes a huge difference to the state, as working (obviously and rightly) vastly reduces the amount of benefits they can claim.

https://immigrationlawyers-london.com/blog/benefits-rights-for-asylum-seekers-in-germany.php

Incidentally, I asked my MP to support removing the bill banning asylum seekers from working, so they could contribute to both the economy and their own lives, and he told me that it was more important to NOT allow them to work, so it didn’t become an incentive for others to come. To punish current asylum seekers in an attempt to reduce future numbers. Which sadly also denies relief to the economy.

How on earth he thought that would work I don’t know. Does he think the people smugglers give a balanced and fair view of asylum seekers rights in the UK before they take the money?

It matters in the context of figuring out why human traffickers are able to easily convince genuine refugees to risk their lives and why we have hundreds of men, women and children drowning every year trying just to get here.

And are you saying only we provide “something approaching adequate” support but no one else in Europe does? Is being the most generous really the same as being merely approaching adequate?

As I am perhaps the most recent poster who has pointed out how asylum seekers' accommodation is not the luxury some people seem to believe it is, can you point me to where in the thread you allege that I disagreed with about that?

This is what you said:
”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.”

Care to explain what you really meant? Because it reads like people…in…Poland….applying to the U.K.

What, if anything, do they get over and above what the rest of us get (e.g. NHS, free education), temporary accommodation and possible charity donations?

None of these things are directly comparable. Where, for instance, we might offer better financial support, another country may offer better education, accommodation, job opportunities, health provision etc. The point here is that some people are trying to assert that somehow asylum seekers are privileged, when manifestly they are not.

Face it, traffickers are hardly likely to tell people the truth about what they can and cannot expect. The solution to trafficking is not to reduce support but to take away the necessity, as discussed above.

excludes you. Didn’t want to name names. But one of them is definitely posting right now.

No, it reads like people who have landed in refugee camps previously applying to the UK. As has been exhaustively pointed out here, you can't apply to the UK for asylum till you get here.

Sure they are comparable. Nothing is ever 100% directly comparable. Any one leaving their home country under any circumstances is going to do a multi-factor assessment of where it is best to go. It doesn’t take a genius.

Besides, I wasn’t saying anything about reducing support, but what would be helpful is for European governments to, I don’t know, maybe collaborate in regards to refugees and negotiate a standard level of support that everyone would offer? So that financial incentives are eliminated and refugees choose destination countries based on actual ties of language, culture, religion, family. That would reduce the risk taking and asylum shopping imho.

If you want to claim asylum then the ONLY way to do that is from within the UK. That is why people are arriving in boats

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1537426451066068992.html

. I was listening to the sad story of the police man from Iran who had to flee fir his life leaving behind his family who were tortured instead.
I don't think it's going to deter desperate people at all.

@LetitiaLeghorn thank you for that reply about Lobov. I presume he was suspended initially due to the war and Russia's expulsion from the council of Europe ? Not sure if he will remain after September when Russia will cease to be a High Contracting Party to the ECHR ?

I've looked I to this story lots too

Let the posters who justify the whole thing come on here and justify THAT

Justify torture? No one is advocating for people being torture on here

Yes, @Wrongkindofovercoat, when Russia withdrew from the Council of Europe to avoid being kicked out, all Lobov's judicial work was suspended while the court considered the legal consequences of the withdrawal. I don't know when they reinstated him but he was hearing cases in April.

He's definitely standing down in September. But he's working as normal til then.