Rwanda plan

[AdamRyan]

Was just reading Suella Bravermans thoughts on how to make the Rwanda plan work, which involve sending staff there to review claims and pulling out of all human rights and refugee conventions.

The plan has cost £140m to Rwanda so far, plus £££££ in legal fees and so far we've sent no-one and found out its illegal. I'm very baffled as to why the government are pursuing it, I keep hearing that "most people" support it. So I thought I'd ask:

IABU: It's a priority as it will deter immigration and the government should spend whatever money and time it takes to deliver this

IANBU: The government should focus time/money on other priorities instead.

Yep thats my take too.

A few 100 sent to Rwanda, many will be returned i believe, so what is the point?

So its exactly as you say, to win a GE, be the tough guy!

I doubt refugees in Libya are bothered about changes to the ECHR or UN charters and no country or Island can process the numbers there or heading that way, plus so many simply cannot be returned, either war torn or their home country refuses to accept them.

Longer term, the only real solution is to work with their home countries where possible and nearby ones where its not, the numbers are too big.

Its either than or we are heading for killing them as they attempt to cross and given what some of the right want and say, thats not a unrealistic scenario.

?

The UK could of course take 10 times more refugees next year and still have fewer migrants moving here than it did last year.

The UK could stop sellling arms around the world, might reduce the amount of instability that exists.

All the money that has been wasted on the Rwanda project could have been used to house the Asylum seekers in a complex (apparently some Pointins camps are now available), feed them, help teach those who need it English and actually process the claims quicker than the pathetic performance that we have done so far.

The problem with that plan is it reduces the profits for our donors in the hotel business.

Pontins is owned by Britannia Hotels, which is why it's kind of suspicious that they've closed 2 sites at short notice.

Mouse Face will be able to say he's stopped housing them in hotels if they're in concentration holiday camps instead.

I am sure it is what my Grandfather who underwent infantry training based out of what became Pontins in Prestatyn fought for in the 2nd World War!?!

And you can bet your life that the gammons will change the complaints from "immigrants being put up in luxury hotels" to "immigrants being sent on holiday at the seaside".

The two groups mentioned in this piece from the Migration Observatory at Oxford uni clearly stated that students and families and workers and families (many going into health and care roles) are the vast majority of immigrants. Those arriving on boats are a small minority but politically, are much more controversial.

I saw some of what Yvette Cooper said on this in the Commons earlier. ( Shadow Home Sec).
In summary she said ;

The plan will only send at best a few hundred migrants to Rwanda.
They can terminate the treaty at anytime ( Rwanda that is).
The UK will be responsible for paying for food and accommodation for 5 years per migrant in Rwanda.
The treaty has already cost £300 million.
Rwanda can send back the migrants.

I haven’t brought myself to vote Labour but Yvette Cooper speaks sense and atleast seems to be capable.

The plan is absolutely ridiculous, will cost a fortune and has more holes in it than a string vest.

This is totally a difficult problem to solve.

How do you decide on who can stay and who can’t? Many of these men have the same story as the previous man and the next man.
How do you deport the ones that fail asylum and where do you send them?

The UK can’t sustain the boat numbers coming over but Rwanda isn’t the answer.

In the interests of factual accuracy I would like to point out that the government choose to allow in over a million migrants with visas last year. Choose to. So the government must think there is space for those additional million people. Therefore logic says that there is also space for the less than 10% of that number who risk their lives crossing in small boats.

It did. But the Rwanda plan isn’t for that issue. @Paul2023 was talking about illeagal migration.

We probably need to look at dependents that arrive with some students and with some workers. That could reduce numbers drastically. Obviously net migration is around 700,000 . Of gross migration, those arriving by boat is a small, but important, minority.

We also have a lot of people who don’t want the jobs available. We have expanded our universities and now they need students who pay international fees to keep them viable. We do need to think about how we manage these issues. Not sure what Labour will do but they are likely to get voters at the next election who will demand action. Lots of Brexit voting people are Labour voters too. The “borrowed” voters will definitely want to secure our borders.

I’d imagine if you look at who votes Labour and Tory it would be fairly even with those who voted leave. Probably 50/50.
So each of those parties would have voters who were split on Brexit.

It’s a good point made though that despite Brexit , immigration is sky high and this is legal migration.This is putting aside the boats problem.

The conservatives have completely lost control and I think should just put themselves out their own misery and call a GE. Obviously they won’t though.

They were given in a once in a lifetime opportunity by Labour voters to make a success of being in government yet they completely let everyone who voted for them down.

It is entirely the government's choice how many visas to issue, I presume it is what people who voted for them wanted as well.

The UK can’t sustain the boat numbers coming over but Rwanda isn’t the answer.

Asylum seekers (including irregular arrivals) make up 7% of all immigration

The UK now has an agreement with Albania, and surprise surprise, the number of Albanians arriving via irregular means has been vastly reduced.

"Illeagal (sic) migration" is an interesting term though, isn't it?

The deal is just returning people. Is that what you’d want for other countries?

Who do you return? Do you mean someone arrives from other countries like Afghanistan, Syria etc and they are sent back

This is the person who sadly took his own life on the Bibby Stockholm yesterday

https://x.com/JacquiMckenzie6/status/1734712796577775700?s=20

Michael #Essouma is named as the young man who ended his life on the #BibbyStockholm today. A doctor from the Cameroon with over 32 peer reviewed clinical research articles, something dreadful drove this talented young man to seek a safe haven in the UK, sadly to be let down.

The government has made me feel nauseated many times over the past 13 years but watching them in parliament yesterday debating that wretched bill, absolutely detached from any sense that migrants are human beings as well, on the day this tragedy happened, was a staggering new low.

Unfortunately I include Labour, whose stance seems only to be that the Rwanda idiocy isn't competent enough and that they'll be more efficient in getting rid of those nasty migrants, in this too.

It’s interesting to see positive takes on the Albania deal

The ability to claim has dropped so low even traffickers can’t sell it in

If you want the same for other countries the likelihood of success has to be very low. So how would pp do that

Sending all back or other?

Of course Albanians should be sent back, in the vast majority, if not all cases, its a poor but relatively safe country, incomparable to Syria or Afghanistan.

Instead of praising the UK Govt, one might ask why they took so long before addressing the issue?

Addressing the root causes of x channel migration is the only way forward as Rwanda cannot deal with the numbers (max 100's per year, so little deterrent) and its simply not possible to send back to Syria/Afghanistan, even Iraq would pose difficulties, we could also do far more to assist the neighbouring countries that take in far more refugees than Europe does.

Of course Albanians should be sent back, in the vast majority, if not all cases, its a poor but relatively safe country, incomparable to Syria or Afghanistan.

If pp are asking why more deals can’t resolve it in the same way they are missing country status