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.

That’s not true. The plan is that successful claimants get to stay in Rwanda.

I don't even know why you try and engage with someone who writes dinghy invaders to be honest. They aren't going to read fact checking articles.

Quite. It’s astonishing how many people will spout off the “apply first” rubbish without engaging brains and doing a little bit of light reading. Likewise the “first safe country” myth.

It is possible (plausible?) that the Spectator looks like it is left wing from where the previous poster was stood.

Of course you have to debate and justify your position. Who has appointed you spokesperson for everyone in the UK?

You may think it’s OK for the government to try to overturn the ECHR’s and Supreme Court’s position on this particular matter, but what will you do when the government tries to do something you disagree with, and you’ve already happily signed away your protections?

As a country, we would have to be insane to say no to immigration. The NHS and care industry would collapse, as would many other industries including the service sector. We would also lose out in a big way in terms of trade and investment if businesses based abroad couldn't choose to send their staff to work in branches they establish here.

There is also a little matter of treaty obligations. If we start showing other countries that we don't keep to those, why on earth would they ever make treaties with us again?

Oh my gosh.
I find it highly offensive to compare immigration to rape, and asylum seekers to rapists.
The only thing migration and rape have in common is the Conservatives have broken the systems so neither can ge effectively addressed.

Good point!

You are wrong

The UK government has now an agreement in place with Albania

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/people-afghans-iran-afghanistan-eritrea-b2447898.html

People from Afghanistan, Iran and Eritrea together account for around four in 10 migrants who have arrived in the UK on small boats so far in 2023.
Albanians represent 4% of this year’s figure, compared with 28% last year, according to new provisional data from the Home Office.
Afghan nationals account for the single largest group of arrivals from January to October 2023, at 20% of the total.

They are followed by Iranians (11%) and Eritreans (10%).
Turkish nationals made up 2% of the total in 2022, but account for nearly 10% of arrivals in the first 10 months of 2023

Oh @DuncinToffee you say Afghans, the Tory boys say Albanians. They're all the same, aren't they?

I totally agree as a country we need immigration, but managed controlled immigration where we can vet the people coming in, import the skills we need. There are hundreds of thousands of people who would like to come here and to other western countries and the fact is we cannot welcome them all. Other EU countries are also taking a harsher line - look at the news out of Finland today.

The Rwanda debate is just a distraction from the roll out of Free Ports across the UK.

They are essentially tax havens with substantially weakened planning, environmental and labour laws.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_ports_in_the_United_Kingdom

This was the true goal of Brexit, which enabled this. Some of us are living in Free Port areas without even knowing it.

There is a different process and protections when it comes to refugees and asylum seekers so it's imprtant to distiguish between the terms refugee and immigrant.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/refugees-asylum-seekers-and-migrants/

Would that vetting include for instance an English language test?

@jgw1 my personal view is that anyone who wants to live here subscribes to British societal values and earn their place in society. It is a privilege to live here. However I don’t see a lot of that from the indigenous population right now which is why I’m off. There is no political party that represents me and quite frankly I’m sick of contributing taxes which I see wasted on failed policies every day.

So you are going to be a migrant?
But don't think refugees should come to the UK?

OK.

Well just as a different idea I work for a large hospital trust which is desperate for less skilled staff such as hcas, domestics, etc then I go into town and every cafe / restaurant / hotel / care home / agency is advertising.. why not screen the refugees properly and let those who can / want to work??
We are crying out for workers and many of the migrants do want to work.
The truth is that a lot of actual asylum seekers are from more 'middle class' backgrounds as they are the ones who get involved in political activism in their own countries, and who can afford to pay people traffickers.

I actually work with and live near a lot of foreign people who've come here for economic reasons... just one example I know one woman who left school at 11 abroad with no English, got a job as a waitress in a hotel in the uk sharing a room then learnt to speak English, got a Domestic position in the hospital, got taught written English and became an HCA achieving NVQ3 in healthcare, now she's married with a mortgage fully contributing to the economy.

There are many many other examples like that I could give.

Unfortunately I also know of a few people from abroad who are now in prison for criminal activities.. but you get good and bad in all people.

Also we have a lower birth rate and a very large elderly population to support who need their state pension propped up with taxes and they need carers.

Refugees and migrants to the uk are not a new thing.. my Nan went to school in 1930s Manchester with a class full of German & Russian Jewish refugee girls with names like Yetta & Rivka whose families had fled the pogroms & the Nazis. Their families have long since integrated.
My Nans ancestors were from the great migration of the Germans (some Jewish) of the early 1800s when the German nations were constantly in a state of war. Over
100 000 Germans settled here which was a lot for the time as the general uk population was much smaller.

Ok, I have actually said I think this country needs immigration but with the correct checks and balances but ok label me as a racist because that suits your agenda.

And yes I will be a migrant moving for a better life and have paid for the correct visa, provided a police background check, agreed to subscribe to that countries way of life and provided evidence I can support myself with no help from the state for at least 2 years.

Don't you think the asylum claim process has correct check and balances?

I do feel the public has an anti Rwanda sentiment, it is a perfectly nice country not a hell hole. We are currently housing immigrants in hotels at great cost, £7m a day? At the same time we have a terrible homeless problem and not able to help them. It is noticeable that other countries in Europe especially Germany, Italy and Poland are make a much tougher stance on refugees, so more likely to come to us.

No I think it is an absolute shit show, I think we should have processing centres in other countries as a start but I don’t pretend to have all the answers to what is a complex problem which will only get worse. Also agree with PP about granting rights to work.

If the Rwanda plan did eventually get off the ground I don't think it would be much of a deterrent.

I understand it will only involve a few hundred people in the end, so statistically any would-be migrant by boat would still think he's in with a good chance of not being sent there.

Say it's all a splendid success, the Rwandan hotels/centres fill up and there is no more capacity - what then?

Just a shame about their human rights record

The courts cited extensive evidence from the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) that Rwanda does not respect the principle of non-refoulement – a legal obligation. The UNHCR's evidence questioned the ability of Rwandan authorities to fairly assess asylum claims. It also raised concerns about human rights violations by Rwandan authorities, including not respecting non-refoulement with other asylum seekers.

We are in agreement then that the UK should have safe legal routes for refugees and asylum seekers.