WTAF? Asylum seekers to be detained across the UK in shock Rwanda operation

[Tenmus]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/28/home-office-to-detain-asylum-seekers-across-uk-in-shock-rwanda-operation

"The Home Office will launch a surprise operation to detain asylum seekers across the UK on Monday in preparation for deportation to Rwanda, weeks earlier than expected, the Guardian understands.
Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices and will also pick people up nationwide in a two-week exercise.

They will be immediately transferred to detention centres, which have already been prepared for the operation, and held to be put on later flights to Rwanda. Others identified for these flights are already being held."

I am actually shocked by this. A cruel, inhumane action with terrible optics and a colossal waste of money.

You do know that the massive numbers of legally admitted immigrants are not solely from the Ukraine and Hong Kong, don't you?

🙌

What a great idea. If anybody else is looking for a refugee charity that directly benefits refugees you could do much worse than the Lesbian Immigration Support Group https://lisg.uk

Yes that will be good when the country becomes like the third world they are all trying to flee from

Again, these are not asylum seekers and they are irrelevant to this discussion.

You sound a lovely person

People in Calais are already well aware of this. It is doing fuck all to deter people from getting into boats.

Oh dear. If only we had had another government in control for the last 14 years that could have reversed that.

The people who may be detained with a view to deportation next week have already had legal challenges to being deported to Rwanda heard? And the challenges to the obvious problems with the legislation passed last week have also already been dealt with? Do tell how that happened.

What a sophisticated argument in response to statements of facts that you find inconvenient.

Not actually true of either town.

And, again, utterly irrelevant to the fact that that point was made specifically in response to a poster claiming that all asylum seekers end up in the UK,

Do try reading posts properly before you respond to them.

They semi-reversed it by providing that asylum seekers who had been waiting for a decision for over 12 months could apply for the right to work which would be granted but limited to shortage occupations.

Then they went further than that by slashing the right of appeal for most immigration cases, shitting all over legal aid so that there are now swathes of the country which are legal aid deserts, ruining the public sector so that waiting for more than 12 months for a decision is now the norm rather than the exception, and spaffing any supposed savings up the wall on a colonialist wank-fantasy about Rwanda.

I think the Tories' immigration policies have been appalling, but I have worked in immigration law for 25 years and the hostile environment began with Labour (though they had enough sense not to actually call it that) and specifically with Blunkett. Obviously the Tories didn't have to adopt those policies so enthusiastically and run with them, but I don't think anybody expected otherwise.

Not only - but countries we helped rip apart. Let’s be honest.

You are missing the point. This was posted in response to the claims of some posters that all our problems in industries that are very short on staff will be solved by forcing all benefit claimants back to work. It is therefore highly relevant to take into account that a very hefty proportion of those claimants are people on state pensions who, with the best will in the world, aren't going to be rushing into employment.

Do you know what the word "allow" means? If someone is allowed to do something but doesn't have to, they can't claim to be being exploited. The fact of paying tax here self-evidently would not give them any extra right to remain here, any more than it does for the mass of legal migrants who work here.

OMG. I might even vote Tory now. Go Sunak!

I’ve not seen any. Can you name one? There’s always comments on safer routes but that is not an alternative to the Rwanda plan.

It really is incredibly difficult to claim asylum on that basis, as you have to establish a credible reason for believing you will be in danger if your return to your country - which is kinda difficult to do if your ID has no past history in that country. If they have enough money to set up a credible back story then they're unlikely to have any wish to leave anyway as money overcomes an awful lot of problems, especially in poorer countries.

As for "tactics used by lawyers" - you mean using the law? The Home Office has nothing to fear from that if it is complying with the law itself.

Oh, this is special.

Can you show me in the Immigration Rules where a person can apply for leave to remain on the basis of an "exploitative arrangement" where such exploitation is said to be legal working?

It is theoretically possible for someone to get leave to remain if they have been trafficked into exploitative labour - i.e. enslaved - AND they meet other criteria such as they are willing to give evidence in court about their traffickers. Is it your position that lawful employment amounts to trafficking? I've heard more coherent arguments from freemen on the land

At a stroke you have demonstrated that you know nothing about this. No, that is not why they are in the system for years. People working in this field will tell you that they have asylum claimants who are waiting years just to have their applications processed. These are people who really don't want to be on benefits and who would love to be working and contributing to the country but are not able to do so because the process is so painfully slow.

You think we have had an efficient asylum processing system for years? With every respect, you're massively deluded.

Of course it’s not going to deter them immediately. It will be a slow realisation until the planes actually take off. After all this has been toing and fro for months due to legal challenges, which have now been exhausted. Sunak is reacting to the majority of the UK population who want the boats to stop. IMO it’s too little too late, and shouldn’t have taken so long to implement a solution.

Asylum seekers are fingerprinted, so using a different ID will lead only to custody for false documents, a likely 12 month prison sentence, and then automatic deportation.

I'm not sure what you mean by "tactics used by lawyers."

We've granted asylum to many people from safe countries. The system is broken.

Why don't you check the facts before slinging accusations around? We have committed to taking what is described as "a portion of Rwanda’s most vulnerable refugees". Given that Rwanda has rather a lot of vulnerable refugees from the Congo whilst they are taking a maximum of 300 (and, face it, we all know that 300 are not going to be deported in practice) if anything we will be taking more than a 1:1 ratio.

As for why we are paying so much, we doing it solely because Sunak has this lunatic perception that it will save his skin in any election. It won't, of course, because actually the British electorate is not as cruel as the current government would like to believe. So the reality is we're paying it for nothing. Wouldn't you prefer those millions to go into the NHS, care system, police, justice system, and education?