VISIT RWANDA

Many interesting points arising from this thread

1. Migrants are heading for Ireland in numbers, so the deterrent factor of Rwanda is already significant despite the Irish government and the Labour party saying it is no deterrent.

2. Leaving the EU has given the UK freedom to make its own decisions regarding the treatment of migrants. If it were not for the Tory in-fighting and the lefty looney lawyers, a policy could have been introduced some time ago to mitigate the movement of migrants to the UK

3. The EC is as clueless about solving the migrant issue as it is about everything else. It attempted to create an EU wide policy for taking in migrants but yet again can't reach any kind of consensus with the Eastern countries. The EC has ordered members to take a prescribed number with heavy fines and enforcement for those who refuse. Amazingly, after criticising the UK's Rwanda programme, Ursula VDL is now promoting the use of third party countries to take and process migrants.

4. Ireland is now in crisis because it insists on having no effective border with the UK. Therefore, it can't stop unwanted immigrants entering the country across the Irish Sea.

5. Ireland is to push ahead with legislation to return immigrants to the UK. However, unless the UK agrees to take them back, there is no legal basis for the forced deportation of migrants. A perfect opportunity for the UK to agree to the return of migrants if, and only if, France also agrees to take them back.
 
Last edited:
tommytwojags said:
Many interesting points arising from this thread

1. Migrants are heading for Ireland in numbers, so the deterrent factor of Rwanda is already significant despite the Irish government and the Labour party saying it is no deterrent.

2. Leaving the EU has given the UK freedom to make its own decisions regarding the treatment of migrants. If it were not for the Tory in-fighting and the lefty looney lawyers, a policy could have been introduced some time ago to mitigate the movement of migrants to the UK

3. The EC is as clueless about solving the migrant issue as it is about everything else. It attempted to create an EU wide policy for taking in migrants but yet again can't reach any kind of consensus with the Eastern countries. The EC has ordered members to take a prescribed number with heavy fines and enforcement for those who refuse. Amazingly, after criticising the UK's Rwanda programme, Ursula VDL is now promoting the use of third party countries to take and process migrants.

4. Ireland is now in crisis because it insists on having no effective border with the UK. Therefore, it can't stop unwanted immigrants entering the country across the Irish Sea.

5. Ireland is to push ahead with legislation to return immigrants to the UK. However, unless the UK agrees to take them back, there is no legal basis for the forced deportation of migrants. A perfect opportunity for the UK to agree to the return of migrants if, and only if, France also agrees to take them back.
Click to expand...

Perhaps we can cut the middleman (UK) out and ask the Irish to ship them straight back to France.... Simples innit! 😆
 
Wizaard said:
Yet the Vice Chair of Reform, the party of your choice, in answer to the question 'Would you leave refugees to drown in the Channel?' Replied 'Absolutely', and has doubled down on it since.

Is that acceptable from our politicians? Especially from one who is of immigrant descent?
Click to expand...
Probably frustrated in response to constant silly hypotheticals of people keeping slashing their 2nd or 3rd dinghy and throwing themselves into the water and expecting to be saved constantly. It's not official policy.

However it's a bit natural selection isn't it from those who do it as there no guarantee they'd could be saved in time anyway.

Labour's answer to the boats will be to let them all in via 'safe routes', let's let in people where some will, as has been shown, go on to murder or harm multiple people. That's not a kind policy or one that most in this country want.
 
JJpool said:
Probably frustrated in response to constant silly hypotheticals of people keeping slashing their 2nd or 3rd dinghy and throwing themselves into the water and expecting to be saved constantly. It's not official policy.

However it's a bit natural selection isn't it from those who do it as there no guarantee they'd could be saved in time anyway.

Labour's answer to the boats will be to let them all in via 'safe routes', let's let in people where some will, as has been shown, go on to murder or harm multiple people. That's not a kind policy or one that most in this country want.
Click to expand...
Natural selection. Nice. Ironically, those best equipped to survive will be the young, fit, healthy ones you say aren't really asylum seekers.
 
Wizaard said:
Natural selection. Nice. Ironically, those best equipped to survive will be the young, fit, healthy ones you say aren't really asylum seekers.
Click to expand...
I see now why you randomly replied to an old post, clearly trying to attack the point at someone who said they support Reform.

I've not said I'd go along with it, infact i said anoyoe slashing a boat is an attempted murderer, but we also can't be bullied by threats of self harm.

Just pick them up and take them back.

If doing ridiculously dangerous things like this, like jumping into the water if you can't swim and expecting someone else to save you, isn't an example of natural selection then what is.

I might threaten to jump off a cliff unless I'm given a million pounds, let's hope there's no heartless buggers out there and that I receive payment soon.
 
JJpool said:
Labour's answer to the boats will be to let them all in via 'safe routes', let's let in people where some will, as has been shown, go on to murder or harm multiple people. That's not a kind policy or one that most in this country want.
Click to expand...

Plus there's the rather fundamental point that letting some in via "safe and legal" routes (which we already do BTW), won't stop those that can't get in from taking the unsafe and illegal routes that they are already using.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Plus there's the rather fundamental point that letting some in via "safe and legal" routes (which we already do BTW), won't stop those that can't get in from taking the unsafe and illegal routes that they are already using.
Click to expand...
What are the safe and legal routes for somebody from say Sudan or Iran to claim asylum in the UK?
 
Lost Seasider said:
Plus there's the rather fundamental point that letting some in via "safe and legal" routes (which we already do BTW), won't stop those that can't get in from taking the unsafe and illegal routes that they are already using.
Click to expand...
The fundamental point is that this Government has closed all the safe and legal routes, deliberately manufacturing an illegal boom to make political capital out of it.
 
At the end of the day there is one simple answer that will resolve this issue overnight so why aren’t we going down this path?

Any refugees picked up mid channel by our Border Force or Coast Guard are returned to France plain and simple.

Any refugees that do sneak through and make it to our shores then round them up and take them straight back to France.

Saves on wasting huge sums of money on Rwanda and saves huge sums of money on putting these people up in hotels but most importantly it’s an humane way and the message will soon get across to the people coming here and numbers will soon drop off.

Why is it so difficult to implement the most simple things in life? 🤷‍♂️
 
We should have a team, Army, Navy whatever, ready to seize the boats which bring them across the Channel.
Take them back, drop them off and keeps the boats.
Why aren't the French living up to their promise of stopping the immigrants?
 
Jaffa_The_Hut said:
At the end of the day there is one simple answer that will resolve this issue overnight so why aren’t we going down this path?

Any refugees picked up mid channel by our Border Force or Coast Guard are returned to France plain and simple.

Any refugees that do sneak through and make it to our shores then round them up and take them straight back to France.

Saves on wasting huge sums of money on Rwanda and saves huge sums of money on putting these people up in hotels but most importantly it’s an humane way and the message will soon get across to the people coming here and numbers will soon drop off.

Why is it so difficult to implement the most simple things in life? 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
Because the French won't take them back, and unless you're planning on restarting the hundred years war, there's not a great deal we can do about that.


Davepick said:
We should have a team, Army, Navy whatever, ready to seize the boats which bring them across the Channel.
Take them back, drop them off and keeps the boats.
Why aren't the French living up to their promise of stopping the immigrants?
Click to expand...
Because they don't want them either.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Because the French won't take them back, and unless you're planning on restarting the hundred years war, there's not a great deal we can do about that.



Because they don't want them either.
Click to expand...
We’re paying them £500m already for doing what exactly?

Just give them a bit more from the Rwanda budget it will work. 💴 💰
 
Sven said:
Does the lack of an agreement with the EU not exacerbate the problem?

People keep saying send them back to France.
Click to expand...
Not really.

What used to happen was they (other EU states) would grant them asylum or some other settled status, at which point they'd use the EU's freedom of movement to come over here entirely legally and there was nothing we could do about it.

At least outside the EU, we have the option to ship them off to Rwanda, hence why a lot of them have suddenly decided that the UK isn't as attractive after all.
 
You do know that the Pottinger family were a vital cog in anything unsavoury and perfidious regarding the British establishment over the centuries, and have been involved in a catalogue of scandals around the world. They make a compelling case for the theory that some families are genetically evil.

Piers Pottinger is a particularly nasty little scrote whose firm (Bell Pottinger) laundered reputations for countries involved in accusations of human rights violations, and has done PR for a host of despicable despots and tyrants. Nothing is morally off limits for this fella, he will literally do anything for money. Do a bit of research on him perhaps.

So, excuse me if I don`t give a f*** what he has to say about anything...;)
 
Lost Seasider said:
Have you?
Click to expand...
Yes. I do voluntary work in a refugee centre in C London attached to a french Catholic church. I do half a day a week at one of the two drop ins per week.
Asylum seekers receive about £49.50 per week per person for food in the form of vouchers plus their accommodation. If meals are provided in an hotel then they get they are given around £9 per week on top They are not entitled to other state benefits. So they have v little money for travel other expenses.
My experience in meeting the ones I see is that if they get refugee status they are seeking a safe and acceptable place to live and a job. Not to live on benefits. The centre provides support and English classes as obviously if their English is poor they'll have difficulty getting work. If they get refugee status the HO will ask them to leave their accomodation within 3 or 4 weeks. Some may have to sleep on the streets. I dont think they do benefit shopping , whatever that is. They are likely to gravitate to places where they might already know someone. But they may be moved around by the HO.
The backlog of applications for refugee status was recently around 83,000 applications. This plus the lack of housing provision in the UK has meant there has been all the expense of providing hotel accommodation.
The Bibby Stockholm barge has cost a small fortune plus the mooring charges are considerable. The Government has probably paid around £400 million pounds to Ruanda. Even if this scheme achieves its wildest expectations of 2000 people being deported to Ruanda then thats at least £200, 000 per person.
.
 
Lost Seasider said:
What used to happen was they (other EU states) would grant them asylum or some other settled status, at which point they'd use the EU's freedom of movement to come over here entirely legally and there was nothing we could do about it.

At least outside the EU, we have the option to ship them off to Rwanda, hence why a lot of them have suddenly decided that the UK isn't as attractive after all.
Click to expand...
Can the people you describe use the EU’s freedom of movement?

I thought asylum seekers were subject to some restriction on movement and settled status wouldn’t necessarily bring freedom of movement. I don’t think it was as easy as you imply.

I’m an expat in Sweden and I don’t get freedom of movement until I have lived there five years and eligible for citizenship.
 
spudgun said:
You do know that the Pottinger family were a vital cog in anything unsavoury and perfidious regarding the British establishment over the centuries, and have been involved in a catalogue of scandals around the world. They make a compelling case for the theory that some families are genetically evil.

Piers Pottinger is a particularly nasty little scrote whose firm (Bell Pottinger) laundered reputations for countries involved in accusations of human rights violations, and has done PR for a host of despicable despots and tyrants. Nothing is morally off limits for this fella, he will literally do anything for money. Do a bit of research on him perhaps.

So, excuse me if I don`t give a f*** what he has to say about anything...;)
Click to expand...
Are you talking to me?

I've no idea who the guy is it's a clip discussing Rwanda...
 
Jaffa_The_Hut said:
France Germany and Italy (the big 3) insisted that the EU member countries would except these illegal immigrants long before we left and when most of the other smaller nations were against it.

Now these 3 are all moaning they’ve taken more than their fair share FFS.

You just couldn’t make this sort of stuff up you really couldn’t.
Click to expand...
``except``??
 
Satriale's Pork Store said:
Extensive sponsorship at Arsenal....

Can't be all that bad a place to go and visit.

We don't see adverts to visit Gaza or Damascus after all?

Surely then, should therefore be ok for refugees fleeing their homelands in fear of their lives?

Crack on Rishi lad! 😜👍
Click to expand...
1243648934057324705.gif


I don't see what all the fuss was about, infact it all seemed a bit wrong to be shitting on an African country just because.

It's meant to be safer than London and they take tackling crime seriously.
 
It's all a complete load of bollux and a waste of time and money.

Boats will continue, migrants hide and the cost of one way tickets to Africa or wherever becomes astronomical.

The UK needs to live with the times and issue ID cards. No ID card, no hospital, no school, no job. Some will still come, others apply for asylum before entry, but most won't try. Existing illegal migrants offered an air ticket to wherever if they fail the application.

I don't like ID cards and I'm OK with asylum seekers who have a genuine case, but I don't see any other choice.
 
Sven said:
Can the people you describe use the EU’s freedom of movement?

I thought asylum seekers were subject to some restriction on movement and settled status wouldn’t necessarily bring freedom of movement. I don’t think it was as easy as you imply.

I’m an expat in Sweden and I don’t get freedom of movement until I have lived there five years and eligible for citizenship.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think it is unlikely that achieving refugee status in an EU country would give you Freedom of Movement. You. would almost certainly need nationality of the country and that is unlikely to come with refugee status until you have spent more time in the country . You wouldn't have a passport I dont suppose. If you have refugee status here you can apply for a travel document to permit foreign travel. But to get Nationality you need to wait until you have Indefinite Leave to Remain for at least 1 year , have lived in the UK for 5 years , pass B1English test etc. Obviously if you've achieved refugee status eg in France you cant claim it here. And if someone gets refugee status eg in France they wouldn't have an obvious reason to come here.
Since Brexit it seems there are far more boat crossings plus the backlog of asylum applications is over 80,000 , or was until recently.
 
ElBurroSinNombre said:
What are the safe and legal routes for somebody from say Sudan or Iran to claim asylum in the UK?
Click to expand...
Zero. There is currently a film shown in some cinemas in London, " Io Capitano", which is the story of 2 16 year old boys from Senegal who pay various people to transport them via Libya to Italy. A tough film to watch as once they get to Libya they may be imprisoned and tortured, even before the boat journey. Though no doubt doesnt happen to everyone.
 
Sven said:
Can the people you describe use the EU’s freedom of movement?

I thought asylum seekers were subject to some restriction on movement and settled status wouldn’t necessarily bring freedom of movement. I don’t think it was as easy as you imply.

I’m an expat in Sweden and I don’t get freedom of movement until I have lived there five years and eligible for citizenship.
Click to expand...
From the Telegraph: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/01/ireland-migrant-crisis-dublin-france-nigeria/

I spoke to a 27-year old Nigerian who told me he arrived at the IPO this week under circumstances which were rather different. He says he felt unsafe in Nigeria after the farm he worked on in the north of the country had been attacked by “bandits” in 2022. A French NGO worker in Nigeria helped him to board a plane to Paris and obtain a French passport, but advised him to travel on to Ireland. The Irish government says the handful of visas it has issued to Nigerians in recent months can’t account for the thousands which have arrived. But this young man’s case suggests many of these asylum seekers could indeed be coming from Europe.

Different rules in different countries, perhaps, but once they get the passport they can travel on to Ireland, and whether they're entitled to free movement or otherwise, there's precious little Ireland can do about it anyway.
 
Lost Seasider said:
From the Telegraph: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/01/ireland-migrant-crisis-dublin-france-nigeria/

I spoke to a 27-year old Nigerian who told me he arrived at the IPO this week under circumstances which were rather different. He says he felt unsafe in Nigeria after the farm he worked on in the north of the country had been attacked by “bandits” in 2022. A French NGO worker in Nigeria helped him to board a plane to Paris and obtain a French passport, but advised him to travel on to Ireland. The Irish government says the handful of visas it has issued to Nigerians in recent months can’t account for the thousands which have arrived. But this young man’s case suggests many of these asylum seekers could indeed be coming from Europe.

Different rules in different countries, perhaps, but once they get the passport they can travel on to Ireland, and whether they're entitled to free movement or otherwise, there's precious little Ireland can do about it anyway.
Click to expand...
That quote leaves more questions than answers.

How did someone from a French NGO get a Nigerian a “French passport”?

Why would someone who already has a French passport need to claim asylum?

Why Ireland? How did he get there? What are his plans?

I’d expect the journalist quoted to question the circumstances of this chap’s arrival as it doesn’t add up.
 
Sven said:
That quote leaves more questions than answers.

How did someone from a French NGO get a Nigerian a “French passport”?
Click to expand...
Who knows, €€€€€ maybe, but that's not evidence that he didn't.


Sven said:
Why would someone who already has a French passport need to claim asylum?
Click to expand...
He doesn't, and neither does anyone else who makes it to France, or indeed anywhere in the EU, but that doesn't mean that he can't, and presumably he'll destroy his passport and claim he came in through another route.


Sven said:
Why Ireland? How did he get there? What are his plans?
Click to expand...
Asylum/benefit shopping?


Sven said:
I’d expect the journalist quoted to question the circumstances of this chap’s arrival as it doesn’t add up
Click to expand...
Presumably there's only so much an illegal migrant is willing to disclose, and only so far that you can question him.


Edit:
From my original post:
The Irish government says the handful of visas it has issued to Nigerians in recent months can’t account for the thousands which have arrived.
Click to expand...

So they're definitely coming from somewhere, and presumably not just over the border from NI.
 
Always tangerine said:
Yes. I do voluntary work in a refugee centre in C London attached to a french Catholic church. I do half a day a week at one of the two drop ins per week.
Asylum seekers receive about £49.50 per week per person for food in the form of vouchers plus their accommodation. If meals are provided in an hotel then they get they are given around £9 per week on top They are not entitled to other state benefits. So they have v little money for travel other expenses.
My experience in meeting the ones I see is that if they get refugee status they are seeking a safe and acceptable place to live and a job. Not to live on benefits. The centre provides support and English classes as obviously if their English is poor they'll have difficulty getting work. If they get refugee status the HO will ask them to leave their accomodation within 3 or 4 weeks. Some may have to sleep on the streets. I dont think they do benefit shopping , whatever that is. They are likely to gravitate to places where they might already know someone. But they may be moved around by the HO.
The backlog of applications for refugee status was recently around 83,000 applications. This plus the lack of housing provision in the UK has meant there has been all the expense of providing hotel accommodation.
The Bibby Stockholm barge has cost a small fortune plus the mooring charges are considerable. The Government has probably paid around £400 million pounds to Ruanda. Even if this scheme achieves its wildest expectations of 2000 people being deported to Ruanda then thats at least £200, 000 per person.
.
Click to expand...
The rental on the Stockholm Bibby has been 5 times what it would have been to buy it. Follow the money. We're being scammed.
 
Sounds
Lost Seasider said:
From the Telegraph: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/01/ireland-migrant-crisis-dublin-france-nigeria/

I spoke to a 27-year old Nigerian who told me he arrived at the IPO this week under circumstances which were rather different. He says he felt unsafe in Nigeria after the farm he worked on in the north of the country had been attacked by “bandits” in 2022. A French NGO worker in Nigeria helped him to board a plane to Paris and obtain a French passport, but advised him to travel on to Ireland. The Irish government says the handful of visas it has issued to Nigerians in recent months can’t account for the thousands which have arrived. But this young man’s case suggests many of these asylum seekers could indeed be coming from Europe.

Different rules in different countries, perhaps, but once they get the passport they can travel on to Ireland, and whether they're entitled to free movement or otherwise, there's precious little Ireland can do about it anyway.

Sounds fabricated. So he arrived in Paris and just got a French passport. Not likely unless forged. Did he even claim asylum ? French bureaucracy is pretty slow even for French citizens to renew their passports. Has no credibility.
Click to expand...
compl
 
Lost Seasider said:
Who knows, €€€€€ maybe, but that's not evidence that he didn't.



He doesn't, and neither does anyone else who makes it to France, or indeed anywhere in the EU, but that doesn't mean that he can't, and presumably he'll destroy his passport and claim he came in through another route.



Asylum/benefit shopping?



Presumably there's only so much an illegal migrant is willing to disclose, and only so far that you can question him.


Edit:
From my original post:


So they're definitely coming from somewhere, and presumably not just over the border from NI.
Click to expand...
Not that shit about asylum/benefit shopping again
Lost Seasider said:
Who knows, €€€€€ maybe, but that's not evidence that he didn't.



He doesn't, and neither does anyone else who makes it to France, or indeed anywhere in the EU, but that doesn't mean that he can't, and presumably he'll destroy his passport and claim he came in through another route.



Asylum/benefit shopping?



Presumably there's only so much an illegal migrant is willing to disclose, and only so far that you can question him.


Edit:
From my original post:


So they're definitely coming from somewhere, and presumably not just over the border from NI.
Click to expand...
Not that shit about asylum/benefit shopping again ! Pretty nonsensical Telegraph article.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top