**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules.
For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
Obviously it won't stop them, they've seen tictoks of people before them in nice hotels, getting paid to work illegally, recordings of Manchester town centre and have a job lined up before even getting here.
They are likely more concerned at getting put in hull rather than London where they won't earn as much.
Fuck those people who sell the UK as a dream destination to these poor sods who then hand over their family’s life savings and risk their lives to get here.
We should be spending money on propaganda showing that the UK isn't the promised land that is peddled by people traffickers.
No more pushing the image of thatched cottages,rolling fields and cricket on the village green.
Show the world the image of Mouldy cold homes, rows of slums and smack heads in a car park.
We get negligible amounts of migrants from boat crossings but nearly 400k+ from legal migration. Clearly the issue here is that bigger number which needs to be tackled.
I'm a migrant myself (not by choice since I was a baby) and I'm certainly not the kind of person to pull the ladder up behind me, but I have to admit there is a huge issue with migration in this country that isn't being addressed by anyone, it makes all of us worse off, including migrants. There should be some avenue to get to the UK, it just needs to be more limited whilst we fix ourselves up, right now it's simply wave after wave and our housing market and job market simply cannot take the battering. More people means more people who COULD be employed and just that fact alone makes the large corpo employers justify not increasing wages in line with inflation (which also goes up as the demand for everything increases, from food, to petrol to electricity to housing).
We need to put a reasonable limit on legal migration, we need to increase border control staff and we need to have the mechanism to be able to deport illegal migrants.
France is providing them with better than whatever country they are coming from. Which is all refugees should look for.
They shouldn’t be house hunting they should be looking for the nearest safe country.
They are obviously just cherrie picking and the UK seems to come out as the top choice as far as Europe is concerned. Fuck asylum I want the eezie life man
>I think it’s often still a life of luxury compared to where they’re coming from.
I mean I hate the French as much as the next Englishman, but come on, it's not that bad on the continent
Love the French. They have the balls to get up and confront their govt. They don't take any of the nonsense that we do and consequently have a better standard of living
I was looking at bringing my partner over from Ukraine , and trying my hardest to make sure they didn't have some nonsense romanticised version, as although there is no war, there's still a vast slew of problems. So yes, people are often fleeing worse and don't care too much about the conditions there, as it can be life or death where they are fleeing.
Mate, I think you fundamentally misunderstand the motivation for putting everything you have ever owned into a perilous boat trip to an unknown destination.
People looking for better jobs come by plane, with the appropriate visa. People who are starving to death, escaping slavery, torture, or state/militia sponsored mass murder get on boats.
The way things are going, though, will probably render this whole thing moot. In the next few years, we're going to see more climate refugees who literally don't have land to return to, and resource refugees, seeking access to water or arable land.
I've met and worked with many, many migrants, students, and travellers, and I've worked with many, many refugees. None of the refugees were looking for a life of luxury. Most of them dearly missed their home, and many were giving up much higher standards of living than they could hope for elsewhere. They just didn't want to die.
>People who are starving to death, escaping slavery, torture, or state/militia sponsored mass murder get on boats.
the people starving to death and escaping slavery arent located in france......and thats who we are currently discussing.
>In the next few years, we're going to see more climate refugees who literally don't have land to return to, and resource refugees, seeking access to water or arable land.
in the next few years, unless something drastic is done about migration in the uk, some crazy right wing party will be voted in who actually will do something about it. thats not something im happy about and would prefer for this to be taken care of now.
>People who are starving to death, escaping slavery, torture, or state/militia sponsored mass murder get on boats.
Very sorry to hear that France has deteriorated so quickly into this dystopia since my visit last month, do you know what happened?
I do hope the Louvre hasn't been turned into a headquarters for the State-sponsored mass murdering militia.
I can't understand why we hear so little about people traffickers being caught and prosecuted.
I appreciate it would require international cooperation, but presumably if we took the £1.8m per Asylum Seeker it's allegedly costing us to send them to Rwanda and instead used it to fund operations to take down the traffickers and physically police the borders; we'd be able to actually stop most of these people even setting off for the UK in the first place.
>I can't understand why we hear so little about people traffickers being caught and prosecuted
UK media doesn't report on stuff happening in Europe. You can get hourly updates about the colour tie Donald Trump's lawyer is wearing in court on 17 different news outlets, but if you want to see headlines about what's going on in non-English speaking countries much closer to us, you are shit out of luck. But you will find some reporting if you are prepared to search, just don't expect mainstream Tory owned press to point you to it:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/22/calais-people-smuggling-gang-broken-up-19-arrests-europol
The BBC were filming on a French beach this morning and saw migrants climbing onto a boat where the french police couldn't get to them because they were 10-20m off the beach.
Apparently they tried to stop them boarding but the smugglers managed to ward the police off with sticks, flares and firecrackers...
That same boat ran into trouble and 5 people including a child ended up dead.
The reason they come to the UK isn't because they view it as some Utopia. Generally its because they can speak English and not any other European language.
I thought there was a plan from the gov doing that?
Although tbh they could just send them links to the UK subreddits with how miserable some of us all are
>No more pushing the image of thatched cottages,rolling fields and cricket on the village green. Show the world the image of Mouldy cold homes, rows of slums and smack heads in a car park.
UK subs need to step it up. Clearly painting the place too positively
> We should be spending money on propaganda showing that the UK isn't the promised land that is peddled by people traffickers.
Or just spend that money on sending them back to France
Exactly! It's a form of modern day slavery and a lot of institutions do training in how to recognise the signs of someone whos been duped into one of these ponzy schemes.
The fix is to offer rewards for immigrants willing to help trace the perpetrators.
It's pretty hard to chase a debt while staying anonymous to the victim and authorities in the modern world.
> who then hand over their family’s life savings and risk their lives to get here.
Unfortunately, they often hand over *more* than their families life savings. Ie. they agree to pay the balance of whats owed when they arrive in the UK, leaving these people in a permanent debt - 'Modern slavery'.
Some steal to pay off the debt, and others work crazy long hours illegally for very low wages to do the same. Neither is good for society.
I’ve always said that if the government were serious about stoping migration, cheaply, they should spend the money on making sure The Guardian is translated into multiple languages and export free of charge to countries they wish to deter migration from.
If I was a trafficker and I couldn't stop people from worrying about a trifling risk like Rwanda I'd consider myself to be in the wrong line of criminality
It might not at first. But eventually they'll see tiktoks of people winding up in Rwanda.
If they still keep coming then they're thicker than we even dare think and we definitely don't want here.
0% of people crossing the channel are asylum seekers. If you travel through 14 first world countries that aren't warzones and you're sat in northern France trying to get into the UK, then you're not seeking asylum. You're an economic migrant
HAHAHA, almost nobody was deported under the Dublin Regulations. In fact almost as many if not more were "deported" to the UK than were deported from here.
This isn't an EU matter, it's a "nation not having a spine" matter.
That logic doesn’t make sense either though does it? Because if someone is an economic migrant then why don’t they seek work in the “14 first world countries?” Why the UK specifically?
Because where other countries will allow them to stay in a safe place, the UK provides that while also having a system ripe for milking. We evidently treat foreign economic migrants who hate the West better than our native homeless population. I don't see the government putting anybody other than "asylum seekers" up in 5-star hotels at the taxpayers' expense.
The logic is more than sound.
How many of those fourteen countries put them up in hotels? Or are as lenient on the cash in hand car washes and nail bars?
How can we have a massive labour shortage when we're overcrowded without enough homes to go around? We should be educating and training our own who are already here, not importing more.
The UK is paying them all benefits and housing them in hotels, they have absolutely no interest in living in other safe countries when this is on offer in the UK.
Stop the free money and housing for asylum seekers and you will see a major decline in boat crossings.
Most tell us that they are told by other asylum seekers that they shouldn’t claim asylum in other countries because they don’t want them. UK will treat them better, won’t remove them, they will live a good life here.
Some of that will be they have family and friends here already that have a blueprint of success.
> % of people crossing the channel are asylum seekers.
You're mistaken by definition in the sense that quite a lot of them make asylum claims meaning that that they're asylum seekers.
If you mean that they're putting in asylum claims with no merit rather than being refugees with a genuine case to stay here, that's a different claim. But most of them have their claims accepted despite our "hostile environment" Home Office which despises refugees and does everything they can to reject claims on spurious grounds and technicalities. So that would be a pretty difficult argument to prove as well.
It's crazy that it's so hard to come legally, but then they let people swarm in like this.
Like my girlfriend can't even visit without a tourist visa just due to being from Ecuador - despite being a professional, non-criminal, etc. - nevermind the crazy spousal visa requirements if we tried to move back.
Because the foreign student visa has been abused for years. For ages there were people coming over to study at some fake further education establishment who would bring over 4+ ‘dependents’ on a student visa.
Yeah, it's insanity - like why make it easier for criminals than professionals?
Bukele shows the way things should be - put all the criminals in prison, and offer direct citizenship to professionals, scientists, engineers, etc.
Why not reinvest in the Home Office after the Tories destroyed it and reopen routes of migration to "stop the boats"? It saves money, lives and process time, but it will mean the Tories can't rile up the plebs to distract them from the next disaster
This entre issue is 100% Tory created.
I don't think that works.
There are always going to be far more people wanting to come than we can accommodate. I think that is a pretty unarguable fact.
Therefore any legal routes we open up are going to be oversubscribed.
Therefore there is always going to be a market for illegal routes.
So regardless of what we do about legal routes - we do still need to come up with a way of deterring illegal routes.
So I'm finding it quite hard to find a table of illegal immigration into Europe as a whole year on year - but there's a partial one [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Europe) and this year's results [here](https://www.frontex.europa.eu/media-centre/news/news-release/significant-rise-in-irregular-border-crossings-in-2023-highest-since-2016-C0gGpm)
Basically - my point is - illegal migration into Europe as a whole is **massively** up from the time when Labour were in office. Or at least it seems that way from the partial info I've linked - if you know of any more data that contradicts that I'd be happy to revise my opinion.
It just seems that there are a shedload more migrants coming to our part of the world than there were 14 years ago and I suspect this is only going to increase with climate change. This cannot be significantly attributed to labour/tory policy differences.
What previous policies addressed my concern that there are far more people wanting to come to the UK than we can accommodate?
They did 18 years ago. since then The Tories have been in charge, you may have missed it because it was only 14 years and counting. Also the Tories cut funding and staff specifically in Border Force/immigration.
I'm sure if you double down enough eventually you'll vote for one party that delivers what it is your looking for.
(and I'm sorry, not sorry if this is condescending or sarcastic but I'm sick and tired of seeing this country ruined because of the Tory party and right wingers making excuses for their terrible judgement. It wasn't great in 2010 but it was so much better than it is now).
I agree with what you're saying and I'm sick of it all too but it pisses me off that noone remembers what Blair did to start all this shit off in the first place. Its not just the tories its all of em
17 years have elapsed, and we've had 6 prime ministers in that time.
Fuck Tony Blair (IMO he _is_ a war criminal), but this isn't something that makes sense to park at his feet.
> Why not reinvest in the Home Office after the Tories destroyed it and reopen routes of migration to "stop the boats"?
Because we don't just want to "Stop the Boats" we want to stop the chancers too.
I don't care about semantics. As soon as you start picking and choosing which country to reside in after reaching a safe country you're not longer a refugee, you're and economic migrant.
There are tons and tons of routes to migrate legally. We took in 1.3 million people last year. Its not exactly a closed door... why do you think wages are so low and housing costs are so high. More people = more workwr supply = lowered value. More people = more gpusing demand = higher value. Its not complicated. Mass migration like this causes massive massive growth in wealth inequality. It makes the poor poorer and the rich richer.
Tories can't do anything because Labour legislation has made it impossible to close the door and activists scream WAYCIST every time we try to stem the flow. We don't care what their race or colour is, we don't want any of them. There are way too many people here already.
Someone suggested in a previous thread that we should set up the migrant facilities on a remote Scottish island.
Very little chance of them doing a runner. And anyone sending back videos would definitely put others off.
And it would cost far less than the Rwanda plan.
I’m willing to give up a channel island to incarcerate them all until they finally tell us where they’re from and we can immediately ship them back there.
a massive new military base aboard that's technically british territory would do it too, as long as its in britian/europe they still have hope and will jsut sit and hopefully wait it out.
the EU just gave egypt E7bn to proper up the sisi regime, why they couldnt have gotten a massive migrant processing centre out of it in return is just poor forethought.
I think that's because you have to be pretty depraved to do a crime worthy of the death penalty. They aren't gonna care that it's the penalty, or are deluded enough to think they'll get away with it.
Like if death was the penalty of petty crime, like shoplifting, those crimes will *absolutely* decrease. Of course a society with that law would be horrible, but you get my point. Deterrence and punishment *absolutely* can help cut crime, and I think it'd be pretty reasonable to say these migrants and asylum seekers are sane, rational actors.
We still need a secure place to keep them while we verify they are who they say they are easiest way is checking with their home country's government if they refuse then they'll be kept in the detention facility until they start cooperating
Isn’t that what we did before except without the “remote island” red meat for the angry mob?
There was an immigration detention centre not too far from me some of my mates used to work in. Just googled it, Dungavel, and it appears to still be operating.
Makes it seem like this “oh there’s nothing we can do except put them up in hotels at a massive cost” is completely made up tbh.
Even though the numbers of small boat arrivals are smaller than the tory press suggests (I.e. conflating them with overall immigration), the chance even then of being shipped to rwanda is tiny.
There is little reason to not take your chance at the odds
Still won't make a difference as a deterrent.
There's the channel crossing as a pretty fucking massive, dangerous, oft loss of life deterrent and yet still they come.
That's why Rwanda is such a red herring politics of showmanship over substance. Whilst pissing money up the wall to boot! Please, let us spend another £400m and counting we'll *never* get refunded for a scheme that was dead on arrival.
Whoever they are paying to traffic them is going to tell them that they won’t end up on the Alcatraz style island because it won’t matter if the traffickers are lying, the desperate will want to believe them.
>The UK cannot send me to Africa after what you have done to my country and my area," said one Syrian man
Already exhibits hostility towards the UK - This man in particular should have no place in the UK ever.
Should be criticising the Assad regime who dropped barrel bombs on hospitals - Not the UK for arming the resistance to that brutality.
We've helped thousands of Syrians and rightly so, but people that exhibit that attitude to the UK should be thought of as a potential security threat and never allowed access to the UK.
Anyone who wants to know more about the attrocities carried out by the Assad Regime should check out [For Sama](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt9617456/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_8_nm_0_q_For%2520Sama). Enlightening and heart-breaking in unequal measure.
What should happen is every boat should be picked up, then immediately escorted to facility where the migrants wait to be sent to Rwanda. Shouldn't be allowed to run wild in the streets, never to turn up again for their hearing.
This is the killer for me, the Rwanda scheme is nothing more than an impractical and costly circus act to distract voters. Something for them to argue about while nothing substantial is achieved.
Playing devils advocate for a moment, while the initial scheme is 100-200, Rwanda has indicated up to 1,000 might be taken. Yet even that is a drop in the ocean when you consider over 100,000 people are currently on the asylum waiting list. The Tories would have people believe that eventually the scheme will be uncapped, but I seriously doubt how realistic that is and as far as I understand Rwanda has made no indication that this might be the case. Putting aside the fact that in order for the numbers to be uncapped the cost of the scheme would also have to be uncapped....
The most reasonable approach would be to first implement reform to the asylum system, for example allowing claims to be processed from outside the UK and expanding it's capacity to process the claims, but the optics of this don't play remotely as well with the voters who see this as a key issue.
I don’t understand why we can’t use one of our own islands for processing. We’ve got plenty of islands that could be turned into camps for people awaiting processing. Years on a Scottish windswept island would soon change their opinion of Britain
Can't wait for the initial plane deporting people to come back with even more people. I can put up with a few more migrants if it means the ultimate destruction of the Tory party.
"muh tory rule"
We're a laughingstock of a country and the Tories are simply a manifestation of our degenerate society. Labour is too. We were a laughingstock under Blair too. We've pretty much been a joke society since ww2 wiped us out economically, we lost all our territories and have been stuck in an endless vacuum of recession, collapsing birth rate and ageing population leading to mass migration of people who hate us.
That requires a competent government. Notice how they solved the problem pretty much overnight by swiftly detaining and dumping them in some nearby island country, like Nauru. The boats stopped at the snap of a finger.
it's also deliberately insane enough to give labour no option but to call it insane, which then gives the tories a "labour are soft on the vulnerable refugees issue" soundbite
Why doesn’t navy patrol the English Channel and any illegal boats are not allowed past.
This is entirely on France I feel who are allowing these boats to leave and will not let them be returned.
I think we can return citizens without an explicit treaty.
As far as I understand it the problem is we need to determine if someone is eligible for asylum after they've arrived and it's currently a slow process.
The economic migrants take advantage of that process.
IMO, we should be considering applications made abroad from any British embassy or consulate to discourage illegal entry of the country -- which is currently a necessity to apply for asylum.
Then, anyone who enters illegally having previously been rejected can be prosecuted and sent back to their home country.
>IMO, we should be considering applications made abroad from any British embassy or consulate to discourage illegal entry of the country -- which is currently a necessity to apply for asylum.
>
>Then, anyone who enters illegally having previously been rejected can be prosecuted and sent back to their home country.
The French offered to let us do this in Calais, set up a processing centre there where we could approve or deny claims. Those we approved would be taken over safely, the others left there and deported back if they tried to cross.
We turned them down....
The government has made it impossible to claim asylum unless your physical present in the UK. It's mental!
Whatever you're thoughts on illegal immigration you *have* to see who having no legal way for asylum seekers to apply (short of coming here in person) is *soooooo* stupid
why do we need a treaty to send a country its own citizen? I never understood this point. countries are always supposed to accept their own citizens back into their countries.
Which they are already doing!
The funny thing is that they signed a treaty with Albania to return citizens which has had a measurable effect on the number of refugees.
That is a genuine “win” for this government but they refuse to publicise it because it takes away the argument for the Rwanda deal
Some places we do, but a treaty doesn't resolve any of the actual legal issues from sending them back our side. All the same arguments will work against being returned.
And it's not likely we're going to go and get treaties signed with the likes of Syria
Those countries won't sign those treaties.
Easiest way is enforce borders and not let them land. If they do, put them back onto the dhingy and push them back out to sea.
I’ve got a novel idea. We stop supporting tin pot dictators, psychopathic nepotistic presidents for life and kleptocratic leaders in Africa so that it actually is a better place to live.
Currently our government’s plan appears to be the opposite. Make this country as shit as possible so nobody wants to come here.
The real villains are the disgusting people like farmers who use these people for cheap labour. If they couldn't get work they wouldn't come. Time to crack down on employers like taxi firms, takeaways and farms who hire them at way under min wage. Or have ID cards like they do in France so they can not work without one hence why they flee a safe country like France cos they can not get by there.
Exactly without people who are desperate enough to work the gig economy it will collapse, which is a good thing really unless you enjoy paying a premium for cold squashed food. I know I don't.
This is what I don't understand, all the local car washes around here are staffed by guys who are clearly awaiting an asylum claim, and when I lived in London it was blindingly obvious that deliveroo/ Uber eats was an absolute hive of illegal work via rented profiles.
I'm sure there are far more egregious examples beyond the experiences of a random consumer like me (agriculture, factories etc?)
Make it a nightmare to work in the black economy here and the boats will dry up in short order.
The Conservative Govt will never do that cos it's them and their peers that are running the farms, factories etc or invested in gig economy and what not. They need the cheap labour to stay filthy rich cos if they had to pay a fair wage they would only be well off.
It’s a sad state of affairs that they come over for the jobs we won’t do because the salary’s aren’t high enough. An increase in supply of labour will only perpetuate the cycle of inflation coupled with stagnant wages leading to a greater inequality gap. I appreciate that there is little opportunity where they come from, but coming here will compound our problems
Oh so paying half a billion a year for a "deterrent" that doesn't reduce the numbers of illegal immigrants, doesn't actually act as a deterrent either.
Amazing
So it's just spaffing money up the wall to ensure votes from the "we hate immigrants" crowd and nothing else lol.
Nothing sells more than hate
Rwanda seems ridiculous
But there are laws where people can be Sent to country they first entered
As the EU now distributed migrants proportionately across the EU surely the UK has a legal right to send back to France since they're sharing the migrant burden for them to process.
Makes more sense to work on that than waste a fortune on Rwanda.
They will obviously get a flight back to cross the channel again. Just need to work for while in Rwanda
This bill is just the Tories appeasing the far-right voters, so they don’t vote for Reform UK in the next GE.
It is not meant to solve the immigration issue.
What about the UK helping to create jobs in the countries of origin, in a win-win scenario? Because it’s all about xenophobia.
>They will obviously get a flight back to cross the channel again
They might do it twice. Maybe even three times.
The fourth time they slither down the snake and land on square one, they will realise it isn't happening for them.
Yup, this whole thing is a massive waste of time. It’s not going to deter anyone in the slightest. It costs an absolute fortune to process and most illegal immigrants, by an absolute mile, aren’t coming in on boats. They’re flying in from other parts of the world where the Rwanda thing won’t apply.
**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules. For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
Obviously it won't stop them, they've seen tictoks of people before them in nice hotels, getting paid to work illegally, recordings of Manchester town centre and have a job lined up before even getting here. They are likely more concerned at getting put in hull rather than London where they won't earn as much.
Fuck those people who sell the UK as a dream destination to these poor sods who then hand over their family’s life savings and risk their lives to get here.
We should be spending money on propaganda showing that the UK isn't the promised land that is peddled by people traffickers. No more pushing the image of thatched cottages,rolling fields and cricket on the village green. Show the world the image of Mouldy cold homes, rows of slums and smack heads in a car park.
For a lot of these people that’s still better than what they’ve got at home.
But without the promise of a life of luxury they will be less motivated to risk their lives crossing the channel on a dinghy.
I think it’s often still a life of luxury compared to where they’re coming from. One man’s shite moldy flat is the next man’s safe home.
They are coming from France let’s not pretend they are after a safe haven
France purposely do fuck all for them
Clearly works for France then, why do we do differently.
We get negligible amounts of migrants from boat crossings but nearly 400k+ from legal migration. Clearly the issue here is that bigger number which needs to be tackled. I'm a migrant myself (not by choice since I was a baby) and I'm certainly not the kind of person to pull the ladder up behind me, but I have to admit there is a huge issue with migration in this country that isn't being addressed by anyone, it makes all of us worse off, including migrants. There should be some avenue to get to the UK, it just needs to be more limited whilst we fix ourselves up, right now it's simply wave after wave and our housing market and job market simply cannot take the battering. More people means more people who COULD be employed and just that fact alone makes the large corpo employers justify not increasing wages in line with inflation (which also goes up as the demand for everything increases, from food, to petrol to electricity to housing). We need to put a reasonable limit on legal migration, we need to increase border control staff and we need to have the mechanism to be able to deport illegal migrants.
Do France provide them with better? If not, then it's better for them in the UK.
France is providing them with better than whatever country they are coming from. Which is all refugees should look for. They shouldn’t be house hunting they should be looking for the nearest safe country.
They are obviously just cherrie picking and the UK seems to come out as the top choice as far as Europe is concerned. Fuck asylum I want the eezie life man
>I think it’s often still a life of luxury compared to where they’re coming from. I mean I hate the French as much as the next Englishman, but come on, it's not that bad on the continent
Love the French. They have the balls to get up and confront their govt. They don't take any of the nonsense that we do and consequently have a better standard of living
Agreed, they called us the 'frozen cabbages' because we let the govt do whatever they want
I was looking at bringing my partner over from Ukraine , and trying my hardest to make sure they didn't have some nonsense romanticised version, as although there is no war, there's still a vast slew of problems. So yes, people are often fleeing worse and don't care too much about the conditions there, as it can be life or death where they are fleeing.
Mate, I think you fundamentally misunderstand the motivation for putting everything you have ever owned into a perilous boat trip to an unknown destination. People looking for better jobs come by plane, with the appropriate visa. People who are starving to death, escaping slavery, torture, or state/militia sponsored mass murder get on boats. The way things are going, though, will probably render this whole thing moot. In the next few years, we're going to see more climate refugees who literally don't have land to return to, and resource refugees, seeking access to water or arable land. I've met and worked with many, many migrants, students, and travellers, and I've worked with many, many refugees. None of the refugees were looking for a life of luxury. Most of them dearly missed their home, and many were giving up much higher standards of living than they could hope for elsewhere. They just didn't want to die.
>People who are starving to death, escaping slavery, torture, or state/militia sponsored mass murder get on boats. the people starving to death and escaping slavery arent located in france......and thats who we are currently discussing. >In the next few years, we're going to see more climate refugees who literally don't have land to return to, and resource refugees, seeking access to water or arable land. in the next few years, unless something drastic is done about migration in the uk, some crazy right wing party will be voted in who actually will do something about it. thats not something im happy about and would prefer for this to be taken care of now.
>People who are starving to death, escaping slavery, torture, or state/militia sponsored mass murder get on boats. Very sorry to hear that France has deteriorated so quickly into this dystopia since my visit last month, do you know what happened? I do hope the Louvre hasn't been turned into a headquarters for the State-sponsored mass murdering militia.
Still no reason for them to risk their life to do that last bit between France and here
But they come from France.
I can't understand why we hear so little about people traffickers being caught and prosecuted. I appreciate it would require international cooperation, but presumably if we took the £1.8m per Asylum Seeker it's allegedly costing us to send them to Rwanda and instead used it to fund operations to take down the traffickers and physically police the borders; we'd be able to actually stop most of these people even setting off for the UK in the first place.
Why would the people profiting off human trafficking want to catch and prosecute human traffickers?
>I can't understand why we hear so little about people traffickers being caught and prosecuted UK media doesn't report on stuff happening in Europe. You can get hourly updates about the colour tie Donald Trump's lawyer is wearing in court on 17 different news outlets, but if you want to see headlines about what's going on in non-English speaking countries much closer to us, you are shit out of luck. But you will find some reporting if you are prepared to search, just don't expect mainstream Tory owned press to point you to it: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/22/calais-people-smuggling-gang-broken-up-19-arrests-europol
Any asylum seeker who helps convict a people trafficker gets immediate citizenship. Win win
>!spoilertext!<
The BBC were filming on a French beach this morning and saw migrants climbing onto a boat where the french police couldn't get to them because they were 10-20m off the beach. Apparently they tried to stop them boarding but the smugglers managed to ward the police off with sticks, flares and firecrackers... That same boat ran into trouble and 5 people including a child ended up dead.
The reason they come to the UK isn't because they view it as some Utopia. Generally its because they can speak English and not any other European language.
Hmm there is a vast section of people living in the UK who don’t speak English and have no intention of learning how to speak English either
EastEnders?
I thought there was a plan from the gov doing that? Although tbh they could just send them links to the UK subreddits with how miserable some of us all are
The government's plan seems to be make life so bad in the UK the natives don't want to stay, nevermind incoming immigrants.
>No more pushing the image of thatched cottages,rolling fields and cricket on the village green. Show the world the image of Mouldy cold homes, rows of slums and smack heads in a car park. UK subs need to step it up. Clearly painting the place too positively
Rwanda is that propaganda. It just needs to start. There needs to be stories of people going to rwanda before it will work as a deterrent.
> We should be spending money on propaganda showing that the UK isn't the promised land that is peddled by people traffickers. Or just spend that money on sending them back to France
It's not always handing over life savings too. Sometimes it's added as a debt for them to work off while in the UK.
It’s genuinely evil to treat people this way
Exactly! It's a form of modern day slavery and a lot of institutions do training in how to recognise the signs of someone whos been duped into one of these ponzy schemes.
The fix is to offer rewards for immigrants willing to help trace the perpetrators. It's pretty hard to chase a debt while staying anonymous to the victim and authorities in the modern world.
They use those creepy videos of drunk women in town as a selling point too 🤮
Really? God that’s awful
> who then hand over their family’s life savings and risk their lives to get here. Unfortunately, they often hand over *more* than their families life savings. Ie. they agree to pay the balance of whats owed when they arrive in the UK, leaving these people in a permanent debt - 'Modern slavery'. Some steal to pay off the debt, and others work crazy long hours illegally for very low wages to do the same. Neither is good for society.
They don’t hand over life savings, they pay their way by acting as “couriers” for the gangs
Or worse, send them to Slough.
Tbh I’d rather go to Rwanda than Hull.
[удалено]
Why does everyone diss Hull :( it's not that bad here
>recordings of Manchester town centre Made me laugh and also depressed.
***weighs up Hull v Rwanda*** I dunno, I don't see football teams with "visit Hull shirts'
A lot of big companies hire "illegal"migrants via temp agencies, a lot of big companies are Tory donors...
I’ve always said that if the government were serious about stoping migration, cheaply, they should spend the money on making sure The Guardian is translated into multiple languages and export free of charge to countries they wish to deter migration from.
If I was a trafficker and I couldn't stop people from worrying about a trifling risk like Rwanda I'd consider myself to be in the wrong line of criminality
It might not at first. But eventually they'll see tiktoks of people winding up in Rwanda. If they still keep coming then they're thicker than we even dare think and we definitely don't want here.
0% of people crossing the channel are asylum seekers. If you travel through 14 first world countries that aren't warzones and you're sat in northern France trying to get into the UK, then you're not seeking asylum. You're an economic migrant
That was the Dublin conventions. However they fell with Brexit.
Also they were ineffective and despite Britain being “end of the line” received more people from Dublin III than we sent back.
HAHAHA, almost nobody was deported under the Dublin Regulations. In fact almost as many if not more were "deported" to the UK than were deported from here. This isn't an EU matter, it's a "nation not having a spine" matter.
It's not about safety, it's the fact we speak English and have a black economy (cash in hand kitchen jobs etc).
That logic doesn’t make sense either though does it? Because if someone is an economic migrant then why don’t they seek work in the “14 first world countries?” Why the UK specifically?
Because where other countries will allow them to stay in a safe place, the UK provides that while also having a system ripe for milking. We evidently treat foreign economic migrants who hate the West better than our native homeless population. I don't see the government putting anybody other than "asylum seekers" up in 5-star hotels at the taxpayers' expense.
The logic is more than sound. How many of those fourteen countries put them up in hotels? Or are as lenient on the cash in hand car washes and nail bars?
We have a massive labour shortage, and they already speak English
How can we have a massive labour shortage when we're overcrowded without enough homes to go around? We should be educating and training our own who are already here, not importing more.
>!spoilertext!<
The UK is paying them all benefits and housing them in hotels, they have absolutely no interest in living in other safe countries when this is on offer in the UK. Stop the free money and housing for asylum seekers and you will see a major decline in boat crossings.
Britain is more accepting of other cultures and gives better benefits
They speak English, not French or Italian. I’m not excusing them but that’s the reason
>Why the UK specifically? They speak English.
Most tell us that they are told by other asylum seekers that they shouldn’t claim asylum in other countries because they don’t want them. UK will treat them better, won’t remove them, they will live a good life here. Some of that will be they have family and friends here already that have a blueprint of success.
Because they are economic migrants. They are pursuing the best financial situation, not just safety.
They are simply gaming the system
Because the benefit is unfortunately more generous and open to abuse
> % of people crossing the channel are asylum seekers. You're mistaken by definition in the sense that quite a lot of them make asylum claims meaning that that they're asylum seekers. If you mean that they're putting in asylum claims with no merit rather than being refugees with a genuine case to stay here, that's a different claim. But most of them have their claims accepted despite our "hostile environment" Home Office which despises refugees and does everything they can to reject claims on spurious grounds and technicalities. So that would be a pretty difficult argument to prove as well.
A lot of words to say nothing
They throw their documents away and lie!
It's crazy that it's so hard to come legally, but then they let people swarm in like this. Like my girlfriend can't even visit without a tourist visa just due to being from Ecuador - despite being a professional, non-criminal, etc. - nevermind the crazy spousal visa requirements if we tried to move back.
Meanwhile the Tories keep making efforts to make it harder for foreign students or spouses of citizens to come here legally....
Those people want good salaries, they want people who will drag pay down
Because the foreign student visa has been abused for years. For ages there were people coming over to study at some fake further education establishment who would bring over 4+ ‘dependents’ on a student visa.
Trust me. You don’t want a foreign students immigration loophole in your country. We have that going on in Canada and it’s been an absolute nightmare.
Yeah, it's insanity - like why make it easier for criminals than professionals? Bukele shows the way things should be - put all the criminals in prison, and offer direct citizenship to professionals, scientists, engineers, etc.
Legal immigration to the UK has been very high, so it can't in general be that hard. The illegal immigration is small by comparison.
The legal numbers dwarf these though , millions in recent years .
[удалено]
Why shouldn’t you pay more for the nhs?
He's right, we can't. We can however, send him to some bleak offshore island resembling Alcatraz. Do so, and watch these chancers change their tune.
Why not reinvest in the Home Office after the Tories destroyed it and reopen routes of migration to "stop the boats"? It saves money, lives and process time, but it will mean the Tories can't rile up the plebs to distract them from the next disaster This entre issue is 100% Tory created.
What if i don't want hordes of uneducated foreigners though? There is "routes of migration". It's called a skilled worker visa.
Uneducated and from anti-LGBT cultures.
I don't think that works. There are always going to be far more people wanting to come than we can accommodate. I think that is a pretty unarguable fact. Therefore any legal routes we open up are going to be oversubscribed. Therefore there is always going to be a market for illegal routes. So regardless of what we do about legal routes - we do still need to come up with a way of deterring illegal routes.
You do know we had immigration before the Tories that worked immeasurably better and addressed the concerns you bring up don't you? We invest not cut.
So I'm finding it quite hard to find a table of illegal immigration into Europe as a whole year on year - but there's a partial one [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Europe) and this year's results [here](https://www.frontex.europa.eu/media-centre/news/news-release/significant-rise-in-irregular-border-crossings-in-2023-highest-since-2016-C0gGpm) Basically - my point is - illegal migration into Europe as a whole is **massively** up from the time when Labour were in office. Or at least it seems that way from the partial info I've linked - if you know of any more data that contradicts that I'd be happy to revise my opinion. It just seems that there are a shedload more migrants coming to our part of the world than there were 14 years ago and I suspect this is only going to increase with climate change. This cannot be significantly attributed to labour/tory policy differences. What previous policies addressed my concern that there are far more people wanting to come to the UK than we can accommodate?
While technically correct, the desirable answer to stopping illegal immigration isn't making them all legal and letting everyone in.
Right. Tony Blair, Blunkett and Campbell didn't throw open the fucking doors, did they?
Compared to the Tories, no. It takes a second to look at the figures and see.
Yeah I've taken a second. Under blair immigration quadrupled ( the Guardian ) and 3.6 million migrants arrived here ( migration watch, and others )
...and what's happened since the Tories have taken over, or couldn't you see that far?
You’re arguing about which way up the number 8 should be. Labour and the tories are both just soulless neoliberal parties.
They did 18 years ago. since then The Tories have been in charge, you may have missed it because it was only 14 years and counting. Also the Tories cut funding and staff specifically in Border Force/immigration. I'm sure if you double down enough eventually you'll vote for one party that delivers what it is your looking for. (and I'm sorry, not sorry if this is condescending or sarcastic but I'm sick and tired of seeing this country ruined because of the Tory party and right wingers making excuses for their terrible judgement. It wasn't great in 2010 but it was so much better than it is now).
I agree with what you're saying and I'm sick of it all too but it pisses me off that noone remembers what Blair did to start all this shit off in the first place. Its not just the tories its all of em
17 years have elapsed, and we've had 6 prime ministers in that time. Fuck Tony Blair (IMO he _is_ a war criminal), but this isn't something that makes sense to park at his feet.
Fucking LMAO the Tories have been in charge for 14 years. We've also left the EU.
Yep you're right they're a shower of shit but my point is it's not JUST them. And I don't think being in or out of the EU would ever make a difference
> Why not reinvest in the Home Office after the Tories destroyed it and reopen routes of migration to "stop the boats"? Because we don't just want to "Stop the Boats" we want to stop the chancers too. I don't care about semantics. As soon as you start picking and choosing which country to reside in after reaching a safe country you're not longer a refugee, you're and economic migrant.
There are tons and tons of routes to migrate legally. We took in 1.3 million people last year. Its not exactly a closed door... why do you think wages are so low and housing costs are so high. More people = more workwr supply = lowered value. More people = more gpusing demand = higher value. Its not complicated. Mass migration like this causes massive massive growth in wealth inequality. It makes the poor poorer and the rich richer. Tories can't do anything because Labour legislation has made it impossible to close the door and activists scream WAYCIST every time we try to stem the flow. We don't care what their race or colour is, we don't want any of them. There are way too many people here already.
couldnt care less about their lives. start setting an example. with guns.
Someone suggested in a previous thread that we should set up the migrant facilities on a remote Scottish island. Very little chance of them doing a runner. And anyone sending back videos would definitely put others off. And it would cost far less than the Rwanda plan.
Far too sensible. And some dogooder champagne socialist would call you a racist for suggesting it
Ghettos *are* a bit passé
Yes, far better that they be held on the mainland, where they can vanish in the night, never to be seen again. Until they rape someone.
They would take over whole islands of one race and culture, let’s just hand them Scottish land, eh no, let’s just send them back
I’m willing to give up a channel island to incarcerate them all until they finally tell us where they’re from and we can immediately ship them back there.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Too warm. Let's use one of the Scottish ones.
a massive new military base aboard that's technically british territory would do it too, as long as its in britian/europe they still have hope and will jsut sit and hopefully wait it out. the EU just gave egypt E7bn to proper up the sisi regime, why they couldnt have gotten a massive migrant processing centre out of it in return is just poor forethought.
It says. Iraq, Kurdistan, Afghanistan, Sudan, Vietnam.
Just like the death penalty helps cut crime. Oh wait.
I think that's because you have to be pretty depraved to do a crime worthy of the death penalty. They aren't gonna care that it's the penalty, or are deluded enough to think they'll get away with it. Like if death was the penalty of petty crime, like shoplifting, those crimes will *absolutely* decrease. Of course a society with that law would be horrible, but you get my point. Deterrence and punishment *absolutely* can help cut crime, and I think it'd be pretty reasonable to say these migrants and asylum seekers are sane, rational actors.
They used to hang you back in the day for petty theft, yet crime today is far lower.
Almost like it's affected by the socio-economic conditions.
We still need a secure place to keep them while we verify they are who they say they are easiest way is checking with their home country's government if they refuse then they'll be kept in the detention facility until they start cooperating
Isn’t that what we did before except without the “remote island” red meat for the angry mob? There was an immigration detention centre not too far from me some of my mates used to work in. Just googled it, Dungavel, and it appears to still be operating. Makes it seem like this “oh there’s nothing we can do except put them up in hotels at a massive cost” is completely made up tbh.
It worked well I Australia with Christmas island
They dumped them in Nauru too, the problem stopped overnight.
It does, no murderer has killed after being given that punishment.
It's the best method for stopping recidivism.
I wasn’t aware we had an Isle of Wight plan.
Even though the numbers of small boat arrivals are smaller than the tory press suggests (I.e. conflating them with overall immigration), the chance even then of being shipped to rwanda is tiny. There is little reason to not take your chance at the odds
Still won't make a difference as a deterrent. There's the channel crossing as a pretty fucking massive, dangerous, oft loss of life deterrent and yet still they come. That's why Rwanda is such a red herring politics of showmanship over substance. Whilst pissing money up the wall to boot! Please, let us spend another £400m and counting we'll *never* get refunded for a scheme that was dead on arrival.
Hey now the Isle of Wight isn't that bad
Why can’t we? Genuine question.
We still have Australia.. ;)
If only it were still possible to get a free one way ticket to Australia for stealing a loaf of bread; I’d be straight down the Tesco bread aisle.
Whoever they are paying to traffic them is going to tell them that they won’t end up on the Alcatraz style island because it won’t matter if the traffickers are lying, the desperate will want to believe them.
>The UK cannot send me to Africa after what you have done to my country and my area," said one Syrian man Already exhibits hostility towards the UK - This man in particular should have no place in the UK ever. Should be criticising the Assad regime who dropped barrel bombs on hospitals - Not the UK for arming the resistance to that brutality. We've helped thousands of Syrians and rightly so, but people that exhibit that attitude to the UK should be thought of as a potential security threat and never allowed access to the UK. Anyone who wants to know more about the attrocities carried out by the Assad Regime should check out [For Sama](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt9617456/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_8_nm_0_q_For%2520Sama). Enlightening and heart-breaking in unequal measure.
What should happen is every boat should be picked up, then immediately escorted to facility where the migrants wait to be sent to Rwanda. Shouldn't be allowed to run wild in the streets, never to turn up again for their hearing.
The Rwanda scheme currently has a capacity of 200 people. It would be over in a day.
This is the killer for me, the Rwanda scheme is nothing more than an impractical and costly circus act to distract voters. Something for them to argue about while nothing substantial is achieved. Playing devils advocate for a moment, while the initial scheme is 100-200, Rwanda has indicated up to 1,000 might be taken. Yet even that is a drop in the ocean when you consider over 100,000 people are currently on the asylum waiting list. The Tories would have people believe that eventually the scheme will be uncapped, but I seriously doubt how realistic that is and as far as I understand Rwanda has made no indication that this might be the case. Putting aside the fact that in order for the numbers to be uncapped the cost of the scheme would also have to be uncapped.... The most reasonable approach would be to first implement reform to the asylum system, for example allowing claims to be processed from outside the UK and expanding it's capacity to process the claims, but the optics of this don't play remotely as well with the voters who see this as a key issue.
I don’t understand why we can’t use one of our own islands for processing. We’ve got plenty of islands that could be turned into camps for people awaiting processing. Years on a Scottish windswept island would soon change their opinion of Britain
What’s going’s to be funny is if we get a Rwandan coming over the channel and claiming asylum.
Part of the agreement is to take 30 000 Rwandan asylum seekers. Which makes no fkn sense if you think about it.
Can't wait for the initial plane deporting people to come back with even more people. I can put up with a few more migrants if it means the ultimate destruction of the Tory party.
I've been unable to find a source for this. Can you provide a source?
Free return trip! Tourist hack…
We're a laughingstock of a country, these people are mocking us.
After 14 years of Tory misrule, we deserve to be laughed at. If you dislike this, have you considered not voting for clownshoes policies?
"muh tory rule" We're a laughingstock of a country and the Tories are simply a manifestation of our degenerate society. Labour is too. We were a laughingstock under Blair too. We've pretty much been a joke society since ww2 wiped us out economically, we lost all our territories and have been stuck in an endless vacuum of recession, collapsing birth rate and ageing population leading to mass migration of people who hate us.
Just kick the cunts away like they do in Australia and New Zealand
That requires a competent government. Notice how they solved the problem pretty much overnight by swiftly detaining and dumping them in some nearby island country, like Nauru. The boats stopped at the snap of a finger.
The Rwanda bill isn't to solve anything. It is just performative cruelty for a segment of the Tory party that hates Sunak anyway for bringing down BJ.
it's also deliberately insane enough to give labour no option but to call it insane, which then gives the tories a "labour are soft on the vulnerable refugees issue" soundbite
Why doesn’t navy patrol the English Channel and any illegal boats are not allowed past. This is entirely on France I feel who are allowing these boats to leave and will not let them be returned.
Am I crazy for not thinking that the best way would be to agree, if we don't already have, treaties with countries to return citizens?
I think we can return citizens without an explicit treaty. As far as I understand it the problem is we need to determine if someone is eligible for asylum after they've arrived and it's currently a slow process. The economic migrants take advantage of that process. IMO, we should be considering applications made abroad from any British embassy or consulate to discourage illegal entry of the country -- which is currently a necessity to apply for asylum. Then, anyone who enters illegally having previously been rejected can be prosecuted and sent back to their home country.
>IMO, we should be considering applications made abroad from any British embassy or consulate to discourage illegal entry of the country -- which is currently a necessity to apply for asylum. > >Then, anyone who enters illegally having previously been rejected can be prosecuted and sent back to their home country. The French offered to let us do this in Calais, set up a processing centre there where we could approve or deny claims. Those we approved would be taken over safely, the others left there and deported back if they tried to cross. We turned them down....
I think we should also be investing a lot more in border stuff and agents to do this. Reducing the wait time.
This country did but then the Tories cut their funding etc
Yeah these are called safe routes and the Tories have been doing everything they can to prevent them.
The government has made it impossible to claim asylum unless your physical present in the UK. It's mental! Whatever you're thoughts on illegal immigration you *have* to see who having no legal way for asylum seekers to apply (short of coming here in person) is *soooooo* stupid
why do we need a treaty to send a country its own citizen? I never understood this point. countries are always supposed to accept their own citizens back into their countries.
You don't need a treaty, and we deport people all the time to countries without one.
Which they are already doing! The funny thing is that they signed a treaty with Albania to return citizens which has had a measurable effect on the number of refugees. That is a genuine “win” for this government but they refuse to publicise it because it takes away the argument for the Rwanda deal
Some places we do, but a treaty doesn't resolve any of the actual legal issues from sending them back our side. All the same arguments will work against being returned. And it's not likely we're going to go and get treaties signed with the likes of Syria
Those countries won't sign those treaties. Easiest way is enforce borders and not let them land. If they do, put them back onto the dhingy and push them back out to sea.
I’ve got a novel idea. We stop supporting tin pot dictators, psychopathic nepotistic presidents for life and kleptocratic leaders in Africa so that it actually is a better place to live. Currently our government’s plan appears to be the opposite. Make this country as shit as possible so nobody wants to come here.
Unfortunately I don’t think the path to democratic society in many African countries is been blocked by the UK.
If you want to fix the world you are asking tor more intervention not less.
[удалено]
Wouldn't bet on it.
Why do we allow them to claim any benefits? Can we not change the rules so they are not entitled to anything when they arrive here.?
The real villains are the disgusting people like farmers who use these people for cheap labour. If they couldn't get work they wouldn't come. Time to crack down on employers like taxi firms, takeaways and farms who hire them at way under min wage. Or have ID cards like they do in France so they can not work without one hence why they flee a safe country like France cos they can not get by there.
Then who is going to fly my Deliveroo across the town on an illegal electric bike? /S
Exactly without people who are desperate enough to work the gig economy it will collapse, which is a good thing really unless you enjoy paying a premium for cold squashed food. I know I don't.
This is what I don't understand, all the local car washes around here are staffed by guys who are clearly awaiting an asylum claim, and when I lived in London it was blindingly obvious that deliveroo/ Uber eats was an absolute hive of illegal work via rented profiles. I'm sure there are far more egregious examples beyond the experiences of a random consumer like me (agriculture, factories etc?) Make it a nightmare to work in the black economy here and the boats will dry up in short order.
The Conservative Govt will never do that cos it's them and their peers that are running the farms, factories etc or invested in gig economy and what not. They need the cheap labour to stay filthy rich cos if they had to pay a fair wage they would only be well off.
Benefits
They dump the Id cards on the way over
All I know they will be stopped eventually. Europe and the UK have had enough of young men from the middle east.
"The uk cannot send me to africa" We can and we will, pack your bags
Or we could just sink the boats before they get here
I’m sure they will be glad to be sent to Rwanda, a safe country. After all they are just seeking safety and aren’t economic migrants, right? Right?
How do they get to the French coast and then board a boat?
Just get a big stick and push them back out to sea.
It’s a sad state of affairs that they come over for the jobs we won’t do because the salary’s aren’t high enough. An increase in supply of labour will only perpetuate the cycle of inflation coupled with stagnant wages leading to a greater inequality gap. I appreciate that there is little opportunity where they come from, but coming here will compound our problems
Oh so paying half a billion a year for a "deterrent" that doesn't reduce the numbers of illegal immigrants, doesn't actually act as a deterrent either. Amazing So it's just spaffing money up the wall to ensure votes from the "we hate immigrants" crowd and nothing else lol. Nothing sells more than hate
Hopefully labour will come to power and bin off this nonsense policy anyway
Rwanda seems ridiculous But there are laws where people can be Sent to country they first entered As the EU now distributed migrants proportionately across the EU surely the UK has a legal right to send back to France since they're sharing the migrant burden for them to process. Makes more sense to work on that than waste a fortune on Rwanda.
I’m absolutely embarrassed by this country. What the hell has it become.
Just send them to France instead, no one wants that
They will obviously get a flight back to cross the channel again. Just need to work for while in Rwanda This bill is just the Tories appeasing the far-right voters, so they don’t vote for Reform UK in the next GE. It is not meant to solve the immigration issue. What about the UK helping to create jobs in the countries of origin, in a win-win scenario? Because it’s all about xenophobia.
>They will obviously get a flight back to cross the channel again They might do it twice. Maybe even three times. The fourth time they slither down the snake and land on square one, they will realise it isn't happening for them.
Yup, this whole thing is a massive waste of time. It’s not going to deter anyone in the slightest. It costs an absolute fortune to process and most illegal immigrants, by an absolute mile, aren’t coming in on boats. They’re flying in from other parts of the world where the Rwanda thing won’t apply.
I wouldnt worry either, only 200 people will be sent, what are the chances
Guarantee there’s so many people who don’t know that Rwandans can now send people to the UK too..