Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Home Office and UK government policy concerning asylum seekers/Rwanda deportations

How has the use of the Navy increased the number of boats crossing? The Guardian doesn't explicate the causal link.
Para 11:

"Their committee has heard evidence from naval commanders that the use of navy assets would, far from being a deterrent, make the crossing safer and therefore more attractive to small boats."

Which seems obvious when you think about it from a migrant's perspective.
 
Para 11:

"Their committee has heard evidence from naval commanders that the use of navy assets would, far from being a deterrent, make the crossing safer and therefore more attractive to small boats."

Which seems obvious when you think about it from a migrant's perspective.

Thanks, I missed that bit. I'm guessing that the Navy's presence means that people on small boats are more likely to be picked up, rather than left entirely to the tender mercies of the sea?

I do not understand how the Tories can keep selling themselves as an anti-immigration party. It's not like it's some kind of secret that there is a mismatch between their rhetoric and their actions. Tories love it when labour is pushed into precarious positions. "Rah, rah, we're sending in the Navy" might sound good in the moment if you're the kind of brain-dead flag shagger that the Tories seem to think we are, but after they've gone in, what do the likes of Patel expect them to do? The Navy has got better things to do than just sitting around the Channel with their thumbs up their arses and watching unarmed civilians drown. Turn them back? They're in little dinghies and I imagine they only have just enough fuel to get to the British side. I assume that France is not going to accept a Royal Navy ship offloading a bunch of people onto their shores either.

Even if you're the kind of selfish thoughtless prick who agrees that boatfuls of migrants should just be made into someone else's problem, this policy is an obvious failure.
 
Tried earlier to find out what the actual deal is with the Rwandan government, what are we paying them . Can’t find any solid info which is just so dodgy in itself. All that’s clear is that a big whack of the international aid budget has gone to ‘the economic development of Rwanda’ this year. Whole thing is just shameful.

Well the IT firm owned by Rishi Sunaks wife got the contracts out there didn’t they.
 
Scrapping the contract with the company that used to provide airborne surveillance for a fairly cheap price was another great Tory decision...
 
Weekend of action against the deportation flights planned on the 16th-17th:
 
In respect of my original intention to make this thread a more general one regarding Home Office and government policy, just read this. Makes me so fucking angry:


Also someone's changed the thread title to specifically mention Rwanda :confused: which was never my original intention. i wanted this to be a much more general thread and although it is entirely to be expected that Rwanda would figure largely in news and discussion as the above article illustrates it's more than that; there's a baked-in long term issue of institutional racism.
 
Patel will be grilled by the home affairs select committee this Wednesday on Channel crossings, the lack of safe, legal passage to the UK and her Rwanda asylum plan. The government has spent significant sums trying to remove asylum seekers to east Africa, but has yet to deport a single person.

I hope to see her squirm.
FFS. Didn't realise is wasn't mandatory to attend the select committee!
 
Updated listing for this weekend:
The demonstrations will be held at these sites on the following dates:

  • Colnbrook & Harmondsworth (Heathrow Airport) - 16th July - 3pm
  • Brook House & Tinsley House (Gatwick Airport) - 16th July - 3pm
  • Derwentside/Hassockfield (Durham) - 16th July - 12pm
  • Manchester Short Term Holding Facility - 16th July - 12pm
  • Dungavel (South Lanarkshire) - 17th July - 2pm
  • Bonn Square, Oxford - 16th July - 12pm
Although I have to admit to being a bit skeptical about how organised some of these will be?
 
Analysis of the Rwanda 'plan' finds it wanting:


meanwhile Rwanda says it can only accept 200 refugees:

 
Last edited:
Analysis of the Rwanda 'plan' find it wanting:


meanwhile Rwanda says it can only accept 200 refugees:


Great links, cheers for posting them.

So, we've blown £120m and they can take a maximum of 200, which is £600k per person, before you even add in all the legal costs involved in all endless court hearings, fucking unbelievable. :facepalm:
 
Great links, cheers for posting them.

So, we've blown £120m and they can take a maximum of 200, which is £600k per person, before you even add in all the legal costs involved in all endless court hearings, fucking unbelievable. :facepalm:
What’s the alternative?
Letting them be free to live their own lives, join and contribute to society? That’s not fiscally responsible.
 
Back
Top Bottom