View Poll Results: So, the UK plans to send some asylum seekers to Rwanda ... Is it a good idea or not?

Voters
17. You may not vote on this poll
  • No, the UK is a rich country and should be open to all asylum seekers

    3 17.65%
  • Yes, asylum seekers should not be allowed, the UK is crowded enough

    5 29.41%
  • Yes, asylum seekers should seek refuge in the first available country.

    9 52.94%
  • I like toffees

    4 23.53%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 161
  1. #101
    Thailand Expat
    malmomike77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    13,681
    I was listening to a radio 4 programme yesterday and they were estimating the number of "refugees" worldwide at over 100 million. Its a growing problem with no solution and the only winners are the traffickers, the middlemen throughout the log chain and the charities and their lawyers.

  2. #102
    Thailand Expat
    taxexile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    19,342
    a lot of these so called "refugees" end up paying off their interest heavy transport costs by working as slaves for the gangs in the myriads of vape shops, kebab shitholes and "turkish" barber shops that have infested the shopping streets in britains more "diverse" neighbourhoods over the past few years and that are also owned by the verminous trafficking gangs and run as money laundering enterprises.

    they are queue jumping illegal immigrants who have destroyed their identification documents and should be treated as illegal until they can prove that they are genuine refugees escaping persecution.

  3. #103
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    12,219
    Rwanda asylum scheme: Warning over political killings before UK flight

    UK ministers who backed sending asylum seekers to Rwanda were warned by their own adviser that its government tortures and kills political opponents.


    The warning came weeks before the British government tried to send asylum seekers to the African nation. The adviser raised concerns about the tone and accuracy of an official note on Rwanda's human rights record.

    There is an ongoing legal challenge against government attempts to keep more of the comments secret.

    Migrants identified for the aborted flight, and three media organisations - BBC News, the Times and the Guardian newspapers - are seeking disclosure of the material.

    The first Rwanda flight was grounded in June after the European Court of Human Rights said the High Court in London must first fully examine whether the removals policy is lawful. A hearing is scheduled for next month.

    On Tuesday, the government asked the High Court to rule that the case should not include 11 specific comments about Rwanda from an unnamed Foreign Office (FCDO) official, who had been asked for their view.

    The court heard that FCDO bosses had asked the unnamed official, who had some expertise in African affairs, to look at a draft of the Rwanda "Country Policy and Information Note". This is an official and public document on the country and its human rights record - and it was being updated while the Rwanda flights plan was being thrashed out. In an email sent to colleagues on 26 April - two weeks after the plan became public - the reviewer questioned the tone of the report and whether it accurately reflected the situation in the country.

    High Court judge Lord Justice Lewis was told the official had written in a covering email: "There are state control, security, surveillance structures from the national level down... political opposition is not tolerated and arbitrary detention, torture and even killings are accepted methods of enforcing control too".

    Jude Bunting QC, appearing for the media organisations, told the court the withheld evidence from the reviewer was likely to be the most critical material about the Rwanda affair.

    "The sensitivity of this policy cannot be understated," he said.

    "The public needs to understand the material that was available to the [government] at the time the decisions under challenge were taken, the evidence that is said to weigh against, as well as to justify, this flagship policy, and the reasons why the [government] decided to proceed."

    Lord Justice Lewis will rule in the coming days on whether any of the material should be kept secret.

    Last month the High Court heard that Whitehall officials had initially excluded Rwanda on human rights grounds from the list of potential partners for asylum transfers. The court was told that Dominic Raab, the then-foreign secretary, had been warned that a deal with Rwanda would force the UK to constrain what it said to the nation about its record.

    The Home Office is claiming public interest immunity on parts of the independent reviewer's response, with Neil Sheldon QC telling the court there would be a "potential of very significant harm" to international relations and national security issues if the extracts were disclosed.

    The pilot scheme would see those who arrived in the UK by what the government considers "illegal, dangerous or unnecessary" routes - such as in small boats or hidden in lorries - flown to the African country, where they could then claim asylum.

    An upfront payment of £120m to Rwanda would be followed by further payments as the country handled more cases, the Home Office has said.

    The government has said the "world-leading scheme" would help prevent dangerous Channel crossings and when announcing it Prime Minister Boris Johnson said it would "save countless lives" by stopping "vile people smugglers".

    ...

    Rwanda asylum scheme: Warning over political killings before UK flight - BBC News

    There's a few Cabinet minister who should be resigning over this...

    ...including our Tory leader hopefuls Sanak and Truss...

  4. #104
    Thailand Expat
    Bonecollector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:41 PM
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,161
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    I was listening to a radio 4 programme yesterday and they were estimating the number of "refugees" worldwide at over 100 million. Its a growing problem with no solution and the only winners are the traffickers, the middlemen throughout the log chain and the charities and their lawyers.
    I agree and as Tax has said below, it is not fair on those to seek through the legal and proper avenues.

  5. #105
    Thailand Expat
    Bonecollector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:41 PM
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,161
    ^^I doubt any of the incoming refugees will be in any sort of position to be the victim of a political killing anytime soon after their arrival. They also have the choice to go back to their country of origin or they could apply to seek asylum elsewhere through the proper channels.
    One should listen twice as much as one speaks

  6. #106
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    12,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonecollector View Post
    they could apply to seek asylum elsewhere through the proper channels
    You are aware that it is nigh impossible for anyone to get a visa through these channels at the moment let alone asylum seekers or refugees.

    Perhaps if the UK opened refugee and migrant centres in Northern Europe there might be some improvement.

  7. #107
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy View Post
    UK ministers who backed sending asylum seekers to Rwanda were warned by their own adviser that its government tortures and kills political opponents.
    Oh if that's the criteria, send them to Russia instead.

  8. #108
    Newbie

    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Last Online
    06-09-2022 @ 10:15 PM
    Posts
    8
    Yes its ethical but might be impractical. To defend our
    Borders we need to checking immigrants going back 60 years
    and check their paperwork, tax returns and sources of income and
    Evict 1 million.

  9. #109
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    12,219
    Gary Lineker told to step back from presenting Match of the Day


    Gary Lineker has been told to step back from presenting Match of the Day until an agreement is reached on his social media use, the BBC has said.

    It follows an impartiality row over comments he made criticising the government's new asylum policy.The BBC said it considered Lineker's "recent social media activity to be a breach of our guidelines".
    It added he should "keep well away from taking sides on party political issues or political controversies".

    The BBC asked Lineker to step back after "extensive discussions with Gary and his team in recent days". It "decided that he will step back from presenting Match of the Day until we've got an agreed and clear position on his use of social media", the statement said. It continued: "When it comes to leading our football and sports coverage, Gary is second to none.

    "We have never said that Gary should be an opinion free zone, or that he can't have a view on issues that matter to him, but we have said that he should keep well away from taking sides on party political issues or political controversies."

    Fellow pundit Ian Wright said he will not appear in "solidarity", tweeting: "Everybody knows what Match of the Day means to me, but I've told the BBC I won't be doing it tomorrow. Solidarity."

    Alan Shearer, who also presents on the show, said he had "informed the BBC that I won't be appearing on MOTD tomorrow night".

    On Tuesday, Home Secretary Suella Braverman outlined the government's plans to ban people arriving in the UK illegally from ever claiming asylum, in a bid to address a rise in the number of people crossing the Channel in small boats.

    Gary Lineker told to step back from presenting Match of the Day - BBC News

    You should know you've F**ed Up when the sports guys walk out over your immigration policies...

    ...Little (screwed up) Britain...

  10. #110
    Thailand Expat
    panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    21-10-2023 @ 08:08 AM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    32,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy View Post
    Home Secretary Suella Braverman outlined the government's plans to ban people arriving in the UK illegally from ever claiming asylum, in a bid to address a rise in the number of people crossing the Channel in small boats.
    Indeed . . . those pesky refugees, Britain has taken far too many so far. More than Andorra even.

  11. #111
    Thailand Expat
    malmomike77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    13,681
    Quote Originally Posted by panama hat View Post
    those pesky refugees
    they aren't though are they, they are economic migrants who freely cross Europe's porous borders and pay criminals to get them across the channel and the EU and France sit back and are complicit in this activity but carry on.

  12. #112
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    12,219
    ^ They are a mix of both and the UK needs to stop sloping its shoulder of responsibilty for them

  13. #113
    Thailand Expat
    malmomike77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    13,681
    50,000 or 100,000 or more a year, all sent and profited by gangs existing on European soil. Your much lauded community who seem incapable of policing yourselves, lets also not forget you are supporting this trade, you and your ilk who lets face it don't have to pick up either the bill or the consequences - so Troy pop back and front up the cash there's a good chap or fook off.

  14. #114
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    12,219
    <sigh> still blaming the EU for everything..

    Meanwhile, don't forget the UN, HR and numerous other groups have condemned UK immigration policy. Why isn't that front page news...rather than Gary Lineker?

  15. #115
    Thailand Expat
    malmomike77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    13,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy View Post
    Meanwhile, don't forget the UN, HR and numerous other groups have condemned UK immigration policy. Why isn't that front page news...rather than Gary Lineker?
    condemn away, who is paying for the cost and the impact on already stretched services - you like all your leftie ilk make these swinging comments divorced of reality and as usual without resolving the consequences.

    i loath you, i loath the fact you and your ilk seem to think you can hold the moral high ground without getting your hands dirty or paying for the consequences - you are a prick who has morals divorced from daily reality Troy - very easy for you to look down divorced as you are.

  16. #116
    Thailand Expat DrWilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,389
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    condemn away, who is paying for the cost and the impact on already stretched services - you like all your leftie ilk make these swinging comments divorced of reality and as usual without resolving the consequences.

    i loath you, i loath the fact you and your ilk seem to think you can hold the moral high ground without getting your hands dirty or paying for the consequences - you are a prick who has morals divorced from daily reality Troy - very easy for you to look down divorced as you are.
    Divorced morals? Loath your ilk? Tell you what I loathe. People dying, people having no where to go, passports, and visas and visa exempt. Documentation that divides rich and poor.

  17. #117
    Thailand Expat
    panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    21-10-2023 @ 08:08 AM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    32,680
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    they aren't though are they
    'they' are all crims . . . well done. The UK helped create millons of refugees and displaced people yet refuses to do anything much about the issue of people suffering. Easy enough to bomb the fuck out of civilians and infrastructure to test new toys but humanitarian? Yea . . . nah.

  18. #118
    Thailand Expat
    panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    21-10-2023 @ 08:08 AM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    32,680
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    who is paying for the cost
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    i loath you, i loath the fact you and your ilk seem to think you can hold the moral high ground without getting your hands dirty or paying for the consequences
    So, you ask who is paying for it and then point to taxpayers . . .

    Yes, we all pay for it, as we should

  19. #119
    Hangin' Around cyrille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    33,543
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    you make these swinging comments
    Think I must have missed those.

    So Troy throws his keys in the bowl, eh?

    The old dog!

  20. #120
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    12,219
    I think mike forgets I am paying tax, but in a different country where they are receiving far more refugees and economic migrants. A country that shoulders its responsibility, unlike the UK.

  21. #121
    Hangin' Around cyrille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    33,543
    Well Sunak now says tbey will focus on preventing immigrants leaving from France via the Channel.

    A sensible move, which should have been made a decade ago.

    This crap bill was made knowing it would fail, and is just a meaningless sop for the consumption of the ERG.

  22. #122
    Thailand Expat
    panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    21-10-2023 @ 08:08 AM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    32,680
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    swinging comments
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    you like all your leftie ilk
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    you and your ilk seem to think you can hold the moral high ground without getting your hands dirty or paying for the consequences
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    all sent and profited by gangs existing on European soil
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    you and your ilk who lets face it don't have to pick up either the bill or the consequences
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    swinging comments
    Oh dear . . . (Let's put this latest rant down to alcohol as he has been comparatively 'sober and normal' with his posts these last few days)


    Quote Originally Posted by Troy View Post
    <sigh> still blaming the EU for everything..
    It's all they can do, without any basis in fact . . . you would have thought all these years of Super-Britain-Unshackled would have put that to rest, but when all you have is a nation inexorably sliding further and further into the economic and social abyss you lash out at anyone you can find.

    <enter Taxi driver and Hugh to ring the bells of the UK)
    Last edited by panama hat; 11-03-2023 at 01:17 PM.

  23. #123
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    12,219
    European court at odds with British values, says Suella Braverman

    The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg is politicised and sometimes at odds with British values, Suella Braverman has said.

    The home secretary was speaking to the BBC one day after acknowledging her plan to stop small boat crossings could be challenged in the Strasbourg court.

    Asked if she could ignore the court, she said a balance should be "struck".

    Ms Braverman's Illegal Migration Bill - which aims to stop small boat Channel crossings - was published on Wednesday.

    The proposed law would put a duty on the government to detain and remove people arriving in the UK illegally, either to Rwanda or another "safe" third country. Migrants would not be granted bail or able to seek judicial review for the first 28 days of detention.

    Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has made passing the law one of his key five priorities, however it is likely to face obstacles - both political and legal.

    For example individuals could challenge their detention and removal from the UK by taking their case to the European Court of Human Rights. Speaking to the BBC's Political Thinking with Nick Robinson podcast, Ms Braverman was asked if she was tempted to follow the example of previous governments which tried to ignore the court's rulings on giving prisoners the vote.

    "There are important questions to be asked about whether the balance has been properly struck," she replied. "I would say it's a court which is politicised, it is interventionist and it doesn't always follow a process that we would recognise as being due process. "In a whole range of policy areas, I think sometimes the jurisprudence from the Strasbourg court is at odds with the will of Parliament or British values more generally."

    She emphasised that the new Illegal Migrants Bill would not be taking the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights - the set of rules interpreted by the court.

    Writing to Conservative MPs after the bill was published, she said there was "more than a 50% chance" the legislation was not compatible with the European Court of Human Rights.

    She said ministers wanted to test the boundaries of legal obligations - but believed their plans were within those limits.

    Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme, French MEP Nathalie Loiseau cautioned that cooperation between the UK and EU depended on the UK sticking to the European Convention on Human Rights.

    "If you read the trade and cooperation agreement between the UK and the EU, which was signed and ratified on both sides, every single piece of judicial cooperation relies on a full commitment to the ECHR," she said.

    Labour's Yvette Cooper has said the government's plans would make "the problems even worse, and make it more chaotic", putting more lives "at risk".

    The United Nations refugee agency has described the moves as "very concerning".

    Mr Sunak has said the measures are "tough, but necessary and fair" and added that he is "up for the fight" over the legislation.
    European court at odds with British values, says Suella Braverman - BBC News




    I would just like to say that the Bill is at odds with British Values, which more closely align to the ECHR.

    For those that can't be bothered to read, this Bill makes it illegal for Asylum Seekers and most Refugees to come to the UK. The Government knows it is illegal but don't give a shit!

  24. #124
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    12,219
    The never ending saga of migrants and Rwanda, it seems...

    Suella Braverman insists Rwanda is safe for migrants

    Suella Braverman has insisted Rwanda is a safe country for migrants, despite evidence that 12 Congolese refugees were shot dead by police there in 2018.
    When presented with the evidence on the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme, the home secretary said she was "not familiar" with the case.

    The government plans to send some migrants to Rwanda if they arrive in the UK through illegal routes.

    The High Court has found Rwanda to be safe, Ms Braverman said. But she acknowledged the plans were still facing a legal challenge. She also refused to commit to a date for achieving the government's goal of stopping small boats crossing the Channel. And it was also notable that Ms Braverman would not repeat her previously stated hope of getting legal immigration under 100,000 a year - not least because there is tension in the cabinet over what is realistic. Under the government's proposals, people who arrive in the UK through illegal routes could be sent to Rwanda on a one-way ticket to claim asylum there.

    In December the High Court ruled the plan was legal, but the decision is currently going through an appeals process.

    Ms Braverman was presented with evidence from the United Nations refugee agency that a group of Congolese refugees were shot dead by Rwandan police during protests over cuts to food rations.

    The Rwandan government have said the actions of the police were a last resort and that there was violence at the protest. The home secretary said: "That might be 2018, we're looking at 2023 and beyond. "The High Court, senior expert judges, have looked into the detail of our arrangement with Rwanda and found it to be a safe country and found our arrangements to be lawful."

    She added that Rwanda has "a track record of successfully resettling and integrating people who are refugees or asylum seekers" and that the government's legislation made provisions for "extreme circumstances", where there is "unforeseeable, serious and irreversible harm", for individuals to challenge the decision to send them to Rwanda.

    Last month several papers reported that a source in the Home Office had claimed there were plans to get flights to Rwanda off the ground by the summer.

    But the government has not committed to a timeframe publicly.

    Ms Braverman said she believed the Rwanda policy would have "a significant deterrent effect" so that people would stop making the journey across the Channel to the UK.

    Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has made stopping small boats crossing the channel one of his top priorities.

    The home secretary refused to commit to a date for achieving this goal. She said she wanted to deliver on the pledge as quickly as possible but said the government could not control timeframes for the ongoing legal challenge over the Rwanda policy.

    ...

    Suella Braverman insists Rwanda is safe for migrants - BBC News

    Just a couple of points:

    1. It is not illegal to enter a country of your choosing to claim asylum.
    2. It doesn't have to be the first safe country that you enter, you may pass through as many countries as you wish before claiming asylum.
    3. There is no illegal method of entry, since you have to claim asylum on entry.

    The UK Government are fully aware of these rules even if they don't state them to the general public.

    The world today has many refugees, asylum seekers and economic migrants caused by the turmoil or wars, persecution and economic collapse.

    The cost to the UK government is not in monetary terms but political ones, it promised a drop in immigration that it cannot meet.

    It is time the UK Government explained the facts and helped rather than slope its responsibility off to a third country.

  25. #125
    Thailand Expat
    panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    21-10-2023 @ 08:08 AM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    32,680
    Where do they come up with these halfwitted neo-fascists . . .

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •