By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I've made some mistakes in my life but up arrowing this has to be the biggest , you hate the UK so why stay here, I assume you're old enough to own passport d so why not use it You're not going to change the past so live with it .
Yes i am sure that you will have made many mistakes.
You clearly love the UK so much, so …. are you looking forward to getting called up ?
You claim to love Ireland , which according to you, is the Worlds most successful and properous country in the World but seems to be a place you don't want to live in. Wonder why?
£54 million in direct costs £120 million extra payment
Plus Home Office costs of at least £40 million by 2025
£584 million!!
And £400 million or so will be spent even if not a single person ever goes.
Then it's £180k per person
What an absolute waste of money, even though IMO it may have been a deterrent to illegals crossing the channel, and saved housing them in hotels, but anyone with half a brain could see that the plan would never work as long as we are governed by the ECHR.
It was the UK Supreme Court that, after careful research and due diligence, declared Rwanda an unsafe country. That was backed up by the Home Office granting asylum to people from Rwanda very recently. People whose lives would be at risk if they were returned to Rwanda.
It's quite unbelievable that Sunak seems to think that if he can send 100 people to Rwanda his electoral prospects will be transformed. The cost to the taxpayer is staggering and legislating that Rwanda is safe in the face of clear evidence to the contrary is an astonishing political act. Sunak is just very poor at politics and how he got to be PM without anyone voting for him is a mystery.
It was the UK Supreme Court that, after careful research and due diligence, declared Rwanda an unsafe country. That was backed up by the Home Office granting asylum to people from Rwanda very recently. People whose lives would be at risk if they were returned to Rwanda.
It's quite unbelievable that Sunak seems to think that if he can send 100 people to Rwanda his electoral prospects will be transformed. The cost to the taxpayer is staggering and legislating that Rwanda is safe in the face of clear evidence to the contrary is an astonishing political act. Sunak is just very poor at politics and how he got to be PM without anyone voting for him is a mystery.
It's common in politics thse days. Kilkenny has railed against it many times, Bojo, Truss, Sunak; It happened in Wales though, when Drakeford first took over he was selected by Labour members but not the electorate and itll bethe same when Gething is foisted on us.
UK politics is totally crooked, democracy is a myth.
It's common in politics thse days. Kilkenny has railed against it many times, Bojo, Truss, Sunak; It happened in Wales though, when Drakeford first took over he was selected by Labour members but not the electorate and itll bethe same when Gething is foisted on us.
UK politics is totally crooked, democracy is a myth.
It certainly is.
Sunak wasn’t even voted in by Conservative members, he lost to Truss on that score and then was unopposed because nobody else wanted the poisoned chalice. Best to get on with life and try to ignore politicians of all columns.
It was the UK Supreme Court that, after careful research and due diligence, declared Rwanda an unsafe country. That was backed up by the Home Office granting asylum to people from Rwanda very recently. People whose lives would be at risk if they were returned to Rwanda.
It's quite unbelievable that Sunak seems to think that if he can send 100 people to Rwanda his electoral prospects will be transformed. The cost to the taxpayer is staggering and legislating that Rwanda is safe in the face of clear evidence to the contrary is an astonishing political act. Sunak is just very poor at politics and how he got to be PM without anyone voting for him is a mystery.
Let me suggest a contrary argument. The Supreme Court received submissions from several bodies, including UNHCR, but it did not instigate any separate independent investigation of the facts. Usually judicial review is about the reasonableness of administrative or policy decisions rather than determining the facts of how a public policy will operate. The government orders the preparation of impact statements for that purpose and has more resources. It is interesting that the Divisional Court found for the government on reasonableness, but that the SC criticised that approach.
For me, the irony is that UNHCR itself sends asylum seekers, refugees and stateless persons to Rwanda, and in its 2024 situation report says many positive things about the country. Many refugees pass through Rwanda to other destinations but UNHCR states that it considers "local integration" to be an option. See extracts at end below.
Several international agencies, including WHO, consider Rwanda to be an exemplary case when it comes to universal healthcare provision.
It seems very curious that one UN body, WHO, is so positive while another, UNHCR, was so negative in its submissions to the UK courts.
I think you have misunderstood the position re successful asylum claims and the implication that an origin country is unsafe. Many governments including the UK operate with a concept of generally safe, meaning that a country is safe for most persons but that exceptionally certain individuals may be at risk of persecution. In the past asylum applications from many Western countries have been accepted by other Western countries, including several persons from the USA who were granted refugee status or at least leave to remain. A key point is that the Refugee Council and several other refugee NGOs strongly support the principle that no person from any country should face an absolute bar on an asylum claim because the said country has been designated as safe. Their argument is that there will be a few exceptional persons at risk in almost any country, and that case by case decisions are needed.
It seems that the critics of the policy in the HoL believe that Rwanda is unsafe because (a) a recent Select Committee visit to Rwanda where they sought assurances on certain legal guarantees left some doubts, and (b) a second committee examining the recent Treaty, identified 10 areas of concern. However, see what you think of the 2024 UNHCR Report that deals with the on-the-ground situation, and which seems surprisingly positive. I admit that Rwanda is not an ideal destination of choice for those who cross the channel, but one wonders what other African nation would meet the standards that the Lords have in mind.
FROM UNHCR COUNTRY REPORT 2024
Situation analysis
As of end of September 2023, Rwanda hosted 135,733 refugees, asylum seekers, and other displaced populations. The majority, 84,867 (62.5%) come from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), 50,146 (36.9%) from Burundi, 587 (0.4%) are hosted at the Emergency Transit Mechanism (ETM) and 133 (0.1%) refugees and asylum seekers from other nationalities. Approximately, 94% of these individuals reside in camps, with the remaining 6% living in urban areas.
Rwanda has also experienced an influx of new asylum seekers due to increased instability in the Eastern DRC since November 2022, with approximately 12,684 recorded as of the end of September 2023 with numbers anticipated to grow in the next year.
Rwanda’s policies provide for refugee inclusion into national services such as education, health, socio-economic and financial services (including access to investment & bank accounts) as outlined in Article 18 of the Law n°13ter/ 2014 of 21/05/2014. This law ensures that refugees enjoy the rights provided for by international refugee instruments.
Refugees have access to civil registration and documentation, including Proof of Registration (PoR), birth and marriage certificates, and refugee IDs issued by the Government of Rwanda for those above 16 years old. All new arrivals/asylum seekers in Rwanda, undergo individual Refugee Status Determination (RSD) by the Refugee Status Determination Committee (RSDC).
UNHCR provides shelter and communal services as a core life-saving activity to all refugees living in camps in Rwanda. (...) UNHCR ensures that all refugees have access to life-saving and essential health care through camp-based primary health facilities for refugees and inclusion in the national Community-Based Health Insurance (CBHI) for urban based refugees. UNHCR also supports and pays the cost of refugee referrals to secondary/tertiary healthcare at national hospitals, although advocacy is directed towards the inclusion of camp-based refugees in CBHI. (...)
In Rwanda, there is a gradual shift from a humanitarian approach to a developmental focus with emphasis on sustainable livelihoods and social cohesion. UNHCR is working to strengthen its advocacy with partners and assist refugees to become more self-reliant in line with GoR strategies. UNHCR also supports activities in community leadership, livelihoods, child protection, inclusion of People with Disabilities (PwDs) and in prevention and response of Gender Based Violence (GBV).
UNHCR provides technical and financial support to the government to address and prevent statelessness and will support the National Statelessness Taskforce. In 2024, the National Statelessness Taskforce plans to finalize a nationwide identification survey to determine an updated figure of the Stateless population in Rwanda and develop a strategy to provide solutions.
UNHCR has a solutions approach and is implementing a multi-year durable solutions strategy that aims at pursuing resettlement for the most vulnerable and protracted Congolese refugees, while examining other broader options including local integration and voluntary repatriation as and when feasible. In collaboration with the Governments of Rwanda and Burundi, UNHCR continues to support the return of Burundian refugees in safety and dignity."
(The report contains an impact statement that it aims to achieve in its current planning cycle).
Impact statement: Refugees, asylum seekers and stateless populations in Rwanda live in a safe environment where their protection needs are met.
She predicted this, and anyone and everyone outside of WOKE lunacy predicted this!
You see you cannot pour a pint into a half pint glass, fit twenty people into a taxi, put a one inch bolt into a half inch hole, etc, etc, etc.
"Social catastrophe"...."Spiralling social sabotage”…."Our tourism industry is destroyed beyond repair”…."There’s towns like Drogheda with no hotel, there’s Roosky with no hotel and that’s thanks to your reckless policy”…. “When we are all already confronted with an housing emergency”, etc, etc, etc.
We are seeing the biggest, most brazen and most obvious operation of human trafficking and slavery in British if not human history and a huge chunk of the population are welcoming it with open arms.
We are seeing the biggest, most brazen and most obvious operation of human trafficking and slavery in British if not human history and a huge chunk of the population are welcoming it with open arms.
A boat has been videoed arriving from France that contained a large amount of Vietnamese seeking (*cough, cough, cough*) 'asylum'.
1:26s in video!
I wonder what kind of professional expertise they will offer U.K society? I guess horticulture? I make the obvious suggestion that the U.K is being flooded with criminality and organised crime of type that I predicted way in advance a few years back on this very forum!!!!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
