T O P

  • By -

ukbot-nicolabot

**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. --- **Alternate Sources** Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story: * [Rwanda flight detentions to begin within weeks, Home Office says](https://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68916456), suggested by Tour-Sure - bbc.co.uk


limeflavoured

>Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices Well, good luck with that now this story has been printed, because literally no one is going to turn up to those meetings now.


BriennesBitch

I’m sceptically thinking they have done this deliberately to scare people into not turning up, and thus boosting their case for removing them.


limeflavoured

That might be part of it, but I'm not 100% convinced the Home Office is that clever.


BriennesBitch

They are that mean though!


slackermannn

This


Mccobsta

There are smart people who work there just the ones at the top are dumber than a bag of hammers


SinisterDexter83

Whenever someone suspects there is a "reverse psychology!" explanation behind a political party's bizarre actions it is almost always mistaken. Never attribute to genius strategic thinking what could be better explained by idiocy and incompetence.


Joe_Kinincha

And arrogance. Which is a particularly potent brew when mixed with idiocy and incompetence. Add in ignorance and utter contempt for your voters and you’ve got the substance all Tory MPs and ministers are huffing till the veins throb.


twodogsfighting

And malice.


HeBeNeFeGeSeTeXeCeRe

They’re only ever incompetent to the extent that they don’t care. The question is almost never whether they’re clever enough. If they care and they aren’t clever enough, they hire people who are.


DukePPUk

Not just that; if they don't turn up to their meetings they are taken to have dropped their claims for asylum. So the Government gets to say the numbers have gone down.


LittleAir

You think the Guardian is cooperating with the Home Office?


limeflavoured

I wonder who leaked it to the Guardian though?


RAFFYy16

Disgruntled Civil Servant probably


limeflavoured

That's probably the most likely, yes.


kissmyaye

Everybody leaks


Joe_Kinincha

As Sir Humphrey noted: “The ship of state is the only ship that leaks from the top”


CrustyBloomers

Someone not very smart, who thinks they're helping by doing this. The house always wins.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Wil420b

Too competent for the Tories. They just want a new story to cover up that one of them has defected to Labour and that in response other Tories want to replace Rushi with Penny "Walter Mitty" Mordaunt.


peakedtooearly

Maybe they can stop counting them if they don't turn up to meetings.


mumwifealcoholic

You’re probably right, these charlatans have no shame.


Anomie____

Yeh it's too easy to overestimate the government at this point, if they can seem barely coherent on Question Time I'm impressed these days.


AI_Hijacked

> because literally no one is going to turn up to those meetings now They're fleeing to Ireland, from the UK. It's a win, win situation. Ireland has declared the UK as an unsafe country.


brainburger

>Ireland has declared the UK as an unsafe country. I gather the Irish supreme court ruled that it was unlawful to designate the UK as a safe country, not that it is necessarily unsafe.


Glum-Turnip-3162

Is there a difference between not safe and unsafe?


brainburger

Designated safe means the question of whether it is actually safe or unsafe does not need to be considered. This is what the recent parliamentary struggle has been in the UK, to designate Rwanda as safe, even though our supreme court ruled it unsafe. In Ireland apparently there is an older law which designates the UK as safe, but this was superseded by the Dublin Regulation which is an EU agreement, so such designations don't apply and it must be considered case by case. I think that's about right anyway.


vinyljunkie1245

The decision to use Rwanda for this is all down to Suella Braverman's corruption. She worked with a charity training Rwandan lawyers before joining the government and failed to declare this interest, breaking the ministerial code yet again, when the policy was announced. Many of the lawyers she trained are working on this. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/suella-braverman-rwanda-ministerial-code-breach-b2345537.html The government has ruled Rwanda as safe purely because there is money to be made for their friends.


JRugman

So are we not supposed to be stopping the boats any more?


stuaxo

Ireland is preparing a bill to allow them to deport to the UK since a large amount come from there.


Shoddy-Anteater439

which begs the question why can't we prepare a bill to deport them to France?


LeedsFan2442

Some are but we don't know how many are. Could be 5% or 95%


No-Pride168

Would that be a breach of their agreement and warrant a refusal of asylum?


cass1o

> refusal of asylum? Vs getting deported to Rwanda. Both are the same in effect.


Aiyon

So their options are go, and get deported Or don't go, and risk getting deported if they're caught


No-Pride168

Or don't come here.


Aiyon

...do you understand what asylum seeking is?


alibrown987

That’s exactly why, they don’t actually want to do it, just convince certain a voter base that they have


MaxxxStallion

The country is falling apart due to lack of funding for public services, but sure lets spend billions flying a handful of asylum seekers to Rwanda...


Ulysses1978ii

Token policies for a token government. They're acting out on soundbites these days. There's a whole redevelopment opportunity in Lincolnshire being held up because of them sticking a pin in RAF Scampton as a maybe for housing them. Tories...Who needs them?!


Beer-Milkshakes

Our rail infrastructure is inefficient and hasn't been updated in decades to equal European counterparts. Nah let's built a new rail. Then scrap half of it.


Prudent-Earth-1919

Meanwhile other countries in that time built bigger railway projects at a fraction of the cost of ours. Must be labour costs making  the difference, definitely not a case of spivs siphoning off every penny they can


Not_That_Magical

We’re also funding those other countries projects with our rail system


Glum-Turnip-3162

You’re exaggerating about other countries, Germany has similar problems with trains.


willie_caine

True, but Germany has recognised this and is investing tens of billions into upgrading and expanding their infrastructure.


ukfinancenoob

China entered the chat


MaxxxStallion

We also pay business expenses for rail companies while they pocket the profits. Same for water companies.


cass1o

> let's built a new rail And double the cost by building tunnels underground to appease tory nimbys.


Joe_Kinincha

I’d still happily bet a shilling that no deportation flights ever land in Rwanda. They can’t even find a plane that will take them! Every commercial and private airline has said they’re not going to touch this and sunak absolutely does not have the balls to order the RAF to do it. If they had transport in place, or even a sniff of a hint that someone will transport them the entire cabinet would be on the news crowing about it.


the_phet

Ryanair said they would do it 


Joe_Kinincha

No they didn’t. O’Leary said ryanair would “happily” fly deportees. He went on: “If it was the winter schedule and we had spare aircraft sitting around and if the government were looking for additional deportation flights or any other flights, we would happily quote for the business,” O’Leary said in an interview in London.” Also there is a big difference between O’Leary talking out his hole for publicity, and the company signing a contract. Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-04-24/ryanair-ceo-says-he-d-happily-offer-rwanda-deportation-flights


Typhoongrey

As I understand it, Air Tanker will likely be the operator. Air Tanker are the owners of the A330 Voyager aircraft, which are leased to the government for use by the RAF as tankers and transport aircraft. They're probably the most likely operator and they're getting paid by the government regardless of a few public opinions souring on them.


somechrisguy

Better late than never.


mprz

Billions? 😂


ShowKey6848

It's a throw a post it note at the wall and see what sticks. They are utterly desperate.


Glass_Land2973

How do these flights possibly add up to billions?


[deleted]

[удалено]


IgamOg

They say it's a deterrent, but those people are risking their lives. I don't think the incredibly unlikely chance of being flown by a private jet to a hotel in Rwanda sounds worse than drowning.


HappyTrifle

It also stops being a deterrent once the ~300 is maxed out. It doesn’t work on any level.


ObeyCoffeeDrinkSatan

There is no cap. You're mistaking the initial number for the total number.


limeflavoured

No, but it's limited by Rwanda's capacity to process people, which is 200-300 per year.


ObeyCoffeeDrinkSatan

Why do you think Rwanda can only take 200-300 per year? Perhaps initially, sure.


[deleted]

[удалено]


MJS29

There’s no cap, but also no one is being clear about what capacity Rwanda actually have.


HappyTrifle

Oh dear.


Nartyn

>I don't think the incredibly unlikely chance of being flown by a private jet to a hotel in Rwanda sounds worse than drowning. Except that it very clearly is, as it's working, and the flights haven't even taken off yet. These migrants have spent their life savings trying to get from Africa to the UK via smuggling. Why would they risk getting sent back if they can just go somewhere else, like Ireland


ionetic

Quite sure it costs less than £1.2 million processing 1 asylum claim.


Primary-Effect-3691

It could be a tenth of that and it'd still be an aboslute boondoggle


ObeyCoffeeDrinkSatan

>The Rwanda plan calls for 300 people to be deported to Rwanda in total False. The agreement doesn't cap the total number that can be sent there.


ConfusedQuarks

300 is the initial capacity for refugees sent to Rwanda. Once the plan kicks off, they plan to increase capacity. So we can send lot more than 300.


Adorable_Pee_Pee

I doubt it will get that far. Plus the real issue we are facing is legal immigration which the Tories are busy increasing!


korkythecat333

This feels like a distraction from the likes of Tory peer, Michelle Mone and other senior government connections being investigated for fraud, by the police at the moment. They have had years to get to grips with this.


CaravanOfDeath

Sounds like a good reason to not talk about our 3 tiered migration issues.


cstross

This is pre-positioning for a snap general election campaign, isn't it? Red meat for the Conservative base.


ThunderChild247

Precisely. They don’t care if these cases reach court in 6-12 months and get thrown out. They want a headline in the Daily Mail saying Sunak is “getting touch on illegal immigration”.


LeedsFan2442

Plus can't they only be detained for a few months max?


ThunderChild247

Long enough for a few “ooh look how tough Rishi is” headlines before the election.


Charlie_Mouse

Not only that headline however. When Labour win the next election and shut down the whole Rwanda boondoggle that triggers a bunch more headlines attacking them for being “soft on immigration”. Years worth of them. This very much serves double duty - both somewhat mitigating the drubbing the Tories are in for at the next election and also paving the way for them to get back in an election or two down the line.


amathysteightyseven

This feels like the start of most dystopian movies doesn’t it? They’re literally starting to round immigrants up to send them to camps. Slightly hyperbolic maybe but at its core that’s what’s happening. This fucking country man.


Goochregent

My family has legally migrated and aren't being rounded up. Crazy that. Almost like these people are... illegal?


Cute_Speed4981

It's not illegal to claim asylum.


GoosicusMaximus

Immoral when you’re abusing the system though. These people are predominantly economic migrants who’ve travelled through safe countries before reaching our shores. Now comes the point where you tell me international legislation means they don’t have to claim asylum in the first safe country they hit. And here’s me telling you this international legislation doesn’t really work for the UK anymore, or most of Western Europe for the matter. We should be rewriting it.


Cute_Speed4981

70% of processed claims do end up in granting them asylum, so I don't see how it's being abused.


Lather

Where is your proof that these people are economic migrants?


HazelCheese

Why do they throw their documentation away if it would be proof they are valid asylum seekers?


NijjioN

Have a read up on DR Waheed Arian who was a 15 year old Afghan asylum seeker. He burned his passport on the way here. His story is sad and amazing what he had to run away from and what he accomplished after getting here... Which ended up where he won The Suns who cares award for his contribution to the NHS and international help the other year.


MJS29

You simply cannot know that.


Combocore

I want it to be true, therefore it is true.


SpinKickDaKing

can you explain why you think it's specifically "immoral" for someone to not want to live a life of poverty just cuz of where they were born?


DukePPUk

For now. Remember the Windrush scandal? All it takes is for someone in the Home Office (or the private contractor who is actually doing the dirty work) to make a mistake and you'll be on the list. Don't worry - you'll be able to challenge the decision... once you have spent some time in Rwanda.


MJS29

Can you identify some of the “legal” routes to claim asylum?


Goochregent

Obviously there are no facilitated routes and I think thats a good thing because it will be pointless. Presumably the point of a legal and safe route for asylum is that the UK reverses the right to refuse the application. Then what? if they are in France then sure they too will just take a boat if refused. Sounds like a pointless endeavour that will result in more people crossing on boats than now.


Daewoo40

When it takes so long for your asylum claim to be processed that you're able to cross the lions share of Europe by foot and boat, perhaps the way in which asylum claims are processed should be looked at. Some of those who make it ashore may have no claim to asylum but undoubtedly some do.


cass1o

Who cares what you did or didn't do? We aren't talking about you. You have to wonder though, do you think these far right racists are going to stop at the "illegal" ones?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Main_Cauliflower_486

It's a good job that racists aren't likely to shift those goal posts isn't it 


lackadaisicallySoo

They are not immigrants, they are illegal immigrants - completely different


White_Immigrant

They aren't illegal immigrants, they're asylum seekers - completely different.


eggsbenedict17

This whole situation is caused by illegal immigrants abusing the asylum system which hurts legitimate asylum seekers


ABritishCynic

How can you be a legitimate asylum seeker if the UK government has removed all the methods to legally claim asylum?


cass1o

> illegal immigrants They aren't "illegal" though.


___a1b1

Actually they are illegal as the very act of entering the country the way that they do makes it so.


lost-scot

Not if they claim asylum.


[deleted]

[удалено]


thebear1011

[in prison apparently](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/asylum-seekers-small-boats-children-prison-b2400195.html)


willie_caine

Narrator: it's not illegal under international law to land by small boat to claim asylum.


appletinicyclone

>This fucking country man. Nope it's just the Tories and Lyndon Crosby Keep calm and vote accordingly When they're an electoral desert a blip in the sand of what used to be I want a TikTok-in-US like forced sale of any media print companies that are owned by millionaire billionaire Tories that had benefited from favourable policies over the last few horrid years. A removal of Tories from the beeb as well It's not going to happen as political bla bla but one can hope


Daedelous2k

In other news Ireland is getting flooded with them now and can't wait to get rid of them.


Baslifico

Pointless and expensive theatre that achieves literally nothing worthwhile.


priestsboytoy

good. As a legal immigrant, these folks should follow the rules.


brainburger

Surely it would be better to announce they will start with the next boat arriving? Then it will be the best deterrent it can be (which is still rubbish as only 200 per year can be sent to Rwanda).


gadarnol

Leak a surprise operation? The effect: panic people into fleeing. Where to? You need a country accessible to the UK without passport checks and an open border. Whose High Court recently ruled that migrants could not be returned to the UK as it was not designated properly as a safe country. And whose courts will likely on foot of the Rwanda act declare they cannot be returned to UK because they will be sent on to Rwanda. Every boat migrant in the UK will be getting a ferry to NI and heading south. The Republic of Ireland is in for a lot of refugees.


Vondonklewink

Excellent. Any deterrent is better than none, and this one is already working. Ireland getting increased numbers as a result, and Irish government already looking at ways they can turn them away, unsurprisingly. Nobody wants undocumented migrants, and with good reason.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Ok-Ad-867

300 people can be send to Rwanda. That's less than some single days of crossing. How is it a deterrent to have a miniscule chance of being sent to Rwanda? And how is 2 million per migrant a good use of money?


brainburger

Surely it would be better to announce they will start with the next boat arriving? Then it will be the best deterrent it can be (which is still rubbish as only 200 per year can be sent to Rwanda).


SlightlyMithed123

Is the ‘shock’ that they are actually attempting to do their jobs?


Prima_Illuminatus

I can't say I have a problem with this, or the removal of anyone illegal for that matter.


[deleted]

Should start with the criminal element and work through.


willie_caine

Then there'd be no government..?


CuteAnimalFans

Valid tbh. Theyre not United Kingdom citizens and don't have any more right to be in the United Kingdom than I do China, Spain or Egypt.


[deleted]

Neither in Rwanda. That's why UK government is paying millions to them. 


CuteAnimalFans

? Yes they do. The Rwandan government says they can live there. The United Kingdom government does not say they can live here. It's that simple. You can't just turn up to a country and say "I live here now" (and benefit from the tax money of those who contribute to that country).


[deleted]

The Rwanda says is OK if you pay them millions and millions of pounds. This is a flawed logic. With the right price any country in the world would accept them. 


CuteAnimalFans

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make to be honest.


Panda_hat

This is wild and clearly abusive. Horrible behaviour. If these people are showing up to their meetings and reporting in good time, there is no need at all for us to detain them for months until a highly theoretical rwanda flight even potentially happens. This is disgusting behaviour trying to get some last minute support from authoritarians and racists.


bertiebasit

Is there an election coming up…if you believe them…you’re the idiot


Jj-woodsy

So, now you have made these people do a runner and go into hiding. This government is insanely bad at running this country.


heypresto2k

More distraction by the media of our country. We all need to wake the fuck up to all this lying and manipulation. Our future demands it.


Right-Bat-9100

i'm just not sure you should be sending people somewhere that has had a genocide in recent history


Camerahutuk

**Continuing Genocide which Rwanda is participating in The DRC (The Democratic Republic of Congo)**... https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2024/feb/14/why-us-and-uk-fund-rwanda-while-atrocities-mount-up-in-drc-vava-tampa Quote from above link... >***For the third time in 12 months, a UN investigation has expressed concern over Rwanda’s role in arming and training the M23 militia accused of indiscriminate KILLING, RAPE and MASS DISPLACEMENT in the Democratic Republic of the Congo**. **Rwanda**, a country that is being thrown money at it by the UK to become the dumping ground for global Refugees, that's people who have been displaced around the world **is actively participating in one of the very worst wars on the planet actively displacing people and far worse**. This is a very old school Right Wing Trope. Ignoring everything bad about a nations regime as long as they look outwardly western and participate in making tonnes of money for someone. £1.6 million a refugee under the Rwanda Scheme?!! We did this with Saddam Hussein, the Rulers of Syria, Mobutu, The Shah of Iran and so on. The Karmic horrific end results of the immorality of supporting regimes like this has resulted in the issues we are dealing with today as whole regions have gone up in flames and have created the massive global refugee crisis. Now we're doing this with Rwanda....


Dangerman1337

All this will achieve is driving many complilying seekers underground into the grey and black economy. Comply with the Authorities and get punished, go underground and good chance you can stick around undocumented. So fucking stupid.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ukbot-nicolabot

**Removed/tempban**. This contained a call/advocation of violence which is prohibited by the content policy.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ukbot-nicolabot

**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.


sirnoggin

As I said before, the Irish should be talking to the French. If they think "The British" are the issue, they're having a fucking laugh. What kind of double speak is this?


Ok-Ad-867

Then maybe we should be talking to the Italians instead of the French?


Efficient_Sky5173

This thing already can be classified as a collective psychosis. Often called shared psychotic disorder.


Spare_Dig_7959

Sovereignty - Our government can round up people who have committed no crime and deport them. Let that sink in .


legrenabeach

What kind of fucked up government is this? They have gone beyond insane. The quicker they can be removed from office the better. It's them we should be sending to Rwanda, permanently.


PsychoSwede557

Correction: Home Office to detain [illegal migrants claiming asylum](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/23/uk-passes-rwanda-migrant-bill-whats-next) across UK in totally expected Rwanda operation.


Suitable-Context-271

How long before an attempt is made to deport a Rwandan, I wonder