Rwanda Policy Defeated By UK Court , Braverman spitting teeth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AfricanBluebird

I've spent a lot of time in Rwanda and the organisation I work for has an office there.

It's a beautiful country with lovely people.

While the government takes two steps forwards with regards to infrastructure (social and transport etc), they take a giant leap backwards with regards to human rights, freedoms , democracy etc. its a very controlling and toxic environment.

I know people who have been taken by the Rwandan authorities and treated appallingly. I can't elaborate here.

The last time Rwanda accepted asylum seekers from other countries it was a disaster with many of the asylum seekers being mistreated. When they escaped, they were killed.

It is not an African utopia.


As for pipsters questions:

What would you do with the ones already here -
things like :

1. Where would you house them ? - firstly we need to process them quickly to make sure they are not staying in poor conditions paid for (over paid for) by the the public purse. Get them into work and filling the huge shortages we have. They can then pay rent and contribute in taxes. (some people wait 4 (FOUR) years before their claim is accepted or rejected). In terms of housing - this is a bigger issue and i am so disappointed with both main political parties for under investing in homes and also allowing landlords and corporations (many foreign) to buy up properties which could be available. Londongrad explains how so many properties in London are bought by foreign companies or oligarchs and remain empty. With the money allocated to sending people to Rwanda, that could easily be used to make 10000's of empty properties available and fix up the so many dilapidated properties in our cities.

2. Would they have priority over existing people on Council house waiting lists ?

See above - no they wouldn't and nor should they... get them into work and let them rent or buy like most others - with the caveat that local authorities get funding from central government to renovate available houses and make them available to everyone.

3. Would you allow them to work ?

Yes - why on earth would anyone NOT want them to work? That is mental. Work, pay tax, pay NI, fill the workforce shortages and save us a ton of money to house them for years while we process their claims... a no brainer.

4. Would you allow them to claim benefits ?

Allow them to work and let them be a full part of the system - paying TAX and NI and if they do fall out of work, then yes they should be able to claim benefits if they are legally allowed to work and live here.

5. Would you offer them safe passage to another country ?

If they wanted it and if they had links to another country... yes. Perhaps we could join some kind of union with our neighbours and negotiate a deal where we share the refugee /asylum population

---

Is the conflict between Hutu’s and Tutsi’s a thing of the past or still an under current of oppression/violence?

I watched a documentary about Liverpool fans there from both sides making peace over football despite how bad things were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

If Brexit was a football manager it would be Colin.

---

I don't understand working class people like warnock sucking up to the Tories

He's a Sheffield boy , a city built on steel and coal yet he's in love with Thatcher

That long haired git Peter Stringfellow was the same

Maybe they had a domineering mother

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Easy to say from Cowbridge eh.

Interesting that the Rwandan govt have strongly criticised the decision? Bit of old school imperialist racism from these elderly Oxbridge judges perhaps?

---

Ah I understand, a bunch of wet eared woke lefty lawyers made the appeal and a bunch of decrepid elite establishment racists agreed with them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays

Ah I understand, a bunch of wet eared woke lefty lawyers made the appeal and a bunch of decrepid elite establishment racists agreed with them.

---

:hehe:

It is starting to sound like real tinfoil hat stuff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wash DC Blue

Is the conflict between Hutu’s and Tutsi’s a thing of the past or still an under current of oppression/violence?

I watched a documentary about Liverpool fans there from both sides making peace over football despite how bad things were.

---

Good question wash DC Blue.

You are not even allowed to talk openly about what happened in 94.

Of course the hutu and tutsi thing is interesting.

There was actually NO such thing as a hutu or a tutsi.. They were labels created by the belgiums and french to divide and conquer.. terms are banned in rwanda.

But tensions remain.

Wounds unattended and ignored will sadly cut deep and long

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I don't understand working class people like warnock sucking up to the Tories

He's a Sheffield boy , a city built on steel and coal yet he's in love with Thatcher

That long haired git Peter Stringfellow was the same

Maybe they had a domineering mother

---

He's got loadsamoney!

I think people saying "process them quicker" are completely missing the point. People throw their identity papers away. They claim to be from somewhere they aren't, they make tracing their origin near impossible. Lawyers intervene at every juncture to support them and so removing them is very costly and in the interim they have to be housed and cared for, all while we have a very severe housing crisis that it seems previously few understand from the coalface.

France is a safe country, our asylum laws are being totally abused. If people were abusing disability benefit or something else, the left would be up in arms. But because absolutely everything has to be sacrificed at the altar of race politics, then it's all fine.

But it isn't fine. Its an absolute mess and people are playing with fire in hoping this problem will go away

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

I think people saying "process them quicker" are completely missing the point. People throw their identity papers away. They claim to be from somewhere they aren't, they make tracing their origin near impossible. Lawyers intervene at every juncture to support them and so removing them is very costly and in the interim they have to be housed and cared for, all while we have a very severe housing crisis that it seems previously few understand from the coalface.

France is a safe country, our asylum laws are being totally abused. If people were abusing disability benefit or something else, the left would be up in arms. But because absolutely everything has to be sacrificed at the altar of race politics, then it's all fine.

But it isn't fine. Its an absolute mess and people are playing with fire in hoping this problem will go away

---

Lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canton Kev

Lol

---

It's not a lol situation in any respect Kev.

Only this week we've seen stories about people being left homeless and 100 job losses. It's not a game and like I said, people need to get real on this as there is the potential for it to become a serious social issue.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65984461

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...l-set-27213583

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

I think people saying "process them quicker" are completely missing the point. People throw their identity papers away. They claim to be from somewhere they aren't, they make tracing their origin near impossible. Lawyers intervene at every juncture to support them and so removing them is very costly and in the interim they have to be housed and cared for, all while we have a very severe housing crisis that it seems previously few understand from the coalface.

France is a safe country, our asylum laws are being totally abused. If people were abusing disability benefit or something else, the left would be up in arms. But because absolutely everything has to be sacrificed at the altar of race politics, then it's all fine.

But it isn't fine. Its an absolute mess and people are playing with fire in hoping this problem will go away

---

Does James know someone is posting Daily Mail editorials in his name?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

I think people saying "process them quicker" are completely missing the point. People throw their identity papers away. They claim to be from somewhere they aren't, they make tracing their origin near impossible. Lawyers intervene at every juncture to support them and so removing them is very costly and in the interim they have to be housed and cared for, all while we have a very severe housing crisis that it seems previously few understand from the coalface.

France is a safe country, our asylum laws are being totally abused. If people were abusing disability benefit or something else, the left would be up in arms. But because absolutely everything has to be sacrificed at the altar of race politics, then it's all fine.

But it isn't fine. Its an absolute mess and people are playing with fire in hoping this problem will go away

---

The 2022 home office reports states that 61% of asylum seeker coming on small boats (2021 figures) would have their application accepted e.g. For the top 10 countries of origin arriving by small boat, 61% of initial decisions made in the 18 months to June 2021 would have resulted in refugee protection being granted, the report states. This compares with 52% of decisions made for all nationalities in the same period, eventually accepted. The report shows 59% of appeals are likely be allowed for the top 10 countries of origin, compared with 46% for appeals allowed for all countries. For example, 59% of appeals by Iranians are likely to be successful, as are 69% of Sudanese appeals and 73% of appeals by Syrians.

This completely contradicts the government and right wing medias narrative.

Therefore - if people on small boats are hiding paperwork from authorities - the 2022 home office report did not mention it and that is not reflected in the above figures.

However, one of the biggest problems with small boats is that because legal routes are closed AND we are not actively participating in the EUAA Resettlement and Humanitarian Admission (RST&HA). We (UK) is doing little to try and end conflicts where these refugees are coming from or work with their surrounding countries.


People should be asking these questions:

why are we not working with European partners to harmonise approaches with refugees?
why has the prosecutions (in the UK) for people smugglers and human traffickers actually gone down? (look at the https://www.ons.gov.uk/ data)
why hasn't the government opened processing centres in Europe so people can go to a centre rather than risk the small boat crossing?
why did the boat crossings NOT stop when the rwandan policy was introduced?
if rwanda is such a utopia then why does the government use it as a deterrent? is it a carrot or a stick?
if rwanda is such a wonder opportunity for asylum seekers, why have they all fled (from other similar schemes) from rwanda detention centres when placed there?
rwanda has admitted they process just a handful of asylum claims a year - they do not have the systems to process more than 100 and the money we have given to rwanda has ONLY gone into building prisons for them, not any administration.
there is no guarantee that asylum claims will even be processed and asylum claims honoured in rwanda.. in fact rwanda has granted 0 people from Afghanistan/Iraq and Iran right to remain over the last few years.
so what will happen to those refugees who are denied right to remain in rwanda? historically rwanda has treated such people absolutely appallingly.
why is it costing £170,000 per person we send?
why has the government, who keep shouting about the problem, reduced significantly the staff working on claims and yet will spaff money away on ridiculous and expensive schemes like rwanda?


I could go on, and on, but let's all remember, the Tories have been in power for 13 years and has allowed this absolute cluster**** to evolve into this current situation ... however, they will now blame 'woke' judges for stopping what they say is the golden ticket solution - which even from this thread shows that it never was a proper solution in the first place.

Before people accuse me of being a Tory hater (which is totally true)... I do not think that labour has a coherent or workable solution for the problems raised in this thread. Would things be better under labour.. undoubtedly they would be better (on the basis that the bar is SO low). But would they be good... nah..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Does James know someone is posting Daily Mail editorials in his name?

---

I thought they had got rid of quentin letts but he's clearly alive and well

Great answers - however the african elephant is still in the room (no pun intended). All good stuff - but back to reality:
We cant process the ones that are here quick enough hence the never ending backlog.

Lets take it at face value though - as of Monday - you have found them all - a house to live in, a job to work, a school place, and all the other stuff like Doctors, Dentists etc etc.


You still have a problem - for over 20 years - they have still been coming in (successive Govts on all sides havent been able to stop it) - so the problem doesnt go away - it gets worse - as people now realise - hey no problem, look what the great people in the UK are doing for me and so more come and we have to do the same with them (as you suggested) - and then more come etc - you now have an exponential problem

It's a great idea - get them all to work - give them a job and a home - but the practicalities of it are ultimately unsolvable. So as much as I admire the 'easy' solution - I think it's a little bit more complicated than that - unfortunately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AfricanBluebird

The 2022 home office reports states that 61% of asylum seeker coming on small boats (2021 figures) would have their application accepted e.g. For the top 10 countries of origin arriving by small boat, 61% of initial decisions made in the 18 months to June 2021 would have resulted in refugee protection being granted, the report states. This compares with 52% of decisions made for all nationalities in the same period, eventually accepted. The report shows 59% of appeals are likely be allowed for the top 10 countries of origin, compared with 46% for appeals allowed for all countries. For example, 59% of appeals by Iranians are likely to be successful, as are 69% of Sudanese appeals and 73% of appeals by Syrians.

This completely contradicts the government and right wing medias narrative.

Therefore - if people on small boats are hiding paperwork from authorities - the 2022 home office report did not mention it and that is not reflected in the above figures.

However, one of the biggest problems with small boats is that because legal routes are closed AND we are not actively participating in the EUAA Resettlement and Humanitarian Admission (RST&HA). We (UK) is doing little to try and end conflicts where these refugees are coming from or work with their surrounding countries.


People should be asking these questions:

why are we not working with European partners to harmonise approaches with refugees?
why has the prosecutions (in the UK) for people smugglers and human traffickers actually gone down? (look at the https://www.ons.gov.uk/ data)
why hasn't the government opened processing centres in Europe so people can go to a centre rather than risk the small boat crossing?
why did the boat crossings NOT stop when the rwandan policy was introduced?
if rwanda is such a utopia then why does the government use it as a deterrent? is it a carrot or a stick?
if rwanda is such a wonder opportunity for asylum seekers, why have they all fled (from other similar schemes) from rwanda detention centres when placed there?
rwanda has admitted they process just a handful of asylum claims a year - they do not have the systems to process more than 100 and the money we have given to rwanda has ONLY gone into building prisons for them, not any administration.
there is no guarantee that asylum claims will even be processed and asylum claims honoured in rwanda.. in fact rwanda has granted 0 people from Afghanistan/Iraq and Iran right to remain over the last few years.
so what will happen to those refugees who are denied right to remain in rwanda? historically rwanda has treated such people absolutely appallingly.
why is it costing £170,000 per person we send?
why has the government, who keep shouting about the problem, reduced significantly the staff working on claims and yet will spaff money away on ridiculous and expensive schemes like rwanda?


I could go on, and on, but let's all remember, the Tories have been in power for 13 years and has allowed this absolute cluster**** to evolve into this current situation ... however, they will now blame 'woke' judges for stopping what they say is the golden ticket solution - which even from this thread shows that it never was a proper solution in the first place.

---

Braverman who says she's going after the smugglers and the boat operators .....for the British people ! .......is as you say presiding over a system whereby FEWER people involved in this rotten trade .....she likes to emphasise this ......are being brought before the courts for their actions ?

It's all bullshit from them

Tough on the people smugglers ? Get on with it then

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AfricanBluebird

Before people accuse me of being a Tory hater (which is totally true)... I do not think that labour has a coherent or workable solution for the problems raised in this thread. Would things be better under labour.. undoubtedly they would be better (on the basis that the bar is SO low). But would they be good... nah..

---

I agree with you , the labour party are full of shit but at least after 13 years of lies from tory home secretaries they should be given a go

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

It's not a lol situation in any respect Kev.

Only this week we've seen stories about people being left homeless and 100 job losses. It's not a game and like I said, people need to get real on this as there is the potential for it to become a serious social issue.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65984461

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...l-set-27213583

---

I’m not laughing at the situation, I’m laughing at you. You’ll do anything you can to avoid blaming the current people in power.

Instead of blaming them for coming up with a ridiculous, expensive and widely criticised plan, you blame old racist judges for shooting that plan down.

You complain people are abusing a broken system but won’t criticise the government who haven’t fixed, or even attempted to fix, the broken system in their 14 years in power. In fact, under the Tories, the problem has only gotten worse.

You complain that we’ve got a severe housing crisis so can’t accommodate migrants, but you ignore that the government have done very little to address that housing crisis for years.

As for your last point, I’ll go grab the Daily Mail and you pick up the Guardian. We both know which one’s more likely to have an article slagging off a single mum on benefits for buying a pack of fags or a bike for her kid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipster

Great answers - however the african elephant is still in the room (no pun intended). All good stuff - but back to reality:
We cant process the ones that are here quick enough hence the never ending backlog..

---

Why can't we process them more quickly?

Let's unpack that - the Home Office has had a huge problem with recruitment, training and retention of staff who process asylum claims. Last year they did recruit more staff but they can't hold onto them.. why? whistleblowers will claim poor working conditions and unrealistic targets and also interference / pressure from the home office.

Also, while there has been an increase in numbers arriving this has been made worse by leaving the EU as we now have NO returns agreement with the EU - all the more reason why we should have processing centres in key areas in Europe and work with European partners.

Can you see the irony (and by irony I mean stupidity) on spending £170000 per person we want to spend to Rwanda and yet the government are not investing in recruitment and retention of staff or setting up European satellite centres... all would cost so much less than the money currently being spent on hotels and stupid deals with Rwanda.

From a purely economic basis - we could offer the EU £50k per person to have them in Europe and still save £120k per person (more when you add hosting and processing costs)! So the Rwanda scheme is wrong both morally and economically.

In 2021 - of the more than 17,000 potential returnees only 21 had been returned. Some have now been allowed to make asylum claims - but it appears more than 9,000 are in a limbo: housed by the Home Office, yet blocked from applying to legally stay and get a job. Absolutely bonkers.


This is a mess of the governments own making and there were and are other solutions, some of which I and others have outlined here.

Like I said... the Tories have completely and utterly messed up the system and it is now overwhelmed and costly but at the same time I do not see any long term plan by labour for fixing the problems.

Anyway... at least the conversation on here is respectful and intelligent= BUT i think it is an indication that city need to sign some players - maybe they are working on their work visas ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AfricanBluebird

Why can't we process them more quickly?

Let's unpack that - the Home Office has had a huge problem with recruitment, training and retention of staff who process asylum claims. Last year they did recruit more staff but they can't hold onto them.. why? whistleblowers will claim poor working conditions and unrealistic targets and also interference / pressure from the home office.

Also, while there has been an increase in numbers arriving this has been made worse by leaving the EU as we now have NO returns agreement with the EU - all the more reason why we should have processing centres in key areas in Europe and work with European partners.

Can you see the irony (and by irony I mean stupidity) on spending £170000 per person we want to spend to Rwanda and yet the government are not investing in recruitment and retention of staff or setting up European satellite centres... all would cost so much less than the money currently being spent on hotels and stupid deals with Rwanda.

From a purely economic basis - we could offer the EU £50k per person to have them in Europe and still save £120k per person (more when you add hosting and processing costs)! So the Rwanda scheme is wrong both morally and economically.

In 2021 - of the more than 17,000 potential returnees only 21 had been returned. Some have now been allowed to make asylum claims - but it appears more than 9,000 are in a limbo: housed by the Home Office, yet blocked from applying to legally stay and get a job. Absolutely bonkers.


This is a mess of the governments own making and there were and are other solutions, some of which I and others have outlined here.

Like I said... the Tories have completely and utterly messed up the system and it is now overwhelmed and costly but at the same time I do not see any long term plan by labour for fixing the problems.

Anyway... at least the conversation on here is respectful and intelligent= BUT i think it is an indication that city need to sign some players - maybe they are working on their work visas ;)

---

I'm sure some of these immigrants play football; let's sign them up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AfricanBluebird

Why can't we process them more quickly?

Let's unpack that - the Home Office has had a huge problem with recruitment, training and retention of staff who process asylum claims. Last year they did recruit more staff but they can't hold onto them.. why? whistleblowers will claim poor working conditions and unrealistic targets and also interference / pressure from the home office.

Also, while there has been an increase in numbers arriving this has been made worse by leaving the EU as we now have NO returns agreement with the EU - all the more reason why we should have processing centres in key areas in Europe and work with European partners.

Can you see the irony (and by irony I mean stupidity) on spending £170000 per person we want to spend to Rwanda and yet the government are not investing in recruitment and retention of staff or setting up European satellite centres... all would cost so much less than the money currently being spent on hotels and stupid deals with Rwanda.

From a purely economic basis - we could offer the EU £50k per person to have them in Europe and still save £120k per person (more when you add hosting and processing costs)! So the Rwanda scheme is wrong both morally and economically.

In 2021 - of the more than 17,000 potential returnees only 21 had been returned. Some have now been allowed to make asylum claims - but it appears more than 9,000 are in a limbo: housed by the Home Office, yet blocked from applying to legally stay and get a job. Absolutely bonkers.


This is a mess of the governments own making and there were and are other solutions, some of which I and others have outlined here.

Like I said... the Tories have completely and utterly messed up the system and it is now overwhelmed and costly but at the same time I do not see any long term plan by labour for fixing the problems.

Anyway... at least the conversation on here is respectful and intelligent= BUT i think it is an indication that city need to sign some players - maybe they are working on their work visas ;)

---

I don't think it is something of the govts own making. It's a problem affecting many countries.

The govt have met their requirements in terms of housing and caring for people and they have tried to reduce numbers but with limited success. They have dramatically reduced numbers from Albania - which was the most outrageous example of exploitation of the system.

They are trying to build disincentives to coming, and have now lost this case and will be appealing. At every turn they are thrwarted, generally by opinions and institutions you would support. So no, I don't really blame them. At least they recognised the problem sooner (whilst others were still shouting racism!) and arec trying to do something and at least seemingly care about the issue and the impact upon many communities, which many don't seem to care about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AfricanBluebird

The 2022 home office reports states that 61% of asylum seeker coming on small boats (2021 figures) would have their application accepted e.g. For the top 10 countries of origin arriving by small boat, 61% of initial decisions made in the 18 months to June 2021 would have resulted in refugee protection being granted, the report states. This compares with 52% of decisions made for all nationalities in the same period, eventually accepted. The report shows 59% of appeals are likely be allowed for the top 10 countries of origin, compared with 46% for appeals allowed for all countries. For example, 59% of appeals by Iranians are likely to be successful, as are 69% of Sudanese appeals and 73% of appeals by Syrians.

This completely contradicts the government and right wing medias narrative.

Therefore - if people on small boats are hiding paperwork from authorities - the 2022 home office report did not mention it and that is not reflected in the above figures.

However, one of the biggest problems with small boats is that because legal routes are closed AND we are not actively participating in the EUAA Resettlement and Humanitarian Admission (RST&HA). We (UK) is doing little to try and end conflicts where these refugees are coming from or work with their surrounding countries.


People should be asking these questions:

why are we not working with European partners to harmonise approaches with refugees?
why has the prosecutions (in the UK) for people smugglers and human traffickers actually gone down? (look at the https://www.ons.gov.uk/ data)
why hasn't the government opened processing centres in Europe so people can go to a centre rather than risk the small boat crossing?
why did the boat crossings NOT stop when the rwandan policy was introduced?
if rwanda is such a utopia then why does the government use it as a deterrent? is it a carrot or a stick?
if rwanda is such a wonder opportunity for asylum seekers, why have they all fled (from other similar schemes) from rwanda detention centres when placed there?
rwanda has admitted they process just a handful of asylum claims a year - they do not have the systems to process more than 100 and the money we have given to rwanda has ONLY gone into building prisons for them, not any administration.
there is no guarantee that asylum claims will even be processed and asylum claims honoured in rwanda.. in fact rwanda has granted 0 people from Afghanistan/Iraq and Iran right to remain over the last few years.
so what will happen to those refugees who are denied right to remain in rwanda? historically rwanda has treated such people absolutely appallingly.
why is it costing £170,000 per person we send?
why has the government, who keep shouting about the problem, reduced significantly the staff working on claims and yet will spaff money away on ridiculous and expensive schemes like rwanda?


I could go on, and on, but let's all remember, the Tories have been in power for 13 years and has allowed this absolute cluster**** to evolve into this current situation ... however, they will now blame 'woke' judges for stopping what they say is the golden ticket solution - which even from this thread shows that it never was a proper solution in the first place.

---

The problem is, you make no account for numbers whatsoever. People just assume the UK can absorb any number of people and there is no impact on society. But there is. It takes years to plan social services, housing, health and education places.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

The problem is, you make no account for numbers whatsoever. People just assume the UK can absorb any number of people and there is no impact on society. But there is. It takes years to plan social services, housing, health and education places.

---

More than 13?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

The problem is, you make no account for numbers whatsoever. People just assume the UK can absorb any number of people and there is no impact on society. But there is. It takes years to plan social services, housing, health and education places.

---

You want them to send 1000s a month to a country that currently processes a handful of claims a year. It's not everyone else who has no grasp of the numbers, it's you.

Nobody is saying absorb them, they are saying process them quickly and send them home, like we used to.

We processed more claims in 2002, why have we got so much worse at doing something seemingly so simple, you seem to know where they are all from so why doesn't the home office?

I'm now deeply suspicious that this government is desperate for the problem to get worse and for the policy to be blocked on legal grounds. Their only chances of winning the next election are either starmer turning trans or the Tories managing to whip people into a 2016 'everyone from Turkey is moving here imminently' style frenzy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canton Kev

More than 13?

---

These things are typically delivered locally. But yeah a govt cant plan years in advance for an incalculable number of people

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

You want them to send 1000s a month to a country that currently processes a handful of claims a year. It's not everyone else who has no grasp of the numbers, it's you.

Nobody is saying absorb them, they are saying process them quickly and send them home, like we used to.

We processed more claims in 2002, why have we got so much worse at doing something seemingly so simple, you seem to know where they are all from so why doesn't the home office?

I'm now deeply suspicious that this government is desperate for the problem to get worse and for the policy to be blocked on legal grounds. Their only chances of winning the next election are either starmer turning trans or the Tories managing to whip people into a 2016 'everyone from Turkey is moving here imminently' style frenzy.

---

Bingo! It's their only hope in Hell. Bring back Brexit fever and start dusting down those old Union Jacks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

It takes years to plan social services, housing, health and education places.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

A govt cant plan years in advance for an incalculable number of people

---

It takes years to plan for something that they can't plan years in advance for?

The number isn't incalculable. We know how many are coming over and we know how many we accept. If we wanted to we could put a hard limit on the precise number of people we let in which would make the number extremely calculable.

Forget the backlog issues and expanding that.

Like I said - you were PM today - by Monday - you had found them all somewhere to live, you have found them a job and got them access to schools, Dr's / Dentists etc. All good, you have fixed the immediate problem - well done.

But the problem still exists - small boats keep on arriving, only this time there is more as they now look at what you have done as PM, think - wow this is great and they do the same - jump on a small boat.

You still wont have fixed the small boat issue (unless you know something that Blair,Brown,Cameron,Clegg,May,Johnson,Truss,Sunak didnt know)

Within a matter of months you would be back to square 1 again, but it would be worse - so you would repeat your first policy of finding the second lot - homes, jobs, schools Drs etc and so on. You problem would be exponential - and you still would not have fixed it eg stopping small boats, trains, container lorries etc.

As with all things in life - when someone says well I'd just do that - bish bash - fixed - it very rarely is and it's usually a bit more complicated - which is why successive UK govts have failed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipster

Forget the backlog issues and expanding that.

Like I said - you were PM today - by Monday - you had found them all somewhere to live, you have found them a job and got them access to schools, Dr's / Dentists etc. All good, you have fixed the immediate problem - well done.

But the problem still exists - small boats keep on arriving, only this time there is more as they now look at what you have done as PM, think - wow this is great and they do the same - jump on a small boat.

You still wont have fixed the small boat issue (unless you know something that Blair,Brown,Cameron,Clegg,May,Johnson,Truss,Sunak didnt know)

Within a matter of months you would be back to square 1 again, but it would be worse - so you would repeat your first policy of finding the second lot - homes, jobs, schools Drs etc and so on. You problem would be exponential - and you still would not have fixed it eg stopping small boats, trains, container lorries etc.

As with all things in life - when someone says well I'd just do that - bish bash - fixed - it very rarely is and it's usually a bit more complicated - which is why successive UK govts have failed.

---

This is a stupid scenario though. Nobody in here is saying we should let everyone who arrives stay. If you want to raise the bar for approval of an asylum case then that's another issue entirely.

Agree with the last part, which is why the Rwanda policy being heralded by braverman as the magic bullet is nonsense. It's an expensive policy that cheapens us as a nation, crosses moral and potentially legal red lines and might not even reduce crossings. Doesn't sound like it ticks many boxes to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

This is a stupid scenario though. Nobody in here is saying we should let everyone who arrives stay.

---

Yes they were - which is why I asked the question if you were PM today what would you do. And then asked ok - you have solved the problem re housing them, schools, jobs for them etc . Then more arrive - as you havent fixed the small boats problem - and so it goes round and round in circles exponentially.

From what I can see the Govt here is trying to do what Australia did quite a few years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipster

Yes they were - which is why I asked the question if you were PM today what would you do. And then asked ok - you have solved the problem re housing them, schools, jobs for them etc . Then more arrive - as you havent fixed the small boats problem - and so it goes round and round in circles exponentially.

From what I can see the Govt here is trying to do what Australia did quite a few years ago.

---

No we are not

And us who don't vote for the tory war machine are not happy with the situation

I think most of us want sensible policy and if possible removals but we don't want to throw those that arrive here back into the sea

It's going to happen , people are going to sneak in over and above legitimate migration

What the Tories have spent 13 years doing is failing to manage this

What we have now ? Braverman and her disciples stoking up hatred to try and win votes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

No we are not

And us who don't vote for the tory war machine are not happy with the situation

I think most of us want sensible policy and if possible removals but we don't want to throw those that arrive here back into the sea

It's going to happen , people are going to sneak in over and above legitimate migration

What the Tories have spent 13 years doing is failing to manage this

What we have now ? Braverman and her disciples stoking up hatred to try and win votes

---

I'd go back and check your answers.

I said would you let them all stay, and now you are saying that is not what you were arguing for.... ffs

What is it :-
1. Let them all stay - give them a job, somewhere to live get them working
2. Put them in hotels in the UK
3. Move some of them on to another country

I think they are the 3 options on the table. Which one gets your vote ?. You said you werent arguing to let them all stay - so I guess that rules out 1 & 2 . So Im not quite sure where that leaves you.
Maybe you have the answer - that so far as been missed by Blair/Brown/Cameron/Clegg/May/Truss/Johnson/Sunak
You're wasted in whatever job you're doing - you could be a worldwide tour de force with your policies. Now's your big moment ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipster

I'd go back and check your answers.

I said would you let them all stay, and now you are saying that is not what you were arguing for.... ffs

What is it :-
1. Let them all stay - give them a job, somewhere to live get them working
2. Put them in hotels in the UK
3. Move some of them on to another country

I think they are the 3 options on the table. Which one gets your vote ?. You said you werent arguing to let them all stay - so I guess that rules out 1 & 2 . So Im not quite sure where that leaves you.
Maybe you have the answer - that so far as been missed by Blair/Brown/Cameron/Clegg/May/Truss/Johnson/Sunak
You're wasted in whatever job you're doing - you could be a worldwide tour de force with your policies. Now's your big moment ...

---

Here's your big moment

Feck off you tory cnut I fecking hate you traitorous Welsh twats voting for them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

Here's your big moment

Feck off you tory cnut I fecking hate you traitorous Welsh twats voting for them

---

Is that it ? It's the wizard of Oz moment , you pull back the curtain and find....absolutely nothing at all, just a shouty little angry man with issues with anyone who dares not to have the same political opinion as themselves.
Enjoy your weekend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipster

Is that it ? It's the wizard of Oz moment , you pull back the curtain and find....absolutely nothing at all, just a shouty little angry man with issues with anyone who dares not to have the same political opinion as themselves.
Enjoy your weekend.

---

You are a tory and like the rest of them are a weasel who will bust a blood vessel defending them

I am turning over a new leaf . You and your acolytes can all rot and I am bored of debating the toss with people who wouldn't be part of my social life if I had a week to live .

You are all the same , pretending you are soft , liberal Tories, sometimes saying you will vote elsewhere but lying through your arses .

If you were brought up in Ely you are a complete traitor .

Now naff off

This morning the papers are reporting there will be a referendum on the ECHR to sidestep all this kerfuffle. I can well imagine Braverman’s teeth grinning like a Cheshire cat, the public groaning a year before an election, and the bleeding hearts everywhere reaching for their Prozac.

I feel for poor Polly Toynbee and her lowly paid rent-a-vent crew in the Guardian and like-minded windbags in The Independent. Clearly not getting any bedroom activity for thirty years Poor Polly is about to blow her lid on this one.

She’ll be there one evening, huffing and puffing away with her poison pen, and I can easily see an artery or aorta blowing. Still, look on the bright side. It’s spare juice and a donation elsewhere for someone’s transfusion. There’s always an upside to a downside. It’s not all doom and gloom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

For “declining caseworkers productivity” read cuts. This country is paying the consequences of forty years of Governments “selling the family silverware” as a former Tory Prime Minister put it or cutting public services and public service jobs to the bone.

Braverman keeps banging on about how the British people back the Government on this subject, yet I thought polls showed a majority against the Rwandan stunt?

---

Watched this week's Question Time on the IPlayer yesterday and was very surprised to see that not one member of the audience was in favour of the Rwanda scheme especially when it turns out that two polls taken after the policy was deemed illegal showed one in favour of it and one against. The margins were very close in both of them and what they didn't provide was any backing for Braverman's contention that the bulk of the British people were in favour of Government policy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

You are a tory and like the rest of them are a weasel who will bust a blood vessel defending them

I am turning over a new leaf . You and your acolytes can all rot and I am bored of debating the toss with people who wouldn't be part of my social life if I had a week to live .

You are all the same , pretending you are soft , liberal Tories, sometimes saying you will vote elsewhere but lying through your arses .

If you were brought up in Ely you are a complete traitor .

Now naff off

---

Yeah, stop pretending you are a soft liberal like me and go and rot with your opinions that are different to mine you traitor!

Sludge is the worst judge of liberalism on here!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Watched this week's Question Time on the IPlayer yesterday and was very surprised to see that not one member of the audience was in favour of the Rwanda scheme especially when it turns out that two polls taken after the policy was deemed illegal showed one in favour of it and one against. The margins were very close in both of them and what they didn't provide was any backing for Braverman's contention that the bulk of the British people were in favour of Government policy.

---

I don't know who the tory was on the panel but I was ready to punch her within 2 minutes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Yeah, stop pretending you are a soft liberal like me and go and rot with your opinions that are different to mine you traitor!

Sludge is the worst judge of liberalism on here!

---

All you Tories are tossers

13 years of this filth and we have fellow Taffs voting for them

Absolute treachery

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I don't know who the tory was on the panel but I was ready to punch her within 2 minutes

---

Do you always resort to violence when you cant debate with someone?