Another waste of money

[northernladuk]

How many bus companies have popped up offering one way tickets from Rawanda to the north African coast? Market opportunity maybe?

[JustKeepSwimming]

Instead, research shows that shared language, culture and family ties are ‘strong factors’ influencing the choice of final destination.

That sounds like the mindset of an economic immigrant. Surely the 'strong factors' for refugees is safety?

[vetran]

This is being massively misreported in the press, the law changes around illegal immigration will be far more reaching. If you enter the country illegally (i.e. via a dinghy) you will be denied access to the UK legal system and will be given the option to return home or head to Rwanda or another safe 3rd party country. You will not have the right to claim asylum in the UK. Only if you come here legally (i.e. a student visa) will be able to apply via the UK.

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...hing-factsheet

oh that is stricter I do like that.

So Arrive, fingerprinted and off to Rwanda never to return in 28 days!

[BlueSharp]

This is being massively misreported in the press, the law changes around illegal immigration will be far more reaching. If you enter the country illegally (i.e. via a dinghy) you will be denied access to the UK legal system and will be given the option to return home or head to Rwanda or another safe 3rd party country. You will not have the right to claim asylum in the UK. Only if you come here legally (i.e. a student visa) will be able to apply via the UK.

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...hing-factsheet

[vetran]

One key cost forgotten is how much criminal and terrorist activity by former illegal migrants costs. Even the Mafia & Yardies are afraid of the Albanians.
The triads control the cannabis farms etc.

[GJABS]

I don't think you can say it is a waste of money unless there is a suitable alternative that costs less money. Presumably the view of the critics is that letting them into the country is not a suitable alternative because it fails to protect our borders by having them physically within the country?

[vetran]

Doing nothing will cost exponentially more.

If they hit it hard and make it stick it should certainly act as a deterrent. Fannying about, legal challenges, half heated attempt and the like will fail and costs will continue to escalate.

How dare you Asylum seekers are an asset (well if you fudge the figures).

https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/in...-about-asylum/

Luckily we have the full story of how the 1200 medically qualified refugees help the NHS that is 0.016 of last years refugees, one assumes some of them arrived before last year.

https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/la...-join-the-nhs/

[northernladuk]

Doing nothing will cost exponentially more.

If they hit it hard and make it stick it should certainly act as a deterrent. Fannying about, legal challenges, half heated attempt and the like will fail and costs will continue to escalate.

[vetran]

Indeed it would be better to just deport the Albanians and Indians who come over in the boats. Verify the age of the 'children' and deal with them appropriately. Ask for rationale for leaving the safe country France.All of these could have been done without the Rwanda plan.

I have no problem with controlled immigration supporting genuine asylum seekers , this is not what is happening currently.

[SueEllen]

Why do they like wasting our money?

https://metro.co.uk/2023/06/26/it-co...co=mosaic_news

Each asylum-seeker sent to Rwanda could cost the UK £169,000, new figures show.
This number includes flights, detention and a £105,000 per-person payment to the central African country.

The estimate is from the Home Office’s own numbers, published in its economic impact assessment on Monday.

It argues that the policy of relocating migrants to ‘safe third countries’ could save between £106,000 and £165,000 per person.

It acknowledges the figures are ‘highly uncertain’ and says the measures would need to deter 37% of people from crossing for the costs to be recouped.

In other words, nearly two in five people would need to be deterred from crossing the Channel in small boats for the Illegal Migration Bill to break even.

The assessment said it is ‘not possible to estimate with precision the level of deterrence’ the Bill will have.

It noted that academic consensus is there is ‘little to no evidence’ that policy changes deter people from leaving their home countries and seeking refuge.

Instead, research shows that shared language, culture and family ties are ‘strong factors’ influencing the choice of final destination.