So the genius plan to stop asylum seekers applying to live in the UK crossing into the UK illegally and dangerously when there are so many safe and legal routes they could take instead, we are going to pay a country halfway across the world to take them off our hands and dump them in one of their huge overcrowded refugee camps, from which people are already desperately trying to get out of and find routes back to Europe.
Hey, look, I was skeptical at first too, but I did some word association and what's the first thing that comes to mind when you think Rwanda? Comfort, prosperity, hope and so on and so forth. It's definitely not genocide or Paul Kagame has an entire section of his Wikipedia article titled "Assassinations".
We really are governed by some of the lowest villains in modern UK history, certainly since the war at least. Priti Patel shouldn't even in the cabinet given her own, very recent, history.
I wonder how many countries we asked before we found one willing to do it? It strikes me as perversely delightful that at some point in the past six months, a representative of the British government was almost definitely told to fuck off by Mozambique.
I mean there's kind of an irony there isn't there, that is accepting asylum seekers is so good and proper everyone we asked should have been glad to do their part, surely.
Canada? Australia? Come on, we're all in this together. Except they only seem to want to come here, of all places, don't they, and they'll go all the way through France, Germany, Dutchland, and wherever the fuck else to get here.
>>95595 The government wasn't asking Germany and France because they can't be bribed with "aid" money. I think this word has been worn thin with overuse, but this is essentially colonial exploitation. We're using our superior power and influence to offload problems onto Rwanda, it's pathetic. The government's only doing it because for years morons have harped on about an "Australian style immigration system", there's no real thinking beyond throwing policies at the wall to see what sticks.
Plenty of refugees go to the countries you listed, they don't go to Rwanda because it's a third world dictatorship the size of Aberdeenshire buried away in the middlest middle bit of the giant continent of Africa.
>>95595 >Except they only seem to want to come here, of all places, don't they, and they'll go all the way through France, Germany, Dutchland, and wherever the fuck else to get here.
>U.K. refugee statistics for 2020 was 132,349
>Netherlands refugee statistics for 2020 was 78,911
>Canada refugee statistics for 2020 was 109,264
>Australia refugee statistics for 2020 was 57,451
>France refugee statistics for 2020 was 436,100
>Germany refugee statistics for 2020 was 1,210,636
How the fuck are that many people getting to Rwanda, let alone WANT to go there?
Presumably that's refugees coming from like, whatever other African countries are currently experiencing famine or civil war or ebola or whatever, not Afghans and Syrians?
Presumably, but what difference does that make? I'm sure there's some Rwandan-Kip group out there full of people complaining about all the refugees they get and why do they all come here, why don't they just go to the UK or something.
DR Congo and Burundi. They're right on the border and miserably poor, even by Rwandan standards. Kivu Province in Congo directly borders Rwanda and has been in a near-constant state of civil war since 1996. The Rwandans kind of owe the Congolese, because Kivu took in about a million Rwandans during the 1994 genocide.
>>95592 Rwanda also had an informal agreement with Israel to take Sudanese and Eritrean people they were deporting, but this fell apart when a spotlight was shone on it and it also turned out that pretty much all of those deported fucked off north to try and get back into Europe again.
>Rwanda has seen immense improvement through the last decade and was recently named the most improved country in the 2016 Legatum Prosperity Report.
>Rwanda has seen a 75-rank increase in the business environment index, according to the Legatum report.
>The country is ranked high due to its strengths in business practices and governance.
I was thinking "Ah, you're exposing your longstanding issues with furrieswomenSimon African Americans" and while I'm not wrong, I'm not right. Rwanda looks great for starting a business but living standards are 150/167 so bugger that.
Turns out that ceding your personal freedom and quality of governance will put you marginally ahead of your ethnic neighbours. That and 2 ½ million square miles of land.
>>95602 >under this system, Priti Patel would not be here?
It will only be single men, according to some reports. Priti Patel, being a woman, poses no threat to the fabric of British society and can therefore show up however she wants. I'm afraid your fantasy of Priti Patel being ravaged by big black Rwandan men would be considered impossible, although if you're also the longstandingissuesposter then you can relish this story from another angle.
>Britain has agreed to take refugees in from Rwanda under Priti Patel’s landmark deal, it has emerged.
>Those who fled war or persecution and were granted asylum status by Rwanda will be able to come to the UK under a reciprocal scheme signed by the Home Secretary last week. The crucial detail in the agreement’s small print – which could lead critics to reappraise the agreement – emerged only after Miss Patel returned from the East African nation on Friday.
>It states: ‘The participants will make arrangements for the United Kingdom to resettle a portion of Rwanda’s most vulnerable refugees in the United Kingdom, recognising both participants’ commitment towards providing better international protection for refugees.’
>A Home Office source said it would apply to ‘a number in the tens, not hundreds’ of people who have already been granted refugee status in Rwanda. However, the agreement states no limit. The refugees who are brought to this country are likely to be those with the most complex needs, it is understood, such as those with physical or mental health problems.
Let's replace able-bodied migrants from the Middle East with those needing mental health services from Doctor Congo. After all, the NHS and mental health services in particular aren't under strain.
It's all going to plan old chap, the trouble is Poles and Lithuanians weren't profitable enough. Our hard working property investors need much more stable assets.
>>95602 Perhaps you could ask your MP and then let us know? Maybe you could also ask why our Home Secretary is a cross between Indira Modi and Rita Repulsa?
Refugees pour into Ireland as Dublin blames Britain’s Rwanda policy
Britain’s Rwanda policy has triggered a surge in refugees arriving in Ireland, Dublin said on Saturday, in a seeming admission that the deal to deport asylum seekers to central Africa is deterring people from coming to the UK.
Senior figures in the coalition government, including the Irish prime minister, have blamed Britain’s new migration measures for an increase in people seeking asylum in Ireland instead, causing an accommodation crisis that has forced Ukrainians to be put in tents.
>>96511 If someone who has debased themselves by creating an account on the Telegraph's site could screencap this I'd be interested in seeing just how much bullshit is in this article.
>>
No. 96523Anonymous 24th July 2022 Sunday 10:42 pm96523Refugees pour into Ireland as Dublin blames Britain’s Rwanda policy
>>96520 An increase in people seeking asylum in Ireland is causing an accommodation crisis that has forced Ukrainians to be put in tents
Britain’s Rwanda policy has triggered a surge in refugees arriving in Ireland, Dublin said on Saturday, in a seeming admission that the deal to deport asylum seekers to central Africa is deterring people from coming to the UK.
Senior figures in the coalition government, including the Irish prime minister, have blamed Britain’s new migration measures for an increase in people seeking asylum in Ireland instead, causing an accommodation crisis that has forced Ukrainians to be put in tents.
Home Secretary Priti Patel’s Rwanda policy aims to deport illegal immigrants to the African country in a bid to deter people making dangerous and unlawful Channel crossings to Britain.
The Home Office refused to comment on the accusations by Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Eamon Ryan, leader of the Greens, one of his two coalition partners.
“Recent policy changes in other jurisdictions, including the UK, as the Taoiseach referred to, may be creating the perception of a less welcoming immigration and international protection environment, leading to secondary movements of applicants,” an Irish government spokesman told The Telegraph.
“One can see, and maybe sense that that policy announcement, which I thought was a wrong policy announcement by the UK, a shocking sort of initiative in my view, to be doing some agreement with Rwanda, clearly may have motivated people utilising the Common Travel Area to come into the Republic – yes, I think it is one of a number of factors,” Mr Martin said last week.
The Common Travel Area is a long-standing open-borders agreement between Dublin and London, which has welcomed about 95,400 Ukrainian refugees to a country of 60 million people.
Some 60 per cent of people seeking international protection are now doing so at offices in Dublin, rather than at the airport. Usually, almost two-thirds of asylum claims are made at the airport.
More than 40,000 Ukrainians have fled to Ireland after Russia’s February invasion of their homeland CREDIT: Michal Dyjuk/AP
Irish officials believe the change could be due to refugees crossing the invisible border from Northern Ireland.
The Irish government said that the Rwanda policy was just one of the factors contributing to an unexpected increase in refugee numbers since last Autumn.
A spokesman pointed to the resumption of international travel after the coronavirus pandemic and the war in Ukraine as other reasons.
There are fewer places for non-Ukrainian refugees across the EU because there are so many fleeing Putin’s forces, which has increased numbers attempting to claim asylum in Ireland.
Ireland, which has a population of just over five million, was already facing a housing shortage before more than 40,000 Ukrainians fled there after Russia’s February invasion of their homeland.
The Irish government has announced it will cost €2.5 billion to care for 100,000 Ukrainian refugees next year and suggested it could take in up to 200,000 Ukrainian refugees.
It is obliged to take in Ukrainians under an EU agreement and there are no plans to cap numbers.
Ireland has waived visa requirements for Ukrainians, which means they do not have to claim asylum and instead are granted “temporary protection” for an initial period of a year. On arrival, they are given welfare payments, access to healthcare, education, accommodation and the right to work.
The unprecedented numbers have put huge pressure on a country already facing a housing crisis, despite a generous response to pleas for host families or offers of holiday homes for Ukrainians.
The shortage of accommodation has become so intense that refugees will be housed in military tents in four campsites, including one army base.
Dublin changed its rules on visa exemption for refugees this week to stop non-Ukrainians granted protection in other EU member states being able to travel to Ireland without a visa, in a bid to control the numbers entering the country.