Politics Today

[arthur]

I'm 90% sure he isn't a real person and is someone on a wind up. The last few months in particular his posts have slipped way too far into the realms of absurdity.

He has also been conspicuously absent from match day threads recently. Two wins and two clean sheets means there's nothing for him to jeer at. It must be horrible for the poor man seeing all the wrong people being happy...

 

[arthur]

From a personal standpoint it would almost be worth suffering 5 years of a Labour Government to see them flounder around our illegal immigration debacle as much as the Tories have…..almost!

Loading…

x.com

While Tory policy is to detain them as "illegals" despite not building any detention facilities.

Genuine questions to someone who knows more about the asylum system than I do. The government is offering asylum seekers whose claims have been rejected £3000 to go and live in Rwanda. Apparently such people cannot be sent back to their countries of origin because those countries are not safe.

Q1 If their countries aren't safe, why have their asylum claims been refused?

Q2 If they turn down the offer to move to Rwanda and they can't be sent "home" what is going to happen to them?

 

[tavyred]

While Tory policy is to detain them as "illegals" despite not building any detention facilities.

Genuine questions to someone who knows more about the asylum system than I do. The government is offering asylum seekers whose claims have been rejected £3000 to go and live in Rwanda. Apparently such people cannot be sent back to their countries of origin because those countries are not safe.

Q1 If their countries aren't safe, why have their asylum claims been refused?

Q2 If they turn down the offer to move to Rwanda and they can't be sent "home" what is going to happen to them?

Art, as I’ve said to you numerous times as the UN Charter on Asylum is currently constituted there are millions of people with the absolute right (if they can force themselves on us illegally) to claim and no doubt succeed in gaining refugee status in the UK.
That is why if you’re from certain countries eg. 1) the country we’ve deemed is unsafe 2) a country we don’t have a returns agreement with, you get to stay here.
Rwanda is supposed to act as a deterrent to those who force their presence on the UK via the channel.

 

[arthur]

Art, as I’ve said to you numerous times as the UN Charter on Asylum is currently constituted there are millions of people with the absolute right (if they can force themselves on us illegally) to claim and no doubt succeed in gaining refugee status in the UK.
That is why if you’re from certain countries eg. 1) the country we’ve deemed is unsafe 2) a country we don’t have a returns agreement with, you get to stay here.
Rwanda is supposed to act as a deterrent to those who force their presence on the UK via the channel.

But this is a different Rwanda scheme and it's voluntary. (I've quoted the BBC rather than the (free) Guardian so as not upset poor Mr Jinx any further). Do you know what will happen to these people if a) their asylum claim has been rejected b) they can't be returned to their country of origin and c) they have declined the offer of a new life in Rwanda? Presumably they will, as you say, get to stay here. But on what basis? Ineligible for benefits or accommodation because their asylum claim has been rejected. Not allowed to work. All a bit of a mystery..

BBC News - UK to pay failed asylum seekers to move to Rwanda under new scheme

UK to pay failed asylum seekers to move to Rwanda under new scheme

The Home Office is offering up to £3,000 to encourage people to relocate to the East African country.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[tavyred]

But this is a different Rwanda scheme and it's voluntary. (I've quoted the BBC rather than the (free) Guardian so as not upset poor Mr Jinx any further). Do you know what will happen to these people if a) their asylum claim has been rejected b) they can't be returned to their country of origin and c) they have declined the offer of a new life in Rwanda? Presumably they will, as you say, get to stay here. But on what basis? Ineligible for benefits or accommodation because their asylum claim has been rejected. Not allowed to work. All a bit of a mystery..

BBC News - UK to pay failed asylum seekers to move to Rwanda under new scheme

UK to pay failed asylum seekers to move to Rwanda under new scheme

The Home Office is offering up to £3,000 to encourage people to relocate to the East African country.

www.bbc.co.uk

I guess this is where people engaging in the aforementioned shadow economy comes in. Although I’m not sure it’s wouldnt be perfectly do-able for these people to access any public service that the rest of us enjoy anyway. French politicians are constantly telling us that our lack of national ID cards makes us very attractive to and susceptible to undocumented illegals.

 

[elginCity]

‘Legal’ net migration into Brexit Britain in the past year, could populate a city the size of Leeds.

It’s been a while since Cameron promised cutting immigration to the ‘tens of thousands’. Why aren’t Tory supporters angry with their government rather than getting agitated by a few dinghies full of ‘illegals’ ?

Still being played it seems.

 

[arthur]

I guess this is where people engaging in the aforementioned shadow economy comes in. Although I’m not sure it’s wouldnt be perfectly do-able for these people to access any public service that the rest of us enjoy anyway. French politicians are constantly telling us that our lack of national ID cards makes us very attractive to and susceptible to undocumented illegals.

But these people will be well documented as they'll have been through the asylum process. So the state will be knowingly handing them over to the black economy. A bit different from someone who is smuggled in to the country undetected to work on a slave owner's skunk farm or car wash

 

[Alistair20000]

I am beginning to get seriously worried about him....

I'm not.

Here he is reeling all you suckers in.

 

[Alistair20000]

Art, as I’ve said to you numerous times as the UN Charter on Asylum is currently constituted there are millions of people with the absolute right (if they can force themselves on us illegally) to claim and no doubt succeed in gaining refugee status in the UK.
That is why if you’re from certain countries eg. 1) the country we’ve deemed is unsafe 2) a country we don’t have a returns agreement with, you get to stay here.
Rwanda is supposed to act as a deterrent to those who force their presence on the UK via the channel.

Tavy

art does not appear to understand the concept of deterrence.

 

[Spanks]

Tavy

art does not appear to understand the concept of deterrence.

I suspect he does, just that, as with the criminal justice system, deterrence only works if it’s likely to be enforced on the offender. In criminal justice, we either no longer have the capacity, or the police, to catch and prosecute (We probably have to release early even if convicted, in order to free up prison space). With Rwanda, the amount that will be treated to its delights is so minuscule (300 out of last years how many tens of thousands?) that it really isn’t any deterrent at all.

Yet, if I’m doing 78 on the motorway, there are cameras everywhere… so I don’t do it. Yet in the scheme of things, which is really important?