Another couple of million spent fighting court actions that were never going to come to fruition. These scumbags do not care one iota that it is failing. This is only ever meant to be a distraction from the real theft that they do elsewhere. Even if this did happen by some remote chance, Labour would have revoked it asap, because of EHCR rules that forbid this.
this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2023
26 points (90.6% liked)
UK Politics
3066 readers
129 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
No, the Rwanda deal itself is theft. The British taxpayer pays for everything - we pay to house the migrants until the deal goes through. We pay to send them over there. We pay for the infrastructure there.
We pay for the vulnerable migrants Rwanda is sending us in return.
Meanwhile Suella Braverman gets to follow in her daddy's footsteps and run a for-profit business in the form of a concentration camp in Africa. At the British taxpayer's expense, of course.
There are no published details regarding contracts. I fully expect to agree with you, but until we have those facts, you cannot hold this line. Once they are out of office, Angela Raynor has said she will be looking into stuff like this. I wait for the day, not long now.
Maybe not on specific contracts and who pays for what, however Article 16 of the Rwanda agreement explicitly states the UK will accept vulnerable migrants from Rwanda in return for sending migrants to Rwanda.
I do wonder if they were really planning on sending that many there, or if this is all a simple grab of right wing votes.
Don't get me wrong, ONE person sent there is a problem.
I think that's been the running theory with most of what they've done in the last few years tbh. Bait anyone with an ounce of humanity into speaking out against something and then attempt to turn it into a 'Loonie Lefty Lawyers' sort of thing. Utterly cynical.
That is all it ever was. This so they could hide the rest of the stuff they are doing and nothing more.
They've definitely been planning on sending them there. That's why they've been booking them in hotels instead of actually processing migrants and deporting or integrating them - they need a big stockpile of migrants to kickstart their new concentration camps.
How many hours of work and how much money has been spent on this tabloid fantasy policy? What if we used all of those resources to ... actually tackle the (massive) asylum backlog. Absolutely inevitable this was going to be shut down and so much effort has gone to waste pursuing it.