Comments (2)
-
Delia B. Hill
It's about time, the Rwanda Policy was created and implemented.. It's the only way to stop would be migrants crossing the English Channel, break the UK Law of Immigration Act 1971, impose their will in our society, and pose as a threat to National Security.. These migrants might see UK as the Land of Milk and Honey through UK's Welfare System from legal aid, to income support, Education and the NHS, but often fails to comprehend that UK is a land of Opportunity, but they have to have the understanding and skill to take advantage of it.. Often these migrants are Muslims and they are believers of the Sharia Law as above UK's Law, which stops them from integrating into the community.. This Sharia Law is a way of life for them, that fosters prejudice upon women and children as second class citizens.. In general their way of life do not Respect and Human Rights of other individuals.. They often appeal to their own Human Rights to remain in UK and they do not even think of the Human Rights of the British people that they are invading.. They to come to UK, then they must enter the legal way.. and no paying up to British emotions of 'compassion' and morality because on the first place, they are immoral by breaking UK Immigration Law.
-
Daniel O'Dair
Felix Yim appears to be either a tory government plant,
or a total & complete idiot.?
There is no such thing as an illegal immigrant, until AFTER that person has been duly processed
& declared illegal by the UK Immigration services.
Currently & contrary to what Cruella paTel would have us all believe,
the UK allows something in the region of 75% or three-quarters in old money of all the people who rock-up on our shores,
to Remain here.!
Either, because they meet the UK's requirements for asylum, or because the UK deems their 'native' country to be an Unsafe place to return them to.
The general public are given the notion that those sent to Rwanda will be allowed into the UK,
should their application for asylum in the UK be granted, but that is simply a barefaced LIE.
Those who have been forcibly deported to Rwanda by Cruella paTel will have NO right of return to the UK at all
& only if the Rwandan authorities grant them leave to remain in Rwanda, will they have ANY legal right to even be in Rwanda.!
The concept that there is anything at all in the Rwanda plan which will break the people-trafficking cycle is laughable.
People-traffickers will quite happily continue to take the money or the credit-notes of the poor unfortunates who want to come to the UK
& quite happily continue to dump them on or vaguely near to our shores,
knowing fine well, that the UK government is bound by international maritime law, to accept & deal with anyone
who turns up on our beaches or even in our international waters.!
So sending the immigrants to Rwanda changes NOTHING at all.
If, however,
we put in place a proper system of staffing & resources,
through which the UK authorities could house, manage & process these people,
we MIGHT be able to put in place a process by which we could put the cross-channel traffickers out of business.?
The UK authorities could house & manage immigration camps IN France.
The UK authorities could give ferry tickets & acceptance papers to a certain number of people from those camps, to allow them to cross the Channel safely & present themselves to UK Immigration.
UK immigration could have properly funded & managed facilities in the UK,
whose sole purpose was to define whether these people ticked the necessary boxes to remain in the UK.
If WE let them in from France (or other places) on specific transit papers, then we know EXCACTLY where we should deport them to, should their asylum applications fail.!
However, the governments' own statistics show that we allow the majority to remain in the UK, because their asylum claim is justified or their home country is considered unsafe to return to.
Since Brexit, we are down around 3 MILLION people who either left the UK to go back to the EU,
or who stopped coming to the UK from the EU as seasonal workers.
Therefore, it seems to make perfect sense to require anyone who rocks-up in the UK & is granted asylum, to be required to work in specific areas of need, unless they have more valuable skills, which can be better utilised by our nation.
Why send someone to Rwanda if they're a fully qualified doctor, nurse, teacher or accountant.?
Why not give them a refresher/ foundation course & give them a job in an area where we're already short of skilled professionals.?
Equally,
if migrants are given leave to remain but have no specific & desirable professional skills,
then make it a condition of their 'license', that they have to work in certain proscribed areas of employment for 3, 4 or 5 years,
unless or until they get another job.?
The departure of EU citizens related to Brexit & the shortages of trained, skilled & professional staff resulting from it, has clearly shown that these people were NOT taking jobs away from indigenous Brits.
They were doing jobs which the indigenous Brits either didn't WANT to do,
or didn't have the skills or qualifications to do.
It makes sense to be allowing 20-30 thousand people a year into the UK as residents & taxpayers, to replenish the Millions who left because of Brexit.
Instead of bringing people in on short-term contracts, when most of them will take the money they earned here out of the country with them, when the go back home after their contract ends.!
Leave your comments
Post comment as a guest