This crisis is reportedly costing the UK £7m per day, so perhaps they'd be better off cracking on with dealing with the 170,000 waiting for a decision.

By my reckoning, that's a shade over £41 per per day on the list. 
Rwanda want £60/day and we have to get them there.

4 minutes ago, Traf said:

This crisis is reportedly costing the UK £7m per day, so perhaps they'd be better off cracking on with dealing with the 170,000 waiting for a decision.

By my reckoning, that's a shade over £41 per per day on the list. 
Rwanda want £60/day and we have to get them there.

If only we had some sort of joined up joint strategy with other countries, like a sort of, I dunno, a pact on migration and asylum or some sort of return directive or possibly a return and re-intergration strategy which issues decisions and then provides re-intergration support so that is stems the flow at source and over the longer terms helps support infastructure.

If only such things were possible.

1 hour ago, royal white said:

How many other Countries have safe and legal routes for asylum seekers and what is it they do to make them safe and legal? 

Let’s focus on Great Britain.

We don’t have a say in the workings of other countries.

Question remains, what are the logistics behind the plan? Because on the face of it, it’s a good plan. I’m behind it.

But they need to explain how it will work. And I’m honestly struggling to find the details.

Just now, Spider said:

Let’s focus on Great Britain.

We don’t have a say in the workings of other countries.

Question remains, what are the logistics behind the plan? Because on the face of it, it’s a good plan. I’m behind it.

But they need to explain how it will work. And I’m honestly struggling to find the details.

Maybe we can see how they make it work. That’s if of course these country's have safe and legal routes? 

20 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

If only we had some sort of joined up joint strategy with other countries, like a sort of, I dunno, a pact on migration and asylum or some sort of return directive or possibly a return and re-intergration strategy which issues decisions and then provides re-intergration support so that is stems the flow at source and over the longer terms helps support infastructure.

If only such things were possible.

I don't think that's ever existed or surely we'd be a part of it.

19 minutes ago, royal white said:

Maybe we can see how they make it work. That’s if of course these country's have safe and legal routes? 

So no details of the plan then?

I honestly wouldn’t mind seeing them.

Prepared to give Rishi a chance.

But you can’t say “stop the boats” and assume it’s that simple.

How will it work? For the United Kingdom?

If you don’t know, it’s ok, maybe they haven’t said yet,

Just now, Spider said:

So no details of the plan then?

I honestly wouldn’t mind seeing them.

Prepared to give Rishi a chance.

But you can’t say “stop the boats” and assume it’s that simple.

How will it work? For the United Kingdom?

If you don’t know, it’s ok, maybe they haven’t said yet,

Eh? I’m asking how other country's are doing it. That’s all. 

This government has taken a proper grim turn with the language they're using towards the people crossing the channel. It's all a bit nazi.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just now, royal white said:

Eh? I’m asking how other country's are doing it. That’s all. 

I asked how Stop The Boats will work.

It’s not relevant what other countries are doing. We go it alone now.

1 minute ago, Spider said:

I asked how Stop The Boats will work.

It’s not relevant what other countries are doing. We go it alone now.

Just ignore the question then, I know you like attention 

1 minute ago, royal white said:

Just ignore the question then, I know you like attention 

I asked first.

you’ve let me down.

Does anyone else know?

I’ll ask again

How will they stop the boats? Is it a physical line of defence in the channel, or immediate return of the boatfolk?

The example I gave was a boat landing on a beach in Kent, what will the new method of dealing with them be?

Thanks, Royal can’t answer this.😘

 

It probably gets legitimised more in certain quarters because they've got funny tinge people at the forefront spewing it. Very odd times we live in.

Edited March 8, 20233 yr by lobbypond

5 minutes ago, Spider said:

I asked first.

you’ve let me down.

Does anyone else know?

I’ll ask again

How will they stop the boats? Is it a physical line of defence in the channel, or immediate return of the boatfolk?

The example I gave was a boat landing on a beach in Kent, what will the new method of dealing with them be?

Thanks, Royal can’t answer this.😘

 

You didn’t though did you 🤦🏻 if I didn’t answer the question is because I might not have an answer. See it’s that easy, you don’t have to seek attention at every opportunity 

1 minute ago, royal white said:

You didn’t though did you 🤦🏻 if I didn’t answer the question is because I might not have an answer. See it’s that easy, you don’t have to seek attention at every opportunity 

You should have said.

I don’t have an answer to your question, in large part because it’s not really relevant to mine.

Anyway, a brief scan of the text from yesterday shows that it’s not really added anything to what we currently have. But I may have missed some details.

Rishi and co. really need to to put some flesh on the bones. Otherwise it’s square one.

Dogwhistle politics.

Build the wall.

Stop the boats.

Not ALL boats, obvs

40 minutes ago, Spider said:

I asked first.

you’ve let me down.

Does anyone else know?

I’ll ask again

How will they stop the boats? Is it a physical line of defence in the channel, or immediate return of the boatfolk?

The example I gave was a boat landing on a beach in Kent, what will the new method of dealing with them be?

Thanks, Royal can’t answer this.😘

 

Yeah - its one click away, anyone can have a look.

Dead easy.

1 hour ago, Traf said:

I don't think that's ever existed or surely we'd be a part of it.

Yeah, you're probably right. Be a bit daft if there was something like this and we didn't know about it.

8 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

Yeah - its one click away, anyone can have a look.

Dead easy.

A bit more than one click but here’s your answer @Spider

 

 

8 minutes ago, royal white said:

A bit more than one click but here’s your answer @Spider

 

 

Again

great idea

But no details on how they’ll get round some of the obvious legal issues.

As it stands, they’ll have to break a lot of UK and international laws, I suspect.

1 minute ago, Spider said:

Again

great idea

But no details on how they’ll get round some of the obvious legal issues.

As it stands, they’ll have to break a lot of UK and international laws, I suspect.

Basically it'll never happen because it'll get amended to get through parliment, it'll be amended in the Lords and it'll get held up in the courts. There is no way it'll pass through in the way that it's been stipluated.

We used to have return agreements, they have been broken down, we used to return more to France, that relationship has broken down (lets see what happens this week with the Anglo/France summit) We have become more isolationist in our policy making, not more expansive. As policy its fankly, rubbish. 

Also, I was thinking the click was to Gov.uk which lays out the proposal rather than twitter.

So sending them back to  a campsite in Calais was fine but sending them to hotels in Rwanda is not on? 

12 minutes ago, royal white said:

So sending them back to  a campsite in Calais was fine but sending them to hotels in Rwanda is not on? 

No - that was the reintergation policy. I do wish you'd do a bit of googling now and again. As I say, it's all there for you, friend. No need to ask people on WW.

4 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

No - that was the reintergation policy. I do wish you'd do a bit of googling now and again. As I say, it's all there for you, friend. No need to ask people on WW.

Is that like the reintegration policy?  my bad then it wasn’t campsites, so you’re ok for folk to be sent back to France, a country they’re obviously not happy with, but not ok for them to go to Rawanda? 

Just now, royal white said:

Is that like the reintegration policy?  my bad then it wasn’t campsites, so you’re ok for folk to be sent back to France, a country they’re obviously not happy with, but not ok for them to go to Rawanda? 

Ah the old gish gallop again. You're quite the fan of that.

No one has said that, anyway here you go, in case you couldn't find it - there is quite a lot of reading but I'm sure you'll manage it. And look at that - an agreement with Albania, done in 2006, if only we could be part of some of these. Bloody EU and its long and boring bureaucracy. There's even a lovely flowchart.

https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/irregular-migration-and-return/return-and-readmission_en

...and here is the outline policy from yesterday for you to compare and contrast;

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ground-breaking-new-laws-to-stop-the-boats

As I said, it's all there for you, soldier.