Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, Spider said:

Spend. The. Money. On. Processing. The. Ones. Coming. Over. Much. More. Quickly.

it’s really fucking easy, this.

If they’re Albanian we know straight away. Ship them back.

If they’re Syrian and legitimate then Rwanda shouldn’t be a problem for them. It’s not Syria.

But they need processing within 48 hours and sending to wherever is the most suitable.

We can find £30billion for knock off PPE when we need to, I’m sure we can build a few Nightingale-style processing centres on the south coast.

Dealing with it sensibly won't generate the outrage though. That's what this is all about.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Spider said:

Spend. The. Money. On. Processing. The. Ones. Coming. Over. Much. More. Quickly.

 

 

I don't know why those advocating the Rwanda deal don't think the above is a better option. I know they like to pretend  that as soon as the first plane sets off from London to Kigali, that the crossings will stop immediately, but they're only kidding themselves.

Posted
1 minute ago, Cheese said:

Dealing with it sensibly won't generate the outrage though. That's what this is all about.

Indeed, that's why the next GE can't come soon enough - The Tory party know this is the only thing they've got left to hang on to. Once the next GE is settled, this will go away.........we'll still have the issue with the boat crossings, and sadly, we always will, it will never stop. We just need to get slicker/better at processing them

Posted
3 minutes ago, Sweep said:

Indeed, that's why the next GE can't come soon enough - The Tory party know this is the only thing they've got left to hang on to. Once the next GE is settled, this will go away.........we'll still have the issue with the boat crossings, and sadly, we always will, it will never stop. We just need to get slicker/better at processing them

Deterring them*

Posted
2 minutes ago, Sweep said:

Indeed, that's why the next GE can't come soon enough - The Tory party know this is the only thing they've got left to hang on to. Once the next GE is settled, this will go away.........we'll still have the issue with the boat crossings, and sadly, we always will, it will never stop. We just need to get slicker/better at processing them

Exactly. It's a deliberately manufactured "crisis". As soon as a sensible head takes charge and the Home Office is instructed to do it's fucking job, the issue will fizzle out.

Posted
2 minutes ago, royal white said:

Deterring them*

we'll never do that, unless we resort to physically blowing them out of the water as soon as they enter our waters, even then, it'd take a while

Posted
2 minutes ago, Cheese said:

The Rwanda scheme isn't happening mate. Mop up your saliva, and get over it.

So you don’t think they need to work on  deterring them? You’re fine with people risking their lives to get here? 

Posted
1 minute ago, royal white said:

So you don’t think they need to work on  deterring them? You’re fine with people risking their lives to get here? 

No to both. We need to re-open legal routes, and process them. Nobody had a problem when we did it for Ukrainians...

Posted
5 minutes ago, Cheese said:

No to both. We need to re-open legal routes, and process them. Nobody had a problem when we did it for Ukrainians...

Ukrainians that were being invaded?
 

legal routes aren’t coming in are they. So a deterrent is obviously needed. 

Posted
1 minute ago, royal white said:

Ukrainians that were being invaded?
 

legal routes aren’t coming in are they. So a deterrent is obviously needed. 

Why aren't legal routes coming? I'll give you a clue - it's to rile up people like you.

Posted
16 minutes ago, royal white said:

Ukrainians that were being invaded?
 

legal routes aren’t coming in are they. So a deterrent is obviously needed. 

or we could try tackling the problem at source by stopping the people trafficking gangs. That would involve working with our neighbours which is not a strong point of the Tories but they need to think of something else as the Rwanda policy is a non-starter.

Posted
30 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

or we could try tackling the problem at source by stopping the people trafficking gangs. That would involve working with our neighbours which is not a strong point of the Tories but they need to think of something else as the Rwanda policy is a non-starter.

Why is the Rwanda policy non starter? It’s quite possible the Supreme Court over turn the latest decision. 

Posted
43 minutes ago, royal white said:

Who are people like me? 

Have a look around and see who else is fuming about the Rwanda scheme being deemed unlawful. Them.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Why is the Rwanda policy non starter? It’s quite possible the Supreme Court over turn the latest decision. 

Is economic suicide for a start

If it was ever deemed lawful, which I understand is unlikely, Labour will be in by then

Posted
2 minutes ago, Cheese said:

Have a look around and see who else is fuming about the Rwanda scheme being deemed unlawful. Them.

But I’m hardly fuming. If safe and legal routes come in do you think that will stop boat crossings and people trying to get here illegally? 

Posted
12 minutes ago, royal white said:

But I’m hardly fuming. If safe and legal routes come in do you think that will stop boat crossings and people trying to get here illegally? 

It will stop most of the legal entries, which are the majority

Atm, folk know theyre going in hotels for 3 months which is better than a tent in france

How many times, just get them processed

Posted
2 minutes ago, Casino said:

It will stop most of the legal entries, which are the majority

Atm, folk know theyre going in hotels for 3 months which is better than a tent in france

How many times, just get them processed

Will it stop the crossings? 

Posted
12 minutes ago, royal white said:

So should we just let them come over or use  some kind of deterrent?

Thr deterrent is you get processed in a month and fucked off

Posted
49 minutes ago, royal white said:

But I’m hardly fuming. If safe and legal routes come in do you think that will stop boat crossings and people trying to get here illegally? 

If we start shipping a few to Rwanda at £170k a pop, do you think that will stop the crossings?

Posted
2 minutes ago, royal white said:

So should we just let them come over or use  some kind of deterrent?

A fully rounded policy is required so that the numbers crossing in boats will significantly drop.

1. Seriously tackle the trafficking gangs. Break up their network and bring them to justice. Coordinated approach is necessary with Germany, France and others.


2. Process asylum seekers quickly so we can then deal with accommodating the legal ones and utilise their skills more effectively to help our economy.

If we did these two things  it would be far more efficient and cost effective than the Rwanda policy and there would be some genuine positive impacts.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Casino said:

Thr deterrent is you get processed in a month and fucked off

Why would they be processed? If they have not come over using the safe and legal route it’s obvious they have no right being here. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.