UK will finally off shore illegal asylum seekers crossing the channel

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936489#Comment_118936489

The airlines won't be involved either way, I suspect it will have to be armed forces transport. There are no direct flights to Rwanda from the UK that I can see.

Illegal immigrants and those who stay after visas have been expired will simply be deported as happens now (and where it doesn't happen for whatever reason nothing will change either). You can not forcibly deport a Brazilian who overstayed their visa to Rwanda - you have to send them back to Brazil. This is literally only for asylum seekers - they admittedly couch this in terms of asylum seekers who have entered illegally but that does not have much legal standing.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936304#Comment_118936304

Working low skilled jobs doesn't make someone a net negative on the economy. For starters they are doing something that the locals can't be bothered to do and without them doing it those roles would be left empty. That is a positive.

That is a stretch. Not a positive. The reference was to those who are illegal, in that they do not have permission to live and work in the country.. so they won't be paying taxes. Also, they're taking the employment and space of those migrants who wish to avail of the legal entry into the UK. It's not as if the UK has any difficulty drumming up interest in immigration from people with low-skills.

As for the percentage of Africans, that is a negligible number in Ireland. Just Ireland hasn't had much in the way of people from other continents relocating there until very recently so it's noticed more. It was a surprise to me on moving from the UK to Ireland how white it was, and felt very odd.

It's not just Ireland. Look at the stats across Europe, and you'll find Africans listing around 40% unemployed, with the remainder working (or in prison).

As for low numbers in Ireland, you need to visit some towns in the Midlands, and you'll see a lot more Africans. Walking around my hometown, it wouldn't be rare to see 1 in 5 people around being Black (the others often being Eastern European or Asians. The majority are still Irish but that's to be expected). Less than the UK, but still very noticeable considering how Ireland was less than two decades ago. Ireland has undergone a massive demographic shift in a relatively short period of time, that few other nations have experienced themselves. The UKs population was built up over an extended period.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936506#Comment_118936506

no way would the tiny cost of illegals and enforcement be less or even be outweighed by this distraction for borris's law breaking.

Have you looked at that old piece of research they did on the costs of illegals living/working in the UK to the State? It's not a tiny cost.

But in any case, we're going circular now, and no point continuing. I'll leave it here.

Hamachi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936304#Comment_118936304

It felt ‘very odd’, really? The only odd thing here is moving to a European country with zero colonial history and expecting the demographics to resemble a Benetton add.

Very curious indeed.

Faugheen

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936364#Comment_118936364

You said:

"The majority call them economic migrants and bogus asylum seekers."

And now you're talking about people calling for open borders when nobody has said that.

Again, show me the proof that the majority of people call asylum seekers 'economic migrants', or admit that you don't have any. It's perfectly fine.

Breifne Blue

They'll probably land here instead and Roderic, Bacik and McEntee will give them hotel rooms and then own door accommodation. And if not then they can easily hop across to England from here.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936556#Comment_118936556

TBH I was kinda shocked when I returned to my hometown to find it so "diverse". Dublin, Galway, Cork, I could understand being desired locations, but Athlone? And yet, there's a rather large population of foreign born (even excluding the foreign university students and Ericssons staff). Sure, there were always a few foreign families, or other ethnic groups, but it's far more noticeable now.. but then, a lot of the younger locals ended up leaving Ireland at different stages so I guess that's part of why they're so noticeable.

Hamachi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936981#Comment_118936981

Yeah, it does seem that particular towns have become exceedingly ‘diverse’ whereas others remain almost as homogeneous as they were in the ‘90s. Dublin is actually an interesting case study. The affluent coastal suburbs, both north and south of the river remain virtually untouched by multiculturalism. Conversely, working class north west Dublin has become highly diverse in pockets.

My point is in relation to that rather idiotic post, feigning surprise that Ireland was and remains largely white. Any English person I’ve ever met, knows intrinsically that Ireland isn’t as diverse as England. Indeed, it’s an attraction for some. Only on boards would you have somebody claiming this is ‘very odd’. The mentality of some posters is just incredibly tedious sometimes.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118937199#Comment_118937199

I'd guess it's related to the desire for a more diverse population.. a bit of disappointment that the vague goal of having the population non-white be close to 50%ish hasn't been reached yet. Although I notice there's rarely any interest in the SE Asians living here, everything seems focused on the darker shades of skin. And the foreign white population here, such as the Eastern Europeans, or such, might as well be invisible to them.

Mr Bumble

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118934655#Comment_118934655

A garden no less. There's swank.

As a straw man, it's pants though.

Look over there, it's the garden owners. And the immigrants. They're my enemies. Not lads in suits who stole your money.

Another mark to keep the wheel turning.

I know two Polish lads who make a fortune doing people's gardens. Feeding a niche in the market. They have two vans now and the best of kit.

Are they good immigrants? Or do you have a particular type in mind? Bet you do.

smurfjed

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936164#Comment_118936164

Yes they are, they must check that passengers have a valid visa for their destination. They are fined if they land passengers without a visa. In a number of European countries, immigration meet planes at the door and check visas. This is their way of avoiding allowing people claim asylum on their terrority.

Galwayguy35

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118928683#Comment_118928683

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118928706#Comment_118928706

Obviously I meant if it was seen as now being more difficult for illegals to enter the UK a greater number of them might want to come here, they have other means of getting places apart from boats.

Didn't think this needed to be explained but it seems it does.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118937631#Comment_118937631

I have no doubt they are fined. However, I have been many places requiring visas, and an airline has never checked, neither have I ever seen immigration at the doors of a plane.

And I'm sure you have been on a lot more flights then me, but I have travelled commercial airline a lot and it has never happened to me.

robinph

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118937725#Comment_118937725

Closest I've ever encountered any kind of immigration force to a plane was on flights from Ireland to the UK with them checking passports on occasion, but that usually just meant that you could get out of the airport quicker by avoiding other passport checking queues. That mostly depended on the UK airport and what had been going on in NI recently though.

Yellow_Fern

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936304#Comment_118936304

Claims that low income people are a net gain to the economy need to be supported by evidence. You cant just assert claims. Not all jobs are worth having, if we wanted, you could easily import people for slave like wages for domestic work, but would be wrong and would not be good for the economy as a whole.

robinph

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118938010#Comment_118938010

The evidence that they are doing something worthwhile is that someone else is willing to pay them to do it. Even if that low income individual isn't directly paying in more to the government than they take out, that someone else deems it worth paying them to do that work means that employer is going to be contributing more to the government on their behalf in the taxes that they are paying.

If there wasn't something in it for someone else then they wouldn't be paying them to do the work.

sonar44

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118937534#Comment_118937534

What type of immigrant do I have in mind?

Also, who stole what money? This is a very confused post.

smurfjed

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118937725#Comment_118937725

I guess that you haven’t seen airlines take a passengers passport before boarding, hand it to the flight attendant in charge and then to the airline representative at the destination ? Just to make sure that they aren’t flushed down the toilet.

Paris and Frankfurt were the last two destinations where I saw immigration check passengers on the air bridge or the bottom of the steps before passengers entered a bus.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118937711#Comment_118937711

The entire point of this program is to target people who have no other means of entering apart from by boat. If they could hop on a plane they would have.

It actually does nothing to stop illegal immigrants - it is directed at asylum seekers.

Acosta

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118938625#Comment_118938625

I think the point of all of this is just politics and to energise their new base of UKIP racists. And judging from what I've seen online, it's working.

I wouldn't be surprised if even one plane departs from the UK due to legal challenges. I'm sure the tories are we'll aware of this and that their supporters will blame everyone but them.

Mr Bumble

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118938209#Comment_118938209

Repeat my question, dont answer it and then claim I'm confused and in a tone which suggests great confidence in this odd form of debate.

me; here's an opinion and a question.

you: something something you're confused.

I'll make it even simpler than it already is for you.

Two Polish gardeners, working hard and making money.

Two Syrian gardeners, working hard and making money.

Two Nigerian gardeners working hard and making money.

Any difference between the three examples?

The Patel stunt is falling apart already. Just a shot in the arm for racist Tories electioneering. Apparently, a refugee can legally refuse to board the flight to Rwanda. Lol.

No costings done. No support from her staff. Ministerial decree. Huge reception centre being built in Durham.

Another con. More people in suits conning gullible oiks

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118938822#Comment_118938822

Well true, that is probably the point. I should have said the target of the program - it really only impacts those who have no legal means of entry and those people equally have no means full stop of getting to Ireland.

sonar44

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118939054#Comment_118939054

Of course a refugee can refuse to board a flight to Rwanda in the plan. The plan is designed for asylum seekers. Are you not aware of the basic difference?

And what costings need to be done? a similar plan to this was done in Australia that reduced illegal boat crossings to none. That's the goal.

Kiwi John

I can see the article in a future sunday paper.

Photos of some abandoned half built structures and a story about how a few well connected lads in Rawanda became very rich.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118942100#Comment_118942100

Actually, I can well imagine an article showing a well built, well maintained, equipped facility... because the costs involved to do something over there are far less than the cost to do anything in the UK.

But sure, some lads will get very rich, but that's no different to Ireland where hotel owners are able to fund the investment of other hotels because their first hotel is being occupied by Asylum seekers.

TBH I don't quite understand the outrage over whats been proposed. People are still getting Asylum, they just wouldn't be getting it in the UK. As long as the UK can guarantee the safety/wellbeing of the people involved... what's the problem? If people are unhappy, then retract their claim, and apply to Ireland.

Mr Bumble

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118939167#Comment_118939167

Schoolboy error by me in allowing the pedantry to emerge and allowing another way for you to avoid answering the question I put - more evidence of an inability to actually have a discussion with someone. Pick the things you want to answer, ignore the rest and expect me to answer some nonsense distraction about Australia, whose immigration policies have been about as well received in the world as Trump's decision to cage children away from their parents. I'd say you were all for that.

Israel, Denmark and now the UK have Rwanda as a destination for anyone they can legally bundle onto a plane with a cash bung and a promise of a new life. As ever with global Tories, it's a business opportunity and someone in the Rwandan government is on an enormous wedge to facilitate this. Are they now touting for business? Uganda too. Stellar history of human rights and peaceful coexistence in those nations.

Will we see reception camps being built and Rwanda becoming a dumping ground? That would end well, I'd say. The Aussies sent people to camps on an island out in the ocean. Grim. £500m a year. You could build 2,500 houses with that. £2.7billion is the first costing I've seen of Patel's brainless incompetence.

But the mugs love it. Brexit innit. Getting it done. Local elections, Raw panic at recent byelection results and polls showing Johnson as popular as HRH Andrew. Bit of red meat for the troops.

Mind you, if they all follow the Australian model, Ukrainians need to be careful. Even war and horror among white people wasn't a good enough reason for Patel to ease back the jackboot. A tricle making it to the UK and most giving up.

Interestingly, Denmark is taking 100k from Ukraine but is aiming for zero refugee/asylum seekers/muslims/brown people, many also running away from cities flattened by Russians, ISIS and the Taliban or just after a bite of the lifestyle we've been telling the world is what they should aspire to and asking them to pay for it with their resources. Wonder how many Russians live in the EU. Might be millions. Deport all of them. Do what Putin is doing in reverse. Make some room.

Maybe Irish people have reason for concern too if we get too uppity for Patel and her mates. 1000 kiwis have been given the boot so far from Australia.

The ERG have their toxic eye on the GFA and the CTA and Johnson is going to need them in the next few weeks/monthss unless the UK is totally beyond the point of no return - which is entirely possible.

Imagine if Johnson decides that the CTA has had it's day and tells the paddies to go home or we'll send you to Rwanda. That would soften your cough.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118942767#Comment_118942767

ael, Denmark and now the UK have Rwanda as a destination for anyone they can legally bundle onto a plane with a cash bung and a promise of a new life. As ever with global Tories, it's a business opportunity and someone in the Rwandan government is on an enormous wedge to facilitate this. Are they now touting for business?

Asylum has always been great money for those providing the services involved. Have you ever taken a look at the range of funding provided by the State to NGOs? Or the salaries of many of those involved in the NGOs? Then, there's all the media who involve themselves in humanitarian causes, who naturally will be paid/sponsored by concerned parties to publish such pieces. Then, the marketing/advertising companies with budgets from the NGOs or departments with the government to promote the humanitarian issues and what's being done to provide for these Asylum seekers. Oh, lets not forget the activists, with book deals, speech circuits, etc. The list is rather long if you're willing to take a balanced view of the overall situation.

Asylum has always been a business opportunity for a whole rake of people.. Although it's worth considering whether Rwanda, and other destinations, might improve because of the investment and favouritism directed towards them by the British government. It's possible.

Will we see reception camps being built and Rwanda becoming a dumping ground? That would end well, I'd say.

It might.. but then again, it might not. However.. you started that thought.. so what's the end scenario for Asylum being provided in the UK? Assimilation? Nope, that's off the table these days. Integration? You'd be hardpressed to find a realistic way to define and measure the effectiveness of it. Ghettos? Well, tribalism is real. Ethnic groups tend to congregate, live together in a community, and see outsiders as, well, outsiders.

Look at all the major players of multiculturalism, and pro-immigration policies. They're all having serious social issues dealing with the clashes between either cultures or ideologies/religions. So... what's the endgame for Asylum in the UK or other countries, if these social issues continue to grow as they have for the last two decades? Or do we continue to ignore it, and just hope it resolves itself? Ahh sure, it'll be grand.

The Aussies sent people to camps on an island out in the ocean. Grim. £500m a year. You could build 2,500 houses with that. £2.7billion is the first costing I've seen of Patel's brainless incompetence.

Live and learn. They'll improve and figure out a better more cost effective way of doing it. Eventually. Nobody is surprised at the ineptitude of government to implement schemes such as this one. Out of curiosity, where else would the Aussies send people? The desert? The countryside, which are often pretty grim places themselves...? The Australian outback is pretty nasty. So... apart from the population centres, and highly developed areas in Oz, where would they be sent?

But the mugs love it. Brexit innit. Getting it done. Local elections, Raw panic at recent byelection results and polls showing Johnson as popular as HRH Andrew. Bit of red meat for the troops.

A lot of people love it. They see something being done about a series of problems that have been deferred for decades, with the consequences piling up in the background, glossed over by the NGOs and the media. TBH I'm quite interested to see what come from it. I doubt the initial ideas will be allowed or continued for long, but it definitely a move away from what's gone before.

Interestingly, Denmark is taking 100k from Ukraine but is aiming for zero refugee/asylum seekers/muslims/brown people,

Of course they are, because they've had two decades of being a popular destination for M.Eastern/African refugees and migrants. Along with a host of problems associated with these cultural groups. I realise people want to shout that it's racism, and it is racist.. but who really cares anymore? We're all a little jaded over being called racist for everything under the sun, that the term doesn't have much umpf anymore. Just as people don't really care all that much by just how much the demographics of Denmark have changed over the years.. nah. That's not a reasonable care for Danish people.. their racism has no grounds for being relevant.

Nationalities with similar cultures to each other will find a better reception than those that don't. We've had three decades of people pushing the agenda of darker skin people coming into Europe, and the negatives of that agenda have tarnished the perceptions of a lot of people involved. Cultures clash. It's really that simple. No doubt you'll dismiss that, because it's been dismissed for the last couple of decades, but people are getting pretty tired of it.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118926301#Comment_118926301

Kagame is beloved by the lives of Tony Blair and The Economist. I think they see him as some kind of benevolent dictator and they hold up up as what an authoritarian technocrat can do when they don't have to worry about the politics of being re-elected.

I have been to Rwanda. I spent two and half weeks there a few years ago. I travelled around the entire country. It's not quite the "Switzerland of Africa" that it's often made out to be. Yes, there is a fancy central business district in Kigali with a few towering buildings and a big shiny convention centre that often gets used for photographs when foreign news organisations talk about Rwanda. As a tourist you'll be able to find nice clean lodgings in most towns with air conditioning and hot showers. This is totally out of step with the vast majority of the population though.

It's the size of Munster but has a population of 13 million people - they are entirely dispersed throughout the country - mostly living in shacks farming small holdings of land. The entire country is mostly rolling hills which is probably one of the reasons that makes providing infrastructure so challenging. Most people don't have running water and in some cases people will have to travel long distances to access water. It's a land-locked country with no natural resources and a very young population. One of the main jobs for young men over there is to push bicycles between towns laden down with jerry cans filled with water. Another big industry seemed to be creating and selling charcoal - which they use to cook food their over in their huts.

There is a large Chinese-built modern paved road that links the major cities, however there are very few cars in the country. It was mostly used by minibuses, a few trucks and lots of motorcycles and bicycles.

One thing that did seem modern to me was their embrace of mobile money. Basically most people used phones for their banking purposes. Rather than open bank accounts if they wanted to send or receive money they could do it with these people who used their phones for the transactions (I believe this is very common in Africa). I saw some solar panels being used as well out in the countryside.

It's the sort of country where foreigners really stand out. Adults would be subtle - they'd walk past you and flick the eyes at you at the last second - children on the other hand would just stare and point at you - especially in the less visited east of the country. I never felt threatened though for the very simple reason that there are armed security forces everywhere. I've done a fair bit of travelling and I've never seen anything like it. Police, army, security guards. All with big guns. I never saw any trouble when I was there but you kind of got the impression that those guys would react quickly if needed.

I didn't have any personal experience of minor corruption over there, nor did I get the impression that it was a thing. I have paid small bribes in other countries in the past so I wouldn't be oblivious as to when this is expected. I suspect that Rwanda is better for this kind of thing than other African countries.

I didn't bring up politics with any of the local people that I talked to because I didn't want to put them in an awkward spot. I do remember one lady who worked in a guesthouse I stayed in telling me that she couldn't wait for an upcoming trip of hers to Uganda. When I asked her what was so great about Uganda she replied "You feel free there". Bear in mind that Uganda is also ruled by an autocrat so that gives you a window into the feeling over there.

Another interesting thing is when you visit the Genocide museum in Kigali the official line is that there are no such thing as Tutsi and Hutu - they say that the Belgians essentially created this distinction as a way to sow division. So now those terms are not used. However it's blatantly obvious that a lot of the people look tall and thin and lighter coloured (like Kagame) and a lot look shorter, darker and thicker. The people with the fancy jobs in the business district of Kigali appeared to be in the former category for the most part.

Kagame deserves credit for keeping order and maintaining stability after the horrors of the genocide. It is a lot more stable than Burundi to the south and especially to the DRC to the west. Under different leadership there may have been a lot of war or an outright collapse in the social order. However he has clearly done this by ruling with an iron fist and snuffing out any sort of opposition to his rule. Famously the man who the movie Hotel Rwanda was about, Paul Rusesabagina, was tricked into returning to Rwanda from exile and then promptly locked him up. Many other opposition voices have simply been murdered.

In my time there the only non-Rwandan, non-tourist I saw over there was an Indian man running a corner shop in Kigali so I really can't see a bunch of Afghans or Syrians starting a new life there.

I would be very surprised if any of the people that the UK send over will stay in the country. Keeping those migrants if they do not want to stay would cost money for Rwanda. The easiest thing for them is to pocket the money that the UK sends them for each migrant and then look the other way as they leave the country.

I think for the Tories this serves as a nice bit of red-meat to throw to the party base but in the long run is unlikely to be successful as a policy. it also doubles as a distraction for Boris Johnson from his own problems.

joseywhales

I'm withholding judgement until I understand more but my first impression is, how are the UK setting up a penal colony in Rwanda in 2022 and what is going to happen to thousands of non rwandans in Rwanda for several years being processed and what happens to them if their application is rejected? Do they integrate into Rwandan society then? If there are bad outcomes, for example if they get murdered, is the UK responsible for their safety? My instinct is that it is a barbaric policy unless they return them to France maybe or their home nation?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118943108#Comment_118943108

I'm withholding judgement until I understand more but my first impression is, how are the UK setting up a penal colony in Rwanda in 2022

That's withholding judgement?

penal colony, distant or overseas settlement established for punishing criminals by forced labour and isolation from society.

joseywhales

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118943225#Comment_118943225

Well I've yet to see what this means in practice, the problem is by the time I see it, it will already be affecting the lives of some very vulnerable people. What will these people do in Rwanda? Nothing is clear to me. There is certainly isolation not sure about the labour part yet.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118943231#Comment_118943231

Nothing is clear for anyone... but what would they be doing in the UK either? Both are likely to be alien cultures to adjust to, and it's questionable how many skills are transferable, and in many cases, transferring skills from a 2nd/3rd world nation to another 3rd world nation would require less of an adjustment. As for "isolation", that's an unknown, considering the facilities haven't been established yet... but over time, a community would be created.

The problem is that people aren't considering what the alternative is. Continue with Asylum in the UK.. and what happens then over the long term?

How about this? The UK put a cap/limit on the total number of Asylum seekers in the UK. When one dies off, another person can come in. Would that be more suitable to you, and others? Or do you believe the number should be unlimited forever...? When would the AS population be too many?

sonar44

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118942767#Comment_118942767

The Aussies have saved untold millions of dollars processing dodgy claims and trying (often in vain) to deport failed applicants.

More to the point, they have saved thousands of lives from drowning in **** boats and they put the people traffickers out of business.

This is the model the British are replicating and they should be applauded. Hopefully, we will follow suit.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118943545#Comment_118943545

We won't though. Not a chance. We haven't reached any kind of breaking point with regards to AS or immigration. Both are wholeheartedly supported by our politicians and the Irish media. So, we'll have to deal with things after it's too late, rather than taking notice of what's been happening in other European countries.

Mr Bumble

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118943545#Comment_118943545

Three times is a charm. You've had three opportunities now to answer the question and dodged it each time. That tells me what I need to know.

At least the other is honest and admits being racist.

You're just hiding behind Priti Patel. Imagine that.

How many boats have crossed from mainland Europe to Ireland with trafficked people on board? None

How many people have died while being trafficked to Ireland? There may have been some but it's vanishly rare if it exists at all, yet you want to send people to Rwanda to "put the people traffickers out of business"

SO just traffic them to Rwanda where they can meet up with all the other trafficked people and compare their HM Gov stamp with the ones from Israel and Denmark.

Be honest. You're making a virtue of this to ease your conscience.

Mr Bumble

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118943049#Comment_118943049

Look at you, with time on your hands to idle away the hours debating the finer points of UK immigration policy and lobbing racist bits and pieces into your spiel is if that's alright because Donald said so.

This is what you're really here for. You're fully distracted from the real source of your problems and are now preoccupied in your little edgelord racist bubble

"pushing the agenda of darker skin people coming into Europe"

There it is

"I realise people want to shout that it's racism, and it is racist.. but who really cares anymore?"

"We're all a little jaded over being called racist for everything under the sun, that the term doesn't have much umpf anymore."

The ignorance contained in this little nest of horrors is not surprising. Juvenile edgelord word salad.

Racism is racism and you speak for nobody but yourself.

Like the other creature, I feel I need a wash after talking to you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118944828#Comment_118944828

Look at you, with time on your hands to idle away the hours debating the finer points of UK immigration policy and lobbing racist bits and pieces into your spiel is if that's alright because Donald said so.

Wow.. so, we're moving into the condescending, and somewhat insulting tone. Let me guess... you're going to dismiss, deflect, and distract from the points raised so you can assume some kind of moral superiority over me. Even better, make associations with other figures, in a lame attempt to discredit. Brilliant! You're truly wonderful.

This is what you're really here for. You're fully distracted from the real source of your problems and are now preoccupied in your little edgelord racist bubble

My problems? Oh, I'm aware of my problems, and they're not even remotely related to this thread. Still... it's nice of you to connect my personal life, with the opinions posted on the thread, based on....? Yup. Nothing. Just the need to disparage others. Have we reached the point where you counter what I said? No...?

The ignorance contained in this little nest of horrors is not surprising. Juvenile edgelord word salad.

Nothing ignorant about it, and quite relevant to the situation.. but I forgot, for a moment, that isn't about countering what I said, or engaging in any kind of mature discussion. This is about attack! attack! attack! because maybe then, nobody will notice that you haven't said anything of value.

It's okay... It really is. I understand. You're angry that someone opposed your previous post, and you're incapable of defending what you said. No worries.

Racism is racism and you speak for nobody but yourself.

Um.. racism is racism. Inspired! What was that about Juvenile word salad? And who else would I be speaking for? Oh! I get it. When I say that a lot of people consider there to be problems, I'm somehow becoming a spokesperson for them? Ahh.. sorry, no, it doesn't work that way.

Like the other creature, I feel I need a wash after talking to you.

Nope, I'm sorry but alas, your pretentious virtue signalling doesn't wash off. Still, you could wash out your mouth, and hopefully lose the chip on your shoulder.

Look at your post. Not one counter. Not one attempt to engage with what I wrote. The entire thing is aimed to deflect, dismiss, and then, disparage the poster. If you're the poster child for decency... then, we're in trouble.

Atlantic Dawn

Anyone who has flushed their documentation down the toilet on the plane over should be fingerprinted and sent back to never be allowed enter the country again.

Slightly Kwackers

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118925802#Comment_118925802

Not just that. Britain welcomed migrants, the Windrush people being an obvious example. Foreigners will seek out kin if they wish to migrate to another country. Who would want to go to a country with no ties?

As the Tories found out, when you have screwed the nations educational system so completely, xenophobia is a vote winner.

Deporting the Windrush migrants after a lifetime in the UK was a step too far, even for their mob though.

A major problem in the UK is that it could never control its borders. I guess it stems from an unwillingness to provide services including immigration to those unwilling to pay. This too is a Tory philosophy. Thus people claiming asylum and having no passports take many months to verify and often get through only after an appeal as do many English disabled when they try to claim their rights.

So migration to the UK is popular due to government incompetence and Britains domination of most of the planet, the latter being why many others and myself included can nip over to Holyhead on a ferry, no questions or papers needed.

On a final note, people are not "illegal". Calling people "illegals" is a trick used by the gutter press to rile the hard of thinking against "foreigners" instead of blaming the nations woes on the Republicans or Tories.

Look at the state of the UK now and see what their Brexit xenophobia brought.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118943545#Comment_118943545

Lies from beginning to end, I'm afraid, sonar. I don't know where you're getting this stuff from, but wherever it is you should stop treating it so credulously. They are making you look very gullible, which is probably the look you are reaching for.

Some facts; firstly, everyone who arrives in Australia by boat to claim asylum is deported, without any examination of their claim; no attempt is made to identify "dodgy claims" and deport only those. Secondly, Australia doesn't avoid processing them. Unlike in the proposed UK model, Australia does process the claims of those who have been deported, though its position is that it will never admit them to Australia . Thirdly, when processed, the claims turn out not to be dodgy; 83% of them are successful. Fourthly, the scheme doesn't avoid the problem of deporting failed applicants; they remain in the system, at the expense of Australia, because there is nowhere to send them. Fifthly, Australia hasn't "saved untold millions"; the cost of the scheme is $9 billion and rising — an average cost of $3.4 million per asylum seeker. It is by far the most expensive asylum application processing scheme in the world. Sixthly, it hasn't put people traffickers out of business; the trade continues to thrive. With keen supporters like the UK government determined to drum up business for them, how can we be surprised at this?

Why do supporters of these schemes feel the need to lie so consistently and comprehensively about them? Because they know if they told truth they could not justify their own support of the schemes, or hope to win yours. So they lie, and they hope you are very stupid.

Danzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118928513#Comment_118928513

It's going to be very popular among the working class.

Not as much in the leafy suburbs.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118944895#Comment_118944895

Genius idea with one little flaw…. You can’t send them back if you can’t prove where they came from in the first place! Countries are not in the habit of accepting random individuals into their country just because the UK tells them they think the person came from there.

Luxembourgo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118944959#Comment_118944959

Do you have a source for those costs?

Seem astronomical per person

gladvimpaker

Ireland will probably come to the rescue like we always do. We're probably one of the least populated countries in the EU for our size anyway.

By 2030 the conspiracy theorists are spouting supposedly we need to add a few million more to the diaspora. As part of some plan by people who think they know what's best for us.

At last we'll have a mixed population and we'll be like any other modern European country in the western world. Anyone who protest's against this will be cancelled and rightly so.

Rural Village's will probably still be the same and be know as native reservations. Town's and cities will be buzzing with culture and Ireland will no longer be what it was, but we'll be a the pride of Europe.

Céad míle fáilte

Multipass

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118943231#Comment_118943231

They can avoid going to Rwanda by claiming asylum in France. Or they can use the thousands of euros they’ve brought for the channel crossing to fly elsewhere. The UK is crowded, and every space for asylum should be reserved for genuine people who apply legally.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118944990#Comment_118944990

The diaspora are Irish people who have spread across the world, away from their homeland.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118945033#Comment_118945033

And how do they apply for asylum?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118944951#Comment_118944951

On a final note, people are not "illegal". Calling people "illegals" is a trick used by the gutter press to rile the hard of thinking against "foreigners" instead of blaming the nations woes on the Republicans or Tories

Do you see posters saying illegal people? They say illegal migrants, because their status is illegal. And there can, indeed, be illegal migrants due to their lacking the legal permission by the State of <insert country> to reside, work, and gain the benefits of being there. (whereas changing illegal to undocumented is a trick designed to change the perspective of people)

In any case, context sets the theme. If you want to ignore context, then anything can be deemed offensive. The context here would be immigration, so saying illegal people should be easily interpreted as being related to the lack of that visa.

Look at the state of the UK now and see what their Brexit xenophobia brought

Ahh yes, because everything happens in a sterile field, where nothing important happened before implementation. The sources for the troubles of the UK are wide and varied... it's rather convenient to blame it all on xenophobia. Also removes a fair chunk of the population from criticism or responsibility. It's a lot like blaming all the UK problems on immigrants.... It doesn't really work, and avoids the core issues involved.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118944984#Comment_118944984

Source.

Yes, it is astronomical per person.

But think about it - if you set out intentionally to design a massively expensive, massively inefficient system for dealing with asylum-seekers, offshoring is pretty much the solution you would come up with. Proponents of such solutions will sometimes tell you they are concerned with value-for-money or with minimising the taxpayers' burden but they are, of course, lying. If they were concerned about such matters they would not advocate offshoring.

gladvimpaker

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118945060#Comment_118945060

I know read my post again. It's probably hard to read between the lines. Actually thinking about it, there's no Irish diaspora tourism attraction in Ireland.

It would be a nice touch for visiting people with an Irish background.