The Labour Government

[west didsblue]

Clearly the amount of money spent wasn't good, the last government spent money on such schemes like water. But there were indeed signs that it was working.

Do you really believe that?

 

[west didsblue]

Laugh ?
I saw earlier you thought the price of FTSE might save us from bankruptcy lol.

You think this country will go bankrupt.
That is funny.

 

[west didsblue]

Fair enough but I still think they need to make the UK a less attractive place to claim assylum.

Could always go the Trump route and make it undesirable for the whole population.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Do you really believe that?

I read reports that showed that despite only a single person being sent, the threat of being sent there was detering people from crossing and also making them leave the UK. I did post a link to one of the reports at the time. So yes there was some evidence.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Could always go the Trump route and make it undesirable for the whole population.

Some may think that has happened the last 30 years already?

 

[west didsblue]

I read reports that showed that despite what a single person being sent, the threat of being sent their was detering people from crossing and also making them leave the UK. I did post a link to one of the reports at the time. So yes there was some evidence.

It’s true there were a few interviews with asylum seekers shown on TV, but to extrapolate one or two people saying they were deterred to the scheme being a success is a bit of a stretch.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

It’s true there were a few interviews with asylum seekers shown on TV, but to extrapolate one or two people saying they were deterred to the scheme being a success is a bit of a stretch.

Rwanda Bill causing migrants to head for Ireland instead of UK, deputy PM Micheál Martin says

It comes at a time when tension over immigration levels is high in Ireland, with the country experiencing a housing crisis.

news.sky.com

Well I never said it was a success, because it was never given the chance to prove it would either work or not, because of legal challenges. All I said was there was some evidence that it was working. However a similar scheme in Australia has been effective as a deterrent.

 

[Brewster's millions]

And the best part? Instead of illegals landing that we could actually deport if we pulled our finger out, France is going to send us genuine asylum seekers that we'll be obliged to allow to stay. Marvellous.

Lots of Iranians, Sudanese. Basically the countries that have the highest level of successful asylum applications in the UK.

 

[bluenova]

The obvious one was the surge in migrants choosing to go to Ireland instead, very many openly said that Rwanda drove that decision - that is deterrence at work.

Of course you wouldn't abscond in the first place, you would chance your arm on acceptance and all the advantages that brings.

Detections of migrants attempting to hide in lorries on the French side are up ,as far as I am aware there is no data for UK side. The numbers are substantial and of course we don't know how many get through.

I believe the Irish Deputy PM said that Rwanda was driving people to Ireland. However, he also said this in 2022, not long after the scheme was announced, despite the fact that the huge surge in applications had actually occurred BEFORE the Rwanda scheme was announced. Seems like politics rather than facts.

Anyway, I'm still not sure why Rwanda would stop people absconding, if it's simply a choice?
I've also not seen anyone seriously claiming that it's easy for boats to avoid detection - but perhaps you have?

I saw that too about attempts being detected on the French side- it was around 5000, which is about 10% of the amount we had a decade ago, when a concerted attempt was made to stop them. If 50,000 were being detected a few years ago, and we've improved security, and now just 5000 are being detected, then it doesn't seem logical to suggest a lot are getting through - more than a much, much smaller number are trying.

 

[Hertzblue]

You think this country will go bankrupt.
That is funny.

You must be financially naive indeed if you think that is not possible.
If it doesn't then it won't be because of the price of the FTSE that's for sure.

 

[bluenova]

Rwanda Bill causing migrants to head for Ireland instead of UK, deputy PM Micheál Martin says

It comes at a time when tension over immigration levels is high in Ireland, with the country experiencing a housing crisis.

news.sky.com

Well I never said it was a success, because it was never given the chance to prove it would either work or not, because of legal challenges. All I said was there was some evidence that it was working. However a similar scheme in Australia has been effective as a deterrent.

I believe there was some research into the Australian scheme which said the offshore processing (which isn't the same as the Rwanda scheme) didn't act as a deterrent. The number of boats arriving actually increased, and it wasn't until they began intercepting boats at sea and turning them back that number went down. It was this drop that seems to have got mixed up in the offshore argument (which again was nothing like the Rwanda scheme).

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I believe there was some research into the Australian scheme which said the offshore processing (which isn't the same as the Rwanda scheme) didn't act as a deterrent. The number of boats arriving actually increased, and it wasn't until they began intercepting boats at sea and turning them back that number went down. It was this drop that seems to have got mixed up in the offshore argument (which again was nothing like the Rwanda scheme).

I haven't read that, any links?

 

[Hertzblue]

I believe the Irish Deputy PM said that Rwanda was driving people to Ireland. However, he also said this in 2022, not long after the scheme was announced, despite the fact that the huge surge in applications had actually occurred BEFORE the Rwanda scheme was announced. Seems like politics rather than facts.

Anyway, I'm still not sure why Rwanda would stop people absconding, if it's simply a choice?
I've also not seen anyone seriously claiming that it's easy for boats to avoid detection - but perhaps you have?

I saw that too about attempts being detected on the French side- it was around 5000, which is about 10% of the amount we had a decade ago, when a concerted attempt was made to stop them. If 50,000 were being detected a few years ago, and we've improved security, and now just 5000 are being detected, then it doesn't seem logical to suggest a lot are getting through - more than a much, much smaller number are trying.

Irish PM isn't what I said, the migrants own testimony informed that Rwanda influenced their decision.

The number of boats landing to boats intercepted would suggest they avoid detection easily enough.

A decade ago we didn't have the boat industry

 

[bluenova]

Irish PM isn't what I said, the migrants own testimony informed that Rwanda influenced their decision.

The number of boats landing to boats intercepted would suggest they avoid detection easily enough.

A decade ago we didn't have the boat industry

How many thousand migrants said this? I'm assuming you're not basing it on the odd anecdote, but some comprehensive research? EDIT: sorry if that's overly sarcastic. Been a long day, and time for bed :)

Where is the data on the number of boats landing undetected, compared to those being intercepted?

I know - that's what I said. People didn't have to risk their lives in boats because they could easily sneak on to a lorry. Risky boat crossings didn't replace lorries because people like the sea air.

 

[bluenova]

I haven't read that, any links?

Here's one: https://externalizingasylum.info/offshore-processing-in-australia/?mc_cid=3f479a67a4

They're clearly not keen on the policy, but it's at least an academic paper, so has sources for the arguments.

 

[Hertzblue]

How many thousand migrants said this? I'm assuming you're not basing it on the odd anecdote, but some comprehensive research?

Where is the data on the number of boats landing undetected, compared to those being intercepted?

I know - that's what I said. People didn't have to risk their lives in boats because they could easily sneak on to a lorry. Risky boat crossings didn't replace lorries because people like the sea air.

This is tiresome, you are scratching around trying to support your argument, you could easily find these things out for yourself.That said your baseline is that Rwanda wasn't working as a deterrent, my contention is that even though it was never tested it was already working, the evidence came from migrant testimony and the Irish government. You have tried to de - bunk the Irish government as politics, though quite why they would want to publicise the success of Rwanda as a deterrent and potentially cause more inflows there way you have not made clear.
See below. Ireland works out where migrants likely come from by where they make the claim. If coming from Europeit will in probability be made at the port or airport, if the Dublin office then the likelihood is the migrant came from the UK across the Northern Irish border. The graph speaks for itself.



As for boat detection, that is available if you choose to look.

Boat v lorry you are mistaken. You are approaching it from a safety perspective. Chance of success is the driver.

 

[west didsblue]

You must be financially naive indeed if you think that is not possible.
If it doesn't then it won't be because of the price of the FTSE that's for sure.

Anything is possible however the strength of the markets are one of many factors that provide an indication of the health of an economy.

 

[blueinsa]

Not if Labour start getting the numbers down. Thats why Farage is clearly panicking and rattled by Macron.

Record numbers under Starmer only getting bigger and his deal is one in, one out.

On what planet is he going to get the numbers down?

I’m genuinely all ears here?

 

[blueinsa]

Are we paying France to operate this system? I've not watched any news today?

Yes. Wait for the numbers to leak.

 

[blueinsa]

GDP shrank 0.1% again

Further and faster, further and faster…