Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The UN sends more asylum seekers to Rwanda - despite opposing Britain's scheme.


itsnotoutthere

Recommended Posts

The United Nations' 'two-faced' refugee agency has sent scores more asylum seekers to Rwanda – despite opposing Britain's scheme.

Officials in Rwanda announced that they had welcomed 153 people who had been evacuated from Libya under a United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) programme.

Last night, the agency was accused of 'hypocrisy of the highest level' for its role in thwarting Britain's Rwanda deal while operating its own scheme with the east African nation.

One government insider said: 'The UNHCR are a bunch of double-dealing, two-faced s****. They've got more brass neck than C-3PO.'

The UN agency hired a legal team to set out its 'grave concerns' about Britain's scheme during a Supreme Court hearing just three months ago.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12911401/asylum-seekers-Rwanda-Britain-migrants.html

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
22 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

The United Nations' 'two-faced' refugee agency has sent scores more asylum seekers to Rwanda – despite opposing Britain's scheme.

Officials in Rwanda announced that they had welcomed 153 people who had been evacuated from Libya under a United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) programme.

Last night, the agency was accused of 'hypocrisy of the highest level' for its role in thwarting Britain's Rwanda deal while operating its own scheme with the east African nation.

One government insider said: 'The UNHCR are a bunch of double-dealing, two-faced s****. They've got more brass neck than C-3PO.'

The UN agency hired a legal team to set out its 'grave concerns' about Britain's scheme during a Supreme Court hearing just three months ago.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12911401/asylum-seekers-Rwanda-Britain-migrants.html

And what's more, the European Union has even helped to fund this scheme as well.

From the 'UNHCR' website, dated 5th November 2021.

Quote: "The AU and UNHCR are grateful to the international community for the resources provided so far to implement the agreement and help these vulnerable people, including from the European Union Trust Fund and other EU member states contributions."

So obviously the UNHCR (and the EU as well it seems) clearly thinks Rwanda is safe for refugees and asyIum seekers.

https://www.unhcr.org/africa/news/rwanda-african-union-and-unhcr-extend-agreement-support-emergency-evacuation-refugees-and

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Destination Unknown said:

And what's more, the European Union has even helped to fund this scheme as well.

From the 'UNHCR' website, dated 5th November 2021.

Quote: "The AU and UNHCR are grateful to the international community for the resources provided so far to implement the agreement and help these vulnerable people, including from the European Union Trust Fund and other EU member states contributions."

So obviously the UNHCR (and the EU as well it seems) clearly thinks Rwanda is safe for refugees and asyIum seekers.

https://www.unhcr.org/africa/news/rwanda-african-union-and-unhcr-extend-agreement-support-emergency-evacuation-refugees-and

We should have stayed in the EU then, we could have joined in! (Thought it obviously isn't true: Do any European countries send asylum seekers to Rwanda? - Full Fact )

Edited by pellinore
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, pellinore said:

We should have stayed in the EU then, we could have joined in! (Thought it obviously isn't true: Do any European countries send asylum seekers to Rwanda? - Full Fact )

 Thanks for debunking yet another example of Bonehead Brexiteer's misrepresentation of the the situation. Is it any wonder certain sections of the UK public voted Brexit being fed this kind of misinformation! It is a pity they lacked the critical ability skills to fact check things like you do, Pellinore. Even now the diehards with lower cognitive ability behave like Pavlov's dog in their reaction to this stuff, choosing to slavishly accept the immediate confirmation bias that distortions and falsehoods gives them over seeking the objective truth. As the article you provide says:

'Selective use of official information without appropriate context and caveats can damage public trust in both official information and politicians. MPs should be transparent and provide all necessary context and caveats when a claim is first made.'

Would the Brexit Boneheads on this forum please take note☝️☝️☝️ ☝️☝️☝️ ☝️☝️☝️ ☝️☝️☝️

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pellinore said:

We should have stayed in the EU then, we could have joined in! (Thought it obviously isn't true: Do any European countries send asylum seekers to Rwanda? - Full Fact )

You're as bad as James McGrory pellinore, taking what someone has said and deliberately twisting it around to make it out that they meant to say something else. Stop it.

I never once said that any EU vassals are directly sending asylum seekers to Rwanda, but the article quite clearly states that the EU and their vassals are contributing to the UNHCR scheme to do so. Even your own link confirms that, which is exactly what I've said in my original comment.

Quote: "The EU does provide funding for a scheme that takes vulnerable asylum seekers from Libya to Rwanda" - so it obviously is true. 👇👇👇👇

https://fullfact.org/news/sir-jake-berry-asylum-seekers-rwanda/

So seeing as you're all about us being more aligned with your beloved EU, I expect you would be over the moon with a UK scheme where refugees and asyIum seekers are being sent to Rwanda, maybe we could get the EU and their vassals to contribute to the UK scheme as well eh. 🤔

Although on second thoughts, they've got their own problems to deal with, seeing as December marks the seventh month in a row of contraction for services and manufacturing in the eurozone, with the rate of decline picking up since November.

Meanwhile, from the same article, annoyingly for you: "By contrast, the UK economy looks to be in a much healthier state, with economic activity seemingly accelerating as we approach year-end. This should both quell investor concerns surrounding the possibility of a UK recession." Ooops.

(Maybe the eurozone should have also voted to Leave the EU and the Single Market as well eh, you know, just like 17.4 million of us in the UK did.) 😂😂😂😂

If Brexit has failed, what does that make your beloved EU then, because by your logic the EU must be an absolute basketcase.

But you just carry on if you want pellinore, there's still more of a hole for you to dig. 👇👇👇👇

https://www.euronews.com/business/2023/12/15/continued-contraction-in-eurozone-services-and-manufacturing-sectors

Edited by Destination Unknown
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ozymandias said:

 Thanks for debunking yet another example of Bonehead Brexiteer's misrepresentation of the the situation. Is it any wonder certain sections of the UK public voted Brexit being fed this kind of misinformation! It is a pity they lacked the critical ability skills to fact check things like you do, Pellinore. Even now the diehards with lower cognitive ability behave like Pavlov's dog in their reaction to this stuff, choosing to slavishly accept the immediate confirmation bias that distortions and falsehoods gives them over seeking the objective truth. As the article you provide says:

'Selective use of official information without appropriate context and caveats can damage public trust in both official information and politicians. MPs should be transparent and provide all necessary context and caveats when a claim is first made.'

Would the Brexit Boneheads on this forum please take note☝️☝️☝️ ☝️☝️☝️ ☝️☝️☝️ ☝️☝️☝️

You're just as bad as pellinore Ozy, taking what someone has said and deliberately twisting it around to make it out that they meant to say something else. Stop it.

I never once said that any EU vassals are directly sending asylum seekers to Rwanda, but the article quite clearly states that the EU and their vassals are contributing to the UNHCR scheme to do so. Even pellinore's own link confirms that, which is exactly what I've said in my original comment.

Quote: "The EU does provide funding for a scheme that takes vulnerable asylum seekers from Libya to Rwanda" - so what I originally said is obviously true, so where is the misinformation exactly? 👇👇👇👇

https://fullfact.org/news/sir-jake-berry-asylum-seekers-rwanda/

 

Edited by Destination Unknown
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enough with the personal insults and name-calling please folks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 12/31/2023 at 4:42 PM, Destination Unknown said:

You're as bad as James McGrory pellinore, taking what someone has said and deliberately twisting it around to make it out that they meant to say something else. Stop it.

I never once said that any EU vassals are directly sending asylum seekers to Rwanda, but the article quite clearly states that the EU and their vassals are contributing to the UNHCR scheme to do so. Even your own link confirms that, which is exactly what I've said in my original comment.

Quote: "The EU does provide funding for a scheme that takes vulnerable asylum seekers from Libya to Rwanda" - so it obviously is true. 👇👇👇👇

https://fullfact.org/news/sir-jake-berry-asylum-seekers-rwanda/

So seeing as you're all about us being more aligned with your beloved EU, I expect you would be over the moon with a UK scheme where refugees and asyIum seekers are being sent to Rwanda, maybe we could get the EU and their vassals to contribute to the UK scheme as well eh. 🤔

Although on second thoughts, they've got their own problems to deal with, seeing as December marks the seventh month in a row of contraction for services and manufacturing in the eurozone, with the rate of decline picking up since November.

Meanwhile, from the same article, annoyingly for you: "By contrast, the UK economy looks to be in a much healthier state, with economic activity seemingly accelerating as we approach year-end. This should both quell investor concerns surrounding the possibility of a UK recession." Ooops.

(Maybe the eurozone should have also voted to Leave the EU and the Single Market as well eh, you know, just like 17.4 million of us in the UK did.) 😂😂😂😂

If Brexit has failed, what does that make your beloved EU then, because by your logic the EU must be an absolute basketcase.

But you just carry on if you want pellinore, there's still more of a hole for you to dig. 👇👇👇👇

https://www.euronews.com/business/2023/12/15/continued-contraction-in-eurozone-services-and-manufacturing-sectors

Perhaps you are referring to this initiative:

Today, Rwanda’s Minister of Finance and Economic Planning Dr Uzziel Ndagijimana and EU Head of Delegation Ambassador Belen Calvo Uyarra signed off on an agreement of €19.5 million in grants to the Government of Rwanda and partner institutions, including civil society, in a bid to strengthen the justice sector and propel reconciliation and human rights efforts in the country.

This funding forms an integral part of the larger €260 million EU support package designated for Rwanda through its 2021-24 Multi-Annual Indicative Programme. The €19.5 million initiative will play a vital role in realizing the objectives set forth by Rwanda’s Justice, Reconciliation, Law and Order Sector (JRLOS) Strategic Plan 2018-2024, aiming to enhance justice delivery, foster inclusivity, and reinforce human rights.

During the signing event, EU Head of Delegation Ambassador Belén Calvo Uyarra said: “With this comprehensive programme, the EU is pleased to partner the Ministry of Justice, the Judiciary, the National Prosecution Authority, the Rwanda Investigation Bureau (RIB), the Rwanda National Police (RNP), and the National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR), Rwanda Correctional Services and Civil society organisations, in the pursuit of  Rwanda’s Vision 2050 for rule of law and justice for all, unity and reconciliation.”

EU and Government of Rwanda join forces with €19.5 Million grant to boost Rwanda's Justice Sector and reconciliation efforts | EEAS (europa.eu)

Edited by pellinore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Perhaps you are referring to this initiative:

Today, Rwanda’s Minister of Finance and Economic Planning Dr Uzziel Ndagijimana and EU Head of Delegation Ambassador Belen Calvo Uyarra signed off on an agreement of €19.5 million in grants to the Government of Rwanda and partner institutions, including civil society, in a bid to strengthen the justice sector and propel reconciliation and human rights efforts in the country.

This funding forms an integral part of the larger €260 million EU support package designated for Rwanda through its 2021-24 Multi-Annual Indicative Programme. The €19.5 million initiative will play a vital role in realizing the objectives set forth by Rwanda’s Justice, Reconciliation, Law and Order Sector (JRLOS) Strategic Plan 2018-2024, aiming to enhance justice delivery, foster inclusivity, and reinforce human rights.

During the signing event, EU Head of Delegation Ambassador Belén Calvo Uyarra said: “With this comprehensive programme, the EU is pleased to partner the Ministry of Justice, the Judiciary, the National Prosecution Authority, the Rwanda Investigation Bureau (RIB), the Rwanda National Police (RNP), and the National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR), Rwanda Correctional Services and Civil society organisations, in the pursuit of  Rwanda’s Vision 2050 for rule of law and justice for all, unity and reconciliation.”

EU and Government of Rwanda join forces with €19.5 Million grant to boost Rwanda's Justice Sector and reconciliation efforts | EEAS (europa.eu)

No pellinore, I was NOT referring to that initiative at all, and you damn well know it, because I actually linked the initiative I was referring to in my original comment, so stop trying to make yourself look even more stupid than I already thought you were.

You know damn well I was referring to the 'United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' (UNHCR) scheme to send refugees and asyIum seekers to Rwanda.

Here's the link, AGAIN, now READ it, and then explain to me how you have come to the conclusion that's got anything to do with what you're claiming I was referring to. 🤦👇👇👇👇

https://www.unhcr.org/africa/news/rwanda-african-union-and-unhcr-extend-agreement-support-emergency-evacuation-refugees-and

Edited by Destination Unknown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

No pellinore, I was NOT referring to that initiative at all, and you damn well know it, because I actually linked the initiative I was referring to in my original comment, so stop trying to make yourself look even more stupid than I already thought you were.

You know damn well I was referring to the 'United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' (UNHCR) scheme to send refugees and asyIum seekers to Rwanda.

Here's the link, AGAIN, now READ it, and then explain to me how you have come to the conclusion that's got anything to do with what you're claiming I was referring to. 🤦👇👇👇👇

https://www.unhcr.org/africa/news/rwanda-african-union-and-unhcr-extend-agreement-support-emergency-evacuation-refugees-and

I think I have found what you mean. The EU is part of an initiative that gives aid to Africans displaced by war, famine etc:

UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, and the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) welcome new funding by the European Union (EU) to promote the inclusion of thousands of people who have fled the ongoing fighting in Sudan and found safety in Chad, Ethiopia, and South Sudan. Going beyond lifesaving interventions, this funding will enable refugees and returnees, as well as their host communities, to access national services such as health and education, in addition to economic opportunities that will improve their self-relianceEuropean Union provides EUR 17 million new development funding to UNHCR and IOM for thousands affected by Sudan conflict | UNHCR Africa

Though I don't know what part of the programme you object to, tbh.

Edited by pellinore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, pellinore said:

I think I have found what you mean. The EU is part of an initiative that gives aid to Africans displaced by war, famine etc;

European Union provides EUR 17 million new development funding to UNHCR and IOM for thousands affected by Sudan conflict | UNHCR Africa

No pellinore, you have not found what I mean at all, so stop it.

I mean this, and only this, where under a scheme that is partly funded by your beloved EU and run by the 'United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' (UNHCR), which is a United Nations agency mandated to aid and protect refugees, refugees and asylum seekers are being sent to Rwanda. 👇👇👇👇

https://www.unhcr.org/africa/news/rwanda-african-union-and-unhcr-extend-agreement-support-emergency-evacuation-refugees-and

Edited by Destination Unknown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

No pellinore, you have not found what I mean at all, so stop it.

I mean this, and only this, where under a scheme that is partly funded by your beloved EU and run by the 'United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' (UNHCR), which is a United Nations agency mandated to aid and protect refugees, refugees and asylum seekers are being sent to Rwanda. 👇👇👇👇

https://www.unhcr.org/africa/news/rwanda-african-union-and-unhcr-extend-agreement-support-emergency-evacuation-refugees-and

You object to this? (this is in your linked article):

Under this agreement, the Government of Rwanda will continue to receive and provide protection and assistance to refugees and asylum-seekers and other vulnerable people at risk in Libya. They will be evacuated to safety in Rwanda on a voluntary basis. 

Upon arrival, UNHCR will pursue durable solutions for the evacuees. While some may benefit from resettlement to third countries, others will be facilitated to return to previous countries of asylum, or to return to their home countries if it is safe to do so. Some may be given permission to remain in Rwanda subject to agreement by the competent authorities.

Why? You do realise Libya and Rwanda are both African countries? Rwanda is being given assistance to strengthen human rights and the rule of law.  Where do you think the refugees should go? Surely you are not suggesting they be transferred to the UK? I know Brexiters prefer their Commonwealth friends to our European neighbours, but we are full!

I really cannot see what it is that you are objecting to.

Edited by pellinore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, pellinore said:

You object to this?

Under this agreement, the Government of Rwanda will continue to receive and provide protection and assistance to refugees and asylum-seekers and other vulnerable people at risk in Libya. They will be evacuated to safety in Rwanda on a voluntary basis. 

Upon arrival, UNHCR will pursue durable solutions for the evacuees. While some may benefit from resettlement to third countries, others will be facilitated to return to previous countries of asylum, or to return to their home countries if it is safe to do so. Some may be given permission to remain in Rwanda subject to agreement by the competent authorities.

Why? You do realise Libya and Rwanda are both African countries? Rwanda is being given assistance to strengthen human rights and the rule of law.  Where do you think the refugees should go? Surely you are not suggesting they be transferred to the UK? I know Brexiters prefer their Commonwealth friends to our European neighbours, but we are full!

I really cannot see what it is that you are objecting to.

No pellinore, what I object to is the sheer hypocrisy of the United Nations condemning the UK for a scheme in which refugees and asyIum seekers would be sent to Rwanda, whilst at the same time the 'United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' (UNHCR), which is a United Nations agency mandated to aid and protect refugees, is running a scheme where refugees and asyIum seekers are being sent to Rwanda. 🤦

Thanks for finally admitting that Rwanda is a safe place to send refugees and asyIum seekers to though, and seeing as you're all about us being more aligned with your beloved EU, I expect you would be over the moon with a UK scheme where refugees and asyIum seekers are being sent to safe Rwanda, maybe we could get the EU and their vassals to contribute to the UK scheme as well eh. 

Although on second thoughts, they've got their own problems to deal with, seeing as December 2023 marked the seventh month in a row of contraction for services and manufacturing in the eurozone, with the rate of decline picking up since November 2023.

Meanwhile, from the same article, annoyingly for you: "By contrast, the UK economy looks to be in a much healthier state, with economic activity seemingly accelerating as we approach year-end. This should both quell investor concerns surrounding the possibility of a UK recession." Ooops.

(Maybe the eurozone should have also voted to Leave the EU and the Single Market as well eh, you know, just like 17.4 million of us in the UK did.) 😂😂😂😂👇👇👇👇

https://www.euronews.com/business/2023/12/15/continued-contraction-in-eurozone-services-and-manufacturing-sectors

Edited by Destination Unknown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

No pellinore, what I object to is the sheer hypocrisy of the United Nations condemning the UK for a scheme in which refugees and asyIum seekers would be sent to Rwanda, whilst at the same time the 'United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' (UNHCR), which is a United Nations agency mandated to aid and protect refugees, is running a scheme where refugees and asyIum seekers are being sent to Rwanda. 🤦

Thanks for finally admitting that Rwanda is a safe place to send refugees and asyIum seekers to though, and seeing as you're all about us being more aligned with your beloved EU, I expect you would be over the moon with a UK scheme where refugees and asyIum seekers are being sent to safe Rwanda, maybe we could get the EU and their vassals to contribute to the UK scheme as well eh. 

Although on second thoughts, they've got their own problems to deal with, seeing as December 2023 marked the seventh month in a row of contraction for services and manufacturing in the eurozone, with the rate of decline picking up since November 2023.

Meanwhile, from the same article, annoyingly for you: "By contrast, the UK economy looks to be in a much healthier state, with economic activity seemingly accelerating as we approach year-end. This should both quell investor concerns surrounding the possibility of a UK recession." Ooops.

(Maybe the eurozone should have also voted to Leave the EU and the Single Market as well eh, you know, just like 17.4 million of us in the UK did.) 😂😂😂😂👇👇👇👇

https://www.euronews.com/business/2023/12/15/continued-contraction-in-eurozone-services-and-manufacturing-sectors

I object to the Rwanda scheme because it is a colossal waste of taxpayers' money that is being spent just to placate the right in the Tory Party and Reform Party. Even Sunak doubted it would work before he became PM. The Home Secretary called it "bat**** crazy". Even if a plane does takes off to Rwanda each refugee will have cost the taxpayer a quarter of a million pounds, though once processed the majority are granted leave to stay in the UK anyway.

The Bibby Stockholm is another waste of £2.5 billion pounds, designed to keep the Tories in power, not solve any problem. 

If a fraction of the money spent on performative politics was spent on actually making the asylum system work, we would see some results, though I realise the backlog was deliberately allowed to build up to stoke the culture wars (the government thought it would be a "deterrent") and distract us from the fact that legal immigration is 500,000 every year since we ended FOM.

The UN and the EU spending money to improve conditions in Africa is just the politics we need- improving conditions will mean less impetus for them to come to Europe. Neither the UN nor the EU are sending refugees from Europe to Rwanda.

The Rwanda Scheme is just a ploy to distract the gullible. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, pellinore said:

I object to the Rwanda scheme because it is a colossal waste of taxpayers' money that is being spent just to placate the right in the Tory Party and Reform Party. Even Sunak doubted it would work before he became PM. The Home Secretary called it "bat**** crazy". Even if a plane does takes off to Rwanda each refugee will have cost the taxpayer a quarter of a million pounds, though once processed the majority are granted leave to stay in the UK anyway.

The Bibby Stockholm is another waste of £2.5 billion pounds, designed to keep the Tories in power, not solve any problem. 

If a fraction of the money spent on performative politics was spent on actually making the asylum system work, we would see some results, though I realise the backlog was deliberately allowed to build up to stoke the culture wars (the government thought it would be a "deterrent") and distract us from the fact that legal immigration is 500,000 every year since we ended FOM.

The UN and the EU spending money to improve conditions in Africa is just the politics we need- improving conditions will mean less impetus for them to come to Europe. Neither the UN nor the EU are sending refugees from Europe to Rwanda.

The Rwanda Scheme is just a ploy to distract the gullible. 

 

Yes, we should remove all incentive for them to come here in the first place, don't make the UK such an attractive option and stop giving them free taxpayer funded everything as soon as they set foot on British soil uninvited. Remove the carrot, and the problem would disappear overnight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

Yes, we should remove all incentive for them to come here in the first place, don't make the UK such an attractive option and stop giving them free taxpayer funded everything as soon as they set foot on British soil uninvited. Remove the carrot, and the problem would disappear overnight.

You think it a good idea to have an annual 50,000 undocumented, unfunded asylum seekers sleeping rough in our towns? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, pellinore said:

You think it a good idea to have an annual 50,000 undocumented, unfunded asylum seekers sleeping rough in our towns? 

No pellinore, that's not what I said. I quite clearly said that if we removed the incentive, such as putting them up in taxpayer funded hotels, and making the UK such an attractive option, they wouldn't even want to come here in the first place.

Do you deliberately go out of your way to take something that someone has said, and then twist it around to make it seem like they said something else? Stop it, it makes you look even more stupid than I already thought you were, if indeed that's even possible.

Edited by Destination Unknown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

No pellinore, that's not what I said. I quite clearly said that if we removed the incentive, such as putting them up in taxpayer funded hotels, and making the UK such an attractive option, they wouldn't even want to come here in the first place.

Do you deliberately go out of your way to take something that someone has said, and then twist it around to make it seem like they said something else? Stop it, it makes you look even more stupid than I already thought you were, if indeed that's even possible.

The UK is an attractive option because it is safe, friendly country, rich, with no severe weather and lots of job opportunities.  That's why people from worn torn countries, suffering famine and drought, full of religious bigots who kill those they do not approve of, with no industry or opportunity for betterment, want to come here. 

I don't want to change that 😏

 

I do agree we should not be just putting them up in hotels - we should be giving them jobs - including working on hotels which are crying out for staff just now! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Essan said:

The UK is an attractive option because it is safe, friendly country, rich, with no severe weather and lots of job opportunities.

Guess what, France is also a safe, friendly country, rich, with lots of job opportunities, and even better weather, so if you were genuinely fleeing for your life from a war torn country, then why would you risk your life even further by leaving the safety of France to cross one of the busiest shipping lanes on the planet in an inflatable dinghy?

Could it be because France aren't stupid enough to put them up in taxpayer funded hotels in the first place? 🤔

Here's what an asylum seeker would be entitled to if they were to claim asylum in France, quote:

"Accommodation – If you have no place to stay, you can be granted accommodation, although this comes with the caveat that it’s not always available, you may be asked to pay depending on your financial situation. You also have to leave quickly once your application is decided. The accommodation is often pretty grim."

👇👇👇👇

https://www.thelocal.fr/20220225/explained-coming-to-france-as-a-refugee/

 

52 minutes ago, Essan said:

I do agree we should not be just putting them up in hotels - we should be giving them jobs - including working on hotels which are crying out for staff just now!

It's precisely because we have been putting them up in hotels that they are crying out for staff right now, because my wife lost her job 2 years ago when the Government block booked the hotel she worked at in order to house these scroungers, only for the hotel to be filled up with fighting age young men wearing the latest designer gear, who then did nothing but loiter around the town centre pestering any schoolgirls who walked past.

So you think we should be kicking British workers out of their jobs and giving them to uninvited foreign paedophiles instead then do you?

Edited by Destination Unknown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.