Starmer kills off Rwanda plan on first day as PM (Telegraph)

[pellinore]

The Rwanda scheme was first announced by Boris Johnson and continued by Liz Truss and Mr Sunak. It has been delayed by long court battles, with no flight having taken off, but it became a battleground in the election campaign.

A Labour insider confirmed to The Telegraph that it was now “dead”, saying: “If Rishi Sunak thought Rwanda would work, he wouldn’t have called an election. It was a con. By calling an election, Sunak was acknowledging that fact.”

Britain can end the Rwanda scheme by terminating the agreement through a break clause. Under the clause, the UK will not have to make any further payments from the date it is activated.

The UK has already paid £270 million, with the latest £50 million instalment handed over in April. By ending the scheme, Britain will save two further £50 million payments in 2025 and 2026.

Starmer kills off Rwanda plan on first day as PM (msn.com)

Edited July 6 by pellinore

[Dejarma]

IMO people should have the balls to stay in their own country & sort out the problems they are running from!

[pellinore]

52 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

IMO people should have the balls to stay in their own country & sort out the problems they are running from!

I agree, but that does not change reality. If people are born into repressive or totalitarian regimes like Afghanistan or Russia, how do they sort problems out? This is a genuine question not a rhetorical one. The US has spent billions trying to answer that and has mostly got nowhere and has often exacerbated problems. 

[Dejarma]

14 minutes ago, pellinore said:

I agree, but that does not change reality. If people are born into repressive or totalitarian regimes like Afghanistan or Russia, how do they sort problems out? This is a genuine question not a rhetorical one. The US has spent billions trying to answer that and has mostly got nowhere and has often exacerbated problems. 

The French Revolution== a modern day version of it if you like.... if England had the same problems as the counties in question; can you honestly see us Brits running away to other countries for asylum ?

NO, we would stay & fight if we have to!!! No Brits running to other countries when being bombed in the second world war!!!! it's just my opinion= who knows the answer, i don't that's for sure 🤷‍♂️

[Destination Unknown]

1 hour ago, pellinore said:

I agree, but that does not change reality. If people are born into repressive or totalitarian regimes like Afghanistan or Russia, how do they sort problems out? This is a genuine question not a rhetorical one. The US has spent billions trying to answer that and has mostly got nowhere and has often exacerbated problems. 

But the thing is pellinore, instead of integrating into our society and embracing the country that gave them asylum in the first place, the ungrateful scumbags try to impose that exact same repressive totalitarian ideology onto the rest of us, trying to change this country into the country they've apparently fled from.

[Setton]

2 hours ago, Dejarma said:

The French Revolution== a modern day version of it if you like....

You know the French revolution was followed by years of absolute tyranny? Have you not heard of the Terror? Then a dictator in the form of Bonaparte. And after all that, the French decided the best thing to do was restore the monarchy. Then eventually another Emperor before settling on a president.

That whole process took 81 years.

That's exactly the problem - we look at these countries and expect a quick solution. Take Afghanistan. We pull out after just 20 years and are surprised when things go back to how they were.

Or look at Iraq and Libya. If they have the capability, people in these countries will depose their own tyrants. But it'll take a long, long time to settle down again and you might not like what replaces the old dictator in the meantime.

[Setton]

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

But the thing is pellinore, instead of integrating into our society and embracing the country that gave them asylum in the first place, the ungrateful scumbags try to impose that exact same repressive totalitarian ideology onto the rest of us, trying to change this country into the country they've apparently fled from.

Except they don't. The majority of those immigrating do try and integrate. Most extremists in the UK are born and raised here, usually at least third generation. The question isn't "why aren't immigrants integrating?". It's what are we doing to alienate the children and grandchildren of immigrants to disengage from our society?

I'd argue stigmatising all immigrants as unwilling to integrate probably goes a long way to helping radicalise them.

[Destination Unknown]

38 minutes ago, Setton said:

Except they don't. The majority of those immigrating do try and integrate. Most extremists in the UK are born and raised here, usually at least third generation. The question isn't "why aren't immigrants integrating?". It's what are we doing to alienate the children and grandchildren of immigrants to disengage from our society?

I'd argue stigmatising all immigrants as unwilling to integrate probably goes a long way to helping radicalise them.

Yeah you just keep on telling yourself that. Just take a look at the sickening sight of gob on a stick Angela Rayner, Deputy Prime Minister, grovelling to a bunch of Muslim men (no women in the room, obviously) begging them to vote for her, just so she can get Palestine on the agenda, and the irony is you can actually see their total disdain for her.

Does this look to you like they're willing to integrate into our society, because it looks more to me like she's appeasing them?

 

Edited July 6 by Destination Unknown

[Alchopwn]

4 hours ago, Dejarma said:

IMO people should have the balls to stay in their own country & sort out the problems they are running from!

Agreed

3 hours ago, Dejarma said:

The French Revolution== a modern day version of it if you like.... if England had the same problems as the counties in question; can you honestly see us Brits running away to other countries for asylum ?

NO, we would stay & fight if we have to!!! No Brits running to other countries when being bombed in the second world war!!!! it's just my opinion= who knows the answer, i don't that's for sure 🤷‍♂️

And agreed.  If you run, the bad guys win automatically.  

Edited July 6 by Alchopwn

[Setton]

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

Yeah you just keep on telling yourself that. Just take a look at the sickening sight of gob on a stick Angela Rayner, Deputy Prime Minister, grovelling to a bunch of Muslim men (no women in the room, obviously) begging them to vote for her, just so she can get Palestine on the agenda, and the irony is you can actually see their total disdain for her.

Does this look to you like they're willing to integrate into our society, because it looks more to me like she's appeasing them?

 

Leaving aside your protectionism.

Very interested to know how you've got the immigration histories of all those in the room with her.

Or could it possibly be that you've completely ignored my point so you can make another boring copy-paste post?

[Destination Unknown]

27 minutes ago, Setton said:

Leaving aside your protectionism.

Very interested to know how you've got the immigration histories of all those in the room with her.

Or could it possibly be that you've completely ignored my point so you can make another boring copy-paste post?

Well quite clearly they've certainly no intentions of integrating have they, that's glaringly obvious from the video, even "if" they are British born Muslims, which I highly doubt.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

Liebour had the chance to keep this policy and deter criminal gangs profiteering but no, day 1, not even 24 hours into office, they support criminal gangs and entice illegal immigration from France.

Disgraceful.

[pellinore]

2 hours ago, Destination Unknown said:

 Just take a look at the sickening sight of gob on a stick Angela Rayner, Deputy Prime Minister,

I think you secretly love her, and it is causing you distress. Here are some ways of dealing with the conflicting emotions you feel:  What to Do When You Hate the One You Love (berkeley.edu)

[Setton]

37 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Liebour had the chance to keep this policy and deter criminal gangs profiteering but no, day 1, not even 24 hours into office, they support criminal gangs and entice illegal immigration from France.

Disgraceful.

It was a stupid gimmick that does nothing to deter the gangs.

You know what might deter them? Actually going after and prosecuting those gangs. Maybe with some kind of dedicated body to do so.

Oh wait, that's exactly what Labour is doing.

Are you really that misinformed or just willing to play stupid to try and support your side?

[Setton]

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

Well quite clearly they've certainly no intentions of integrating have they, that's glaringly obvious from the video, even "if" they are British born Muslims, which I highly doubt.

Jesus you're still arguing back to front.

Is this what happens when you can't just copy and paste a nutters tweet about "politburos"?

[OpenMindedSceptic]

10 minutes ago, Setton said:

It was a stupid gimmick that does nothing to deter the gangs.

You know what might deter them? Actually going after and prosecuting those gangs. Maybe with some kind of dedicated body to do so.

Oh wait, that's exactly what Labour is doing.

Are you really that misinformed or just willing to play stupid to try and support your side?

A gimmick.maybe, but did nothing, well that's just false.

As for a Liebour task force, is that so they don't hurt themselves getting on the beach at Dover?

We already have a task force. Our special forces, go fetch the criminals. Let them know we are coming. Be vocal, aggressive, deadly and quell.this security threat.

[Setton]

1 hour ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

A gimmick.maybe, but did nothing, well that's just false.

My mistake of course. It was a very efficient way of flushing £250 million away with no benefit to taxpayers.

Quote

As for a Liebour task force, is that so they don't hurt themselves getting on the beach at Dover?

We already have a task force. Our special forces, go fetch the criminals. Let them know we are coming. Be vocal, aggressive, deadly and quell.this security threat.

You have literally no idea what special forces are or do, have you? This is just laughable.

No, we don't have a Border Command in the way Labour is promising. Not with counter terrorism level powers. 

Let's put it this way, there hasn't been a co-ordinated terrorist attack in the UK for 17 years. Because MI5 keep catching them. Now imagine you sent MI5 after people smuggling gangs. How long do you think they'll last?

Because that's effectively what the Labour plan is.

Edited July 6 by Setton

[Destination Unknown]

2 hours ago, Setton said:

Jesus you're still arguing back to front.

Is this what happens when you can't just copy and paste a nutters tweet about "politburos"?

Even Trevor Phillips, former chairman of the 'Equality and Human Rights Commission' between 2003 and 2012, has said that Muslim communities are, quote: "unlike others in Britain" and "will not integrate in the same way", so is he wrong as well then?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/muslim-communities-unlike-others-in-britain-former-race-equality-chief-trevor-phillips-says-a6836301.html

Edited July 6 by Destination Unknown

[Setton]

34 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

Even Trevor Phillips, former chairman of the 'Equality and Human Rights Commission' between 2003 and 2012, has said that Muslim communities are, quote: "unlike others in Britain" and "will not integrate in the same way", so is he wrong as well then?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/muslim-communities-unlike-others-in-britain-former-race-equality-chief-trevor-phillips-says-a6836301.html

Yes.

And you're conflating integration with assimilation.

[Destination Unknown]

16 minutes ago, Setton said:

Yes.

And you're conflating integration with assimilation.

So why is he wrong then?

[Setton]

14 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

So why is he wrong then?

For the same reasons already given, which apparently you're struggling to comprehend.

[L.A.T.1961]

10 hours ago, pellinore said:

The Rwanda scheme was first announced by Boris Johnson and continued by Liz Truss and Mr Sunak. It has been delayed by long court battles, with no flight having taken off, but it became a battleground in the election campaign.

A Labour insider confirmed to The Telegraph that it was now “dead”, saying: “If Rishi Sunak thought Rwanda would work, he wouldn’t have called an election. It was a con. By calling an election, Sunak was acknowledging that fact.”

Britain can end the Rwanda scheme by terminating the agreement through a break clause. Under the clause, the UK will not have to make any further payments from the date it is activated.

The UK has already paid £270 million, with the latest £50 million instalment handed over in April. By ending the scheme, Britain will save two further £50 million payments in 2025 and 2026.

Starmer kills off Rwanda plan on first day as PM (msn.com)

Starmer was asked in his presser this morning and confirmed the Rwanda policy is dead.

He did not say how effective his policy would be. Other than it represented change.

Totals crossing the channel are known so in the rest of the year his approach can be measured.

Also his ideas about holding before process and it's associated costs.

Will he use army camps, hotels or floating camps? 

They have to go somewhere. 

One thing is obvious, the only restriction on illegal crossings will be the weather and number of boats and criminals available in France to move them.

Expect to see Dunkirk levels of small boats appearing from the fog in the channel.

 

[Essan]

10 hours ago, Dejarma said:

IMO people should have the balls to stay in their own country & sort out the problems they are running from!

Everyone in Britain is descended from those who migrated here .....    

And some had very good reasons to run here for safety.   

[Essan]

8 hours ago, Destination Unknown said:

But the thing is pellinore, instead of integrating into our society and embracing the country that gave them asylum in the first place, the ungrateful scumbags try to impose that exact same repressive totalitarian ideology onto the rest of us, trying to change this country into the country they've apparently fled from.

I know.  Forcing their new-fangled Christian religion on us.  Making us speak English ......   They should all go back to Italy and Germany! 

[Duke Wellington]

11 hours ago, pellinore said:

The Rwanda scheme was first announced by Boris Johnson and continued by Liz Truss and Mr Sunak. It has been delayed by long court battles, with no flight having taken off, but it became a battleground in the election campaign.

A Labour insider confirmed to The Telegraph that it was now “dead”, saying: “If Rishi Sunak thought Rwanda would work, he wouldn’t have called an election. It was a con. By calling an election, Sunak was acknowledging that fact.”

Britain can end the Rwanda scheme by terminating the agreement through a break clause. Under the clause, the UK will not have to make any further payments from the date it is activated.

The UK has already paid £270 million, with the latest £50 million instalment handed over in April. By ending the scheme, Britain will save two further £50 million payments in 2025 and 2026.

Starmer kills off Rwanda plan on first day as PM (msn.com)

On one thread you are against scrapping ECHR and on this critical of politicians for not carrying through the Rwanda plan.

Make up your mind, you cannot have both. The reason why ECHR needs scrapping is because its that legislation being used to block the Rwanda plan.