- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
The timing of the announcement on the Rwanda scheme, which is estimated to cost more than £500m over five years, has prompted scorn Labour.
A party source said: “Is there any more blatant sign that [former immigration minister Robert] Jenrick was right about this all being symbolic before an election than this mad flurry of stories?
“The core substance though hasn’t changed. This is a tiny scheme at an extortionate cost and the criminal gangs will see through this con.”
Downing Street categorically denied this. The prime minister’s press secretary said: “From our part there isn’t really a day to lose when people are dying in the Channel having been induced into boats by gangs.
You must log in or register to comment.
Downing Street denied this. The prime minister’s press secretary said: “From our part there isn’t really a day to lose when people are dying in the Channel having been induced into boats by gangs.”
I love that they stop the blame train there when it’s the government that forced them to rely on gangs by not having a proper immigration policy in places and under-investing in the immigration service so claims can be processed quicker. They have, essentially, created this crisis then come up with a ridiculous “solution”.
“People are ultimately breaking into our country"
That phrase isn’t used in this article.
“People are ultimately breaking into our country” isn’t used in the article.
The Guardian must have changed that. I copied and pasted the phrase from the article. (They also say now that Downing Street ‘denied this’ instead of ‘categorically denied this’, a minor edit).
I changed the title now.
Cheers. It’s weird that they’d remove it as it is suitably bizarre.
Yeah, it would be interesting to know why the Guardian did it.
If you Google it, you find a number of news articles (and us) and those pieces have all had the phrase removed. Something has gone wrong somewhere - it might be they were scammed by a fake Home Office spokesperson.
deleted by creator
Weird how most people I talk to are for it or want harsher punishments
The right-leaning people I know mostly think the Rwanda policy is performative and futile. They want stronger border controls but don’t seem convinced by this approach.
Opinion polls apparently put support for it at around ~40%, but that was only when the policy was still hypothetical.
I don’t think the Rwanda plan is the will of the people at all.
I think the will of the people is that France is a safe country and that anyone trying to get across the channel illegally is an economic migrant and they should be pushed back with force if required. Anyone that makes it should be arrested and returned to their country of birth also by force if required.
The main issue with the Rwanda plan is that it isn’t big enough of a deterrent. People would much rather put everyone on some Scottish island for processing then send them home when required.
