3 ms·

I don't think even the most fundamental left leaning people are against sending illegal immigrants away - the problem is that UK is choosing to send people away

I don't think even the most fundamental left leaning people are against sending illegal immigrants away - the problem is that UK is choosing to send people away to Rwanda, basically telling them that it's a safe African country, good luck there. Ministers have confirmed that yeah, it's "possible" that for instance Ukrainian refugees could be sent there if they didn't follow the right procedures and are deemed "illegal". I can only imagine that if not for horrible optics, UK would send them to Australia. But oh well, I guess if your dream is to resurrect the British Empire, having a foreign penal colony is one of the requirements.

tialaramex 4y ago
The UK can't send asylum seekers to Australia because Australia is a sovereign entity and wouldn't accept them. Indeed Australia already has anti-asylum policies locally, and these influenced the model for the UK's decision.
- gambiting 4y ago
  Well of course, it was a tongue in cheek comment - that UK would probably send people to Australia, just like it used to. I'm not saying that it's possible, realistic, or even a good idea in the first place.
true_religion 4y ago
What’s wrong with Rwanda? From the point of view of Africans, we see this as a Rwanda led initiative to take care of refugees in a country that is safe, and in an environment that is closer to their homelands. Although in the past Rwanda has had is troubles but … so did Ireland and the UK on different scale. Rwanda of today is a different place, and the current president has long experience in handling refugee situations and defusing the natural tensions of people in a refugee crises. Is it absolutely necessary for refugees to leave to go to a different continent, to live on an island where they will forever look like an “other” and have a culture and weather that is totally alien to them? There should be more to this equation than the thought of sending people to the most prosperous country that they can.
- jaywalk 4y ago
  I have literally never heard an African perspective on this before your comment. Thank you for this, it's very enlightening!

tialaramex 4y ago

The UK can't send asylum seekers to Australia because Australia is a sovereign entity and wouldn't accept them. Indeed Australia already has anti-asylum policies locally, and these influenced the model for the UK's decision.

gambiting 4y ago
Well of course, it was a tongue in cheek comment - that UK would probably send people to Australia, just like it used to. I'm not saying that it's possible, realistic, or even a good idea in the first place.

true_religion 4y ago

What’s wrong with Rwanda? From the point of view of Africans, we see this as a Rwanda led initiative to take care of refugees in a country that is safe, and in an environment that is closer to their homelands. Although in the past Rwanda has had is troubles but … so did Ireland and the UK on different scale. Rwanda of today is a different place, and the current president has long experience in handling refugee situations and defusing the natural tensions of people in a refugee crises. Is it absolutely necessary for refugees to leave to go to a different continent, to live on an island where they will forever look like an “other” and have a culture and weather that is totally alien to them? There should be more to this equation than the thought of sending people to the most prosperous country that they can.

jaywalk 4y ago
I have literally never heard an African perspective on this before your comment. Thank you for this, it's very enlightening!