[Politics] Should Prince Charles be speaking out about the Rwanda deportations?

[Eric the meek]

Of course Charles is right to. When the governments own report in 2021 called out Rwanda for having a poor human rights record - including: (source https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/37th-universal-periodic-review-uk-statement-on-rwanda)

We recommend that Rwanda:

- Conduct transparent, credible and independent investigations into allegations of extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, enforced disappearances and torture, and bring perpetrators to justice.

- Protect and enable journalists to work freely, without fear of retribution, and ensure that state authorities comply with the Access to Information law.

- Screen, identify and provide support to trafficking victims, including those held in Government transit centres.



Then why now is it seemingly ok to send anyone in our care there ? I’ve not seen any updated report that suggests these concerns have been satisfied.

I wasn't aware of that statement on Rwanda. It is hugely important and raises a whole series of questions, including yours above. It makes the government policy even more extraordinary, if that were possible.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Mail on Sunday and the Sunday Express both very upset that Prince Charles is " meddling in politics " regarding forced transportation to Rwanda...after all its newspapers like them that are supposed to decide what the government should do....silly Prince Charles.

Stops the focus on Crime Minister Johnson.

Job done.

 

[vegster]

Stops the focus on Crime Minister Johnson.

Job done.

Good point, kind of pushes the agenda that Prince Charles is going to be wishy washy and woke on the future too, so it's highlighting another potential " Enemy of the People " to be mighty angry about alongside the 0.028% of refugees swarming here !

 

[Thunder Bolt]

This post troubles me.

I know nothing about immigration law as it doesn't particularly interest me.

So is this true or dangerous misinformation?

It isn’t true. I posted a meme earlier which pointed out the wording in the UN convention 1951 which says that refugees and asylum seekers can choose where they ask. Here it is again.
The press that call them illegal are right wing newspapers owned by very rich people living abroad and not paying taxes.

 

[Pondicherry]

Although it’s certainly true that crossing the Channel without authorisation isn’t a legal way to enter the UK, Article 31 of the UN Refugee Convention states that refugees cannot be penalised for entering the country illegally to claim asylum if they are “coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened” provided they “present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence”.

A lot depends here on how to interpret which country people are “coming directly from”. It could be argued, for instance, that as the people crossing the channel are coming directly from France—which is not the country they initially fled—they don’t have the right to claim asylum in the UK.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Although it’s certainly true that crossing the Channel without authorisation isn’t a legal way to enter the UK, Article 31 of the UN Refugee Convention states that refugees cannot be penalised for entering the country illegally to claim asylum if they are “coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened” provided they “present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence”.

A lot depends here on how to interpret which country people are “coming directly from”. It could be argued, for instance, that as the people crossing the channel are coming directly from France—which is not the country they initially fled—they don’t have the right to claim asylum in the UK.

Wrong. This government has closed down all the asylum centres abroad where it could be claimed. There is no other way here now except to cross the Channel by whatever means.

https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/

 

[Pondicherry]

Wrong. This government has closed down all the asylum centres abroad where it could be claimed. There is no other way here now except to cross the Channel by whatever means.

https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/

Correct. And the UNHCR itself states.


'I am currently outside the UK but wish to seek asylum in the UK. Can UNHCR assist me?'

'No. To apply for asylum in the UK, you must be physically in the UK. Applications for asylum are submitted to the UK Government and not to UNHCR. More information can be found on this UK’s Government Services webpage.'

However it is incorrect to say that all asylum centres in Europe are closed. Its just that there aren't UK asylum centres in France. Just as there aren't French asylum centres in the UK.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

This government knows what Rwanda is like. Our chameleon PM said this previously

.

 

[cunning fergus]

It isn’t true. I posted a meme earlier which pointed out the wording in the UN convention 1951 which says that refugees and asylum seekers can choose where they ask. Here it is again.
The press that call them illegal are right wing newspapers owned by very rich people living abroad and not paying taxes.

View attachment 148792

Don’t forget the U.K. newspapers that support liberal migration policies that the U.K. taxpayer has to fund……. and don’t pay UK taxes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/timwor...hypocrisy-of-the-guardian-on-corporation-tax/

 

[Eric the meek]

'Rwanda asylum plan: Number of people on first flight 'close to single figures'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61779845

'A Home Office source told the BBC that, of the original 37 scheduled to fly to the east African nation, legal challenges relating to modern slavery and human rights claims have drastically reduced that number.
And BBC home editor Mark Easton says it is expected that could be "whittled down to zero" before the plane is due to take off.'

Cheap tickets to Kigali anyone?

 

[carlzeiss]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xmsOzboE04

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The agreement with Rwanda states in Article 16.1 that refugees flown out there will be in exchange for Rwandan refugees to come to Britain. What is the sense of that?

[tweet]1536028375520780288[/tweet]

 

[carlzeiss]

The agreement with Rwanda states in Article 16.1 that refugees flown out there will be in exchange for Rwandan refugees to come to Britain. What is the sense of that?

[tweet]1536028375520780288[/tweet]

Makes no sense at all . The government needs to concentrate on getting migrants and refugees out of expensive hotels by investing in a massive house building program ( asap ) with suitable homes in areas that the folk would prefer to reside in
would prefer to reside in

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Makes no sense at all . The government needs to concentrate on getting migrants and refugees out of expensive hotels by investing in a massive house building program ( asap ) with suitable homes in areas that the folk would prefer to reside in
would prefer to reside in

There are over 300,000 empty properties and refugees cannot work until their claim has been processed. It is a vicious circle. Claims could be processed much more quickly so they can work and pay taxes.

 

[Is it PotG?]

There are over 300,000 empty properties and refugees cannot work until their claim has been processed. It is a vicious circle. Claims could be processed much more quickly so they can work and pay taxes.

Assuming that those able are willing to work, of course.

 

[The Clamp]

The agreement with Rwanda states in Article 16.1 that refugees flown out there will be in exchange for Rwandan refugees to come to Britain. What is the sense of that?

[tweet]1536028375520780288[/tweet]

I flagged this up a while back. It’s always been the agreement. Ridiculous!

 

[carlzeiss]

There are over 300,000 empty properties and refugees cannot work until their claim has been processed. It is a vicious circle. Claims could be processed much more quickly so they can work and pay taxes.

Why would they need to find work before being given a home ?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Why would they need to find work before being given a home ?

To be able to pay rent, of course.



In the meantime, there are quite a few demonstrations going on.


[tweet]1536124850745618433[/tweet]

[tweet]1536267066021400577[/tweet]

[tweet]1536021900970827779[/tweet]

 

[Is it PotG?]

 

[carlzeiss]

To be able to pay rent, of course.


/QUOTE]

I believe there is something called Universal credit , no idea how it works as I have never had to make a claim but I am pretty sure that it can be used to pay rent and other living costs