Desparate

[baggy1]

I mean how far down the list of countries did we have to go before one of them said "yeah we'll take your refugees", wouldn't it have been easier to set up an operation somewhere nearer, like Calais for instance, to deal with the refugees as they arrive. That would give the legitimate claims an opportunity to be properly vetted - something like 75% of those that come across the channel are genuine claimants with a right to stay.

It really is desperate when we have to send them to a country with a humanitarian record such as Rwanda

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61097114

[Protheroe]

The issue of illegal migration is complex and multi-faceted. It's all very well suggesting that 75% of known arrivals have "a right" to stay - but that's under legislation that's wholly unfit for purpose and wholly ignores the reality that even genuine asylum seekers have travelled through a multitude of safe countries to get here.

Complex problems need well thought out, cost effective and practical solutions. This is not a policy to process anyone in Rwanda, it's simply a policy to disincentivise individuals from spending £thousands with people traffickers. It sounds horribly impractical, inhumane and potentially highly discriminatory - if we were to ever send people there in numbers.

[baggy1]

You're thinking that the crossing of a continent followed by an extremely dangerous sea crossing isn't disincentive enough? If the problem is the legislation, then fix that, don't think of some fucked up idea that rates up there with wave machines. This bunch of morons are all about the show, it's a bit boring to do the legislation bit so lets spend £120M of taxpayers money on some crackpot idea.

[Kit Kat Chunky]

Let's just mine the channel.

More cost efficient, very effective and would solve the problem.

[Sotv]

Let's just mine the channel.

More cost efficient, very effective and would solve the problem.

What's the point? There is no coal there.

[Kit Kat Chunky]

Let's just mine the channel.

More cost efficient, very effective and would solve the problem.

What's the point? There is no coal there.

You are in a rich vein at the moment 

[Borin' Baggie]

Really nice to know that the government is prepared to waste taxpayers money on something stupid. Not like there's a cost of living crisis or anything...

Good to know that they're putting the extra tax receipts caused by inflation to good use. Definitely prefer this to a VAT rate cut...

If anyone ever argues that the Tories are fiscally responsible I'm going to laugh in their face like Bender from Futurama. Made worse that this is probably only doing the rounds because the government is trying to push the fact that Johnson and Sunak need to resign off the front pages and top of the search results.

[baggy1]

Let's just mine the channel.

More cost efficient, very effective and would solve the problem.

We may as well, we've done everything else to fuck our trade up with Europe, why not go the whole hog.

[Kit Kat Chunky]

Let's just mine the channel.

More cost efficient, very effective and would solve the problem.

We may as well, we've done everything else to fuck our trade up with Europe, why not go the whole hog.

I think the problem is the navy is so thin these days, it would take us 2 years to do it.

[Derek Hardballs]

Just another lump of red meat to their base… it’s interesting that they go down this route on the eve of local elections.