How it Works17 mins ago
Now Over 18,000 Channel Illegal Immigrants So Far This Year
We look set to beat last years appalling total of 28,000+
Government policy is failing (has been for 3 years).
Yet the minister over seeing this debacle keeps her job.
Is this problem really unsolvable ?
Government policy is failing (has been for 3 years).
Yet the minister over seeing this debacle keeps her job.
Is this problem really unsolvable ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Bobinwales
What deterrent?
Since the Rwanda policy was announced, 13,000 additional immigrants have come.
Patel has never said how many of the 57,000 she intends to send abroad.probabky because it is a pathtically low number.
Only 5.5% of the 18000 are from Albabia. Saying 40% Of migrants are Albania is very misleading.
What deterrent?
Since the Rwanda policy was announced, 13,000 additional immigrants have come.
Patel has never said how many of the 57,000 she intends to send abroad.probabky because it is a pathtically low number.
Only 5.5% of the 18000 are from Albabia. Saying 40% Of migrants are Albania is very misleading.
Tora,
£1.7Million is a guess because the Government have not revealed their costing of the Rwanda plan.
Australia pays that per person, so we are possibly doing the same (who knows).
If you want to know what Australia gets for £1.7million, go find out yourself. That is their budget, and they seem happy to spend it. Note that it is x4 more than Patel has allocated.
£1.7Million is a guess because the Government have not revealed their costing of the Rwanda plan.
Australia pays that per person, so we are possibly doing the same (who knows).
If you want to know what Australia gets for £1.7million, go find out yourself. That is their budget, and they seem happy to spend it. Note that it is x4 more than Patel has allocated.
I think it's nothing like that and you 5C types are including initial set up costs. Once established the per person costs cannot be that high or they'd not to the deal. It's like saying when you build a prison the costs per prisoner are the costs of the build divided by the number of prisoners. Ignoring the fact that the infrastructure is now in place and future prisoners are now much cheaper.
Tora,
The Australian off shoring scheme has been running for 10 years. It’s cost has gone up over the decade, not down.
// It is estimated that offshore processing cost the Australian government A$8.3 billion (US$6.2 billion) between 2014 and 2020. The annual cost of detaining a single asylum seeker in Papua New Guinea or Nauru is A$3.4 million (US$2.5 million). //
Patel has committed £120Million, not $8.3Billion. Until the UK Government put some serious money on the table, it is obviously an expensive gimmick, not a serious solution.
You can keep parroting that you don’t believe it, but you are not providing an alternative figure, mainly because the Home Secretary won’t tell you.
The Australian off shoring scheme has been running for 10 years. It’s cost has gone up over the decade, not down.
// It is estimated that offshore processing cost the Australian government A$8.3 billion (US$6.2 billion) between 2014 and 2020. The annual cost of detaining a single asylum seeker in Papua New Guinea or Nauru is A$3.4 million (US$2.5 million). //
Patel has committed £120Million, not $8.3Billion. Until the UK Government put some serious money on the table, it is obviously an expensive gimmick, not a serious solution.
You can keep parroting that you don’t believe it, but you are not providing an alternative figure, mainly because the Home Secretary won’t tell you.
ToraToraTora
//We need to beef up the legislation so It's not challengeable and then leave the ECHR then implement it properly. Of course there is a much better 100% fool proof way of stopping this but we need France to want to help themselves rather than annoying us but that's another story.//
Well if the French are not doing their bit then what are we paying them for and the government have already put plans in place to give them even more??
https:/ /www.th etimes. co.uk/a rticle/ priti-p atel-s- plan-to -pay-fr ench-mi llions- more-to -stop-m igrants -angers -tories -nrlj3j gvc
From the link.
Priti Patel is planning to announce another
multimillion-pound deal with France to stop
migrants crossing the Channel in what is
likely to be one of her last acts as home
secretary.
She will risk another backlash from
Conservative MPs to pay the French tens of
millions of pounds for more beach patrols
and surveillance equipment, despite previous
deals having failed to improve the low
interception rate. Senior Tory MPs urged
Patel last night to pull out of the deal,
insisting that she was "throwing more good money after bad”.
It’s HER job to sort this out and get the French to utilise the money correct.
If they’re not, stop paying them and sack her for someone who can ‘deliver for the British people’ we’ve heard so much of!
//We need to beef up the legislation so It's not challengeable and then leave the ECHR then implement it properly. Of course there is a much better 100% fool proof way of stopping this but we need France to want to help themselves rather than annoying us but that's another story.//
Well if the French are not doing their bit then what are we paying them for and the government have already put plans in place to give them even more??
https:/
From the link.
Priti Patel is planning to announce another
multimillion-pound deal with France to stop
migrants crossing the Channel in what is
likely to be one of her last acts as home
secretary.
She will risk another backlash from
Conservative MPs to pay the French tens of
millions of pounds for more beach patrols
and surveillance equipment, despite previous
deals having failed to improve the low
interception rate. Senior Tory MPs urged
Patel last night to pull out of the deal,
insisting that she was "throwing more good money after bad”.
It’s HER job to sort this out and get the French to utilise the money correct.
If they’re not, stop paying them and sack her for someone who can ‘deliver for the British people’ we’ve heard so much of!
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.