UK passes bill to send asylum seekers to Rwanda

Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda deportation bill will become law after peers eventually backed down on amending it, opening the way for legal battles over the potential removal of dozens of people seeking asylum. Sunak has put the bill, which would deport asylum seekers who arrive in the UK by irregular means to Kigali, at the centre of his attempts to stop small boats crossing the Channel.

The Guardian on YouTube:

#Rwanda #Sunak #UK #Immigration #News

[neelamacwan]

Why is UK paying for these flights . And paying billions to Rwanda government. STOP THE BOATS NOWWWW

[ALLUK]

This is the reason why I’m paying so much taxes

[Puddingtops]

How many will be sent to Rwanda ? 50 or 500, 000. ?
I still think none will be sent .

[dwaynewrighton]

At a cost of £1.8million per passenger at the taxpayers expense; and a legal annual cap of 250 deportations per year.


Thats less deportations per year then some of the reported number of arrivals per day.



Doesnt seem to solve anything, and ots exorbitant cost will be used to justify tax hikes to fund

[LivingLifeSlower]

You can't even tell us how many illegal immigrants are in the UK, so how on earth will this change anything?

[RedBull.RedBull]

Instead of paying for these flights and billions to Rwanda government why can't spend in STOPPING those boats.. Stop the boats first..

[MrChriss]

2000 spaces.. 26 dinghies worth.
The ones they send will be back in 3 weeks.

[BryanPardoe]

Just stop the boats then rwanda bolx wouldnt happen.
The cost to us will never be known but will be astronomic.

[mickrussell]

what an absolute waste of time and money. how many people are they going to send when there are hundreds coming in everyday

[johnthecloud]

We still have hundreds of thousands of immigrants moving here legally, which dwarfs those arriving on small boats, and is totally at odds with the Tory manifesto promises. We have an economy that is dependent on exponential population growth, and if those already living here can't afford to have children anymore to create that population growth then our government is quite happy for immigration to do it for us. Ultimately this is bad news for the environment, and for the general population; when services are stretched to breaking point and do not keep step with population growth. Never mind though, those at the top will consolidate their wealth.

[isaacacmillan]

Asylum seekers who come by boats are sending to Rwanda whilst they re been replaced by others so called “legitimate” from India who are coming by planes..what a messed up politics!!!

[jaybee]

Why is it 1.8 million per passenger does easyJet not go there? Doesn’t Rishi have a plane we can use?

[TracyLewis-xjzm]

It’s going to be a case of the everyday folk taking control of the shores to stop these boats offloading on our shores. Until then nothing will change. This ain’t rocket science. Common sense prevails! They need to get this government out asap

[jobbingactor]

If true that this cost half a billion pounds, with a max intake of 300 people per year,

[lokischildren]

Breaking international law

Sunak the dictator

[eespn]

UN should intervene, Human rights trambled 😢😢

[hetty]

As an African I don’t desgarre with the bill…. My problem is I have to pay more tax🙄🙄. I just hope this will stop the people from crossing and risking children’s life 🙁and their own life

[mikeh]

We need the points system. And zero access to welfare benefits for foreign immigration for at least a minimum of 5 years. Then we'd see how many of these young men all want to flock over, when there is a responsibility that they contribute to us, not the other way round.

[harshildhaduk]

When UK take actions against illegal immigrants than it is ok.
But they will oppose CAA law by Bharat.
Even USA had been already passed CAA like law before.
It means all countries are against illegal immigrants.
So no one should oppose it.

[garethchurton]

In any other country your put on the next flight out if you don't have the correct visas