EU Rwanda flavoured immigration plan

You might want to reread the original post.

It is quite clear.
 
JonathanM said:
Asylum seekers will be processed in a "safe" third country
Click to expand...
I've being saying this could be an option for ages. France offered to open a processing centre previously and we said no.

But some equated more safe routes with opening our borders. Which is nonsense.
 
If you mean the party proposal, it is quite clear, as is what they say about the UK position.
 
denso13 said:
I've being saying this could be an option for ages. France offered to open a processing centre previously and we said no.

But some equated more safe routes with opening our borders. Which is nonsense.
Click to expand...

These new "safe" countries would be outside the EU.
 
motorbiking said:
You might want to reread the original post.

It is quite clear.
Click to expand...
I read it, and the research paper, and the Guardian article. Only the Guardian article has anything relevant and it implies that they wouldn't be outlawing people who arrive and seek asylum.

Which is fundamentally different, and much less objectionable. Offshoring asylum claims and letting successful refugees come back is different to the UK plan to outlaw all asylum seekers and then offer some asylum in a different country.
 
Last edited:
IT Minion said:
Offshoring asylum claims and letting successful refugees come back is different to the UK plan to outlaw all asylum seekers and then offer some asylum in a different country.
Click to expand...

The Guardian article and the FT article both appear to be saying that, under this proposal/suggestion, the default position would be that successful asylum seekers would be settled in the "safe" third country. Then a quota of the "vulnerable" successful ones would be settled in the EU. I know this is only a proposal by one group in the parliament, but it does have the backing of the Commission president. This may be the direction of travel.

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has embraced a UK-style immigration plan that would force people claiming asylum in the EU to settle outside the union.
Click to expand...

"In the case of a positive outcome, the safe third country will grant protection to the applicant on site.” ... "The EU would then set “annual humanitarian quotas of vulnerable individuals” who could settle there."
Click to expand...

it proposes the EU then “admit a quota of people in need of protection through annual humanitarian quotas of vulnerable individuals”.
Click to expand...
 
The original link stresses a safe country and what that means. Rwanda's main problem. Intent anyway is process them there.
Finding a suitable country might prove to be difficult. ;) I'm not sure even the one we live in one.
 
Last edited:
JonathanM said:
The Guardian article and the FT article both appear to be saying that, under this proposal/suggestion, the default position would be that successful asylum seekers would be settled in the "safe" third country
Click to expand...
It would be good to read the actual proposals.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top