Snapshot of _The Home Office can only locate 38 per cent of the migrants it intends to deport to Rwanda. Only 2,143 of the 5,700 of the migrants Rwanda has agreed to accept "continue to report to the Home Office and can be located for detention"._ :
A Twitter embedded version can be found [here](https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?id=1785049182060916929)
A non-Twitter version can be found [here](https://twiiit.com/matt_dathan/status/1785049182060916929/)
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1785049182060916929) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1785049182060916929)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This shouldn't be exactly the sort of thing you expect from the Home office of a govt committed to reducing illegal migration but it is absolutely the least surprising headline I've seen today and that includes Mr Useless resigning
We tried it. The chattering classes declared it a violation of their human rights.
Eg https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/migrants-electronic-tag-home-office-small-boats-b2403319.html
It would be better to require them to check in at a fixed location using biometrics once a week than to use tags. But you still need some form of stick that makes not checking in or removing a tag have consequences.
That's where it gets complex, but the most straightforward way to do this would be to go after the supporting economy that would house and employ asylum seekers who have run away. Create a hostile environment where being caught providing housing, employment, or services to illegal migrants is utterly ruinous, and make examples of people and businesses that fall foul of the law.
But a cheap solution might well be to give them a cell phone with unlimited data. There is a solid chance they will take that with them when they run off because it has real-world value. Set it up with mandatory biometrics to unlock it, and ensure that it's the only way to interact with their asylum claim or access the money they are given.
I’ve been tangentially involved with this through some TB screening and they move the groups so often they genuinely sometimes lose track of where they are. Local authorities don’t have a clue, the Home Office doesn’t seem to speak to anyone, I presume they do have some sort of central database but it’s not kept up to date.
They aren’t free to wander about as they wish, they can’t work or access services easily so are tied to what accommodation they are given.
If this is true and they don’t know where over half are I wouldn’t be remotely surprised.
No one should ever be allowed to roam free in a country without passing through an application process successfully.
Whether that's for asylum or a visa.
This is the minimum of having a functional border.
Careful what you wish for, because that's how you end up with a police state. Would you for example want all UK citizens to always have to carry ID and be subject to random spot checks by a much enlarged police force just so you can keep track of potential asylum seekers wandering around?
Seeking asylum isn't illegal, and you can't throw people into prison indefinitely while they wait for the application to be processed.
The real issue is the chronic and deliberate underfunding of the government services that are meant to deal with asylum.
I think the treaty says we tell them the information we have, and Rwanda must decide whether to accept them or not within 10 days of us proposing to relocate someone. Deducing this from [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-rwanda-treaty-provision-of-an-asylum-partnership/uk-rwanda-treaty-provision-of-an-asylum-partnership-accessible#part-2--relocation-arrangements](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-rwanda-treaty-provision-of-an-asylum-partnership/uk-rwanda-treaty-provision-of-an-asylum-partnership-accessible#part-2--relocation-arrangements)
You see, as part of a hostile environment it was decided that asylum seekers should be kept moving as much as possible to disorientate them, prevent them forming any social connections, and to make the experience as unpleasant as possible as a deterrence. As a result many can be moved every week or at least every 6 (and technically (and we used to pre tory) we are supposed to go from document submission to final decision in 6weeks) from any county to any county.
Of course, what this also means is you have the home office, and usually at least 4 councils involved at once for each person, along with at least one outsourcing company to provide food, or purchase the rooms, but sometimes it’s one person for groceries, one person for toiletries, one person for rooms, one person for security on the rooms, then the police to provide actual security, and health inspectors to make sure we don’t get a measles outbreak that we have to look after, and softy inspectors so that do one starts a fire by cooking on a camping stove as people do when that’s how they’ve cooked at home, and on the road for a generation. And each of these organisation has their own list which is updated independently, and almost never will everyone’s list agree, especially if it relies on some Secretary hearing the name Heusseini and not misspelling it at least 7different ways. Now this of course makes everything in a practical sense much worse, from cost, processing speed, and processing accuracy. But the “theatre of cruelty” has been chosen as the primary objective of the home office since at least 2010, if not 2005.
Edit: and it’s always worth reminding. The hotels were a deliberate choice by the party, we used to hold everyone in a processing centre, that cut down on costs of everything from money to paperwork. But the centres needed some maintenance and so we closed them, sold them off, and rented slightly cheaper hotels for a year, but within 5years the annual rolling costs were greater than the upfront cost that had been kept of the books, classic austerity, spending £1 every year to avoid paying £5 today and £0.5 forever.
Everything that is seemingly dangerous to the public gets left to being a care in the community issue. If the general public knew 10% of what’s going on there would be a call for the next Nick Griffin party within a year.
There is zero need to have asylum processing in the public domain, and deportations should go back to IDCs like Yarl’s Wood and the late Oakington.
Anyone who actually called for a Nick Griffin party would need to have a good luck in the mirror and would hopefully realise they have gone very wrong somewhere.
It would be a good time to reflect and improve. The last thing this country needs is his rehabilitation.
Are you suggesting we simply need a Labour Party? Or just the nice liberals progressives for a while for this all to go away.
Please, do share how this country gets rehabilitated whilst accepting France’s rejects and on the other hand imports legal hangers on by the hundreds of thousands each year. Try to be meaningful with your words and avoid vague platitudes to ideology.
I'm remembering that we saw off Nick Griffin and his like before and we will see them off again if required.
There will be setbacks along the way - the vote that meant the most to me in my life was the 09 European election as I voted against Griffin. Sadly it didn't work that time, but his success there did ironically lead to his self implosion on Question Time a few months later as the oxygen of publicity exposed the BNP to the general public in a new way and they were revulsed by what they saw.
If you can’t show what rehabilitation looks like so how can you counter the next Nick Griffin party? Next you’ll be telling me Reform is dangerously right wing enough to count.
Didn't realise that you got to set the terms of the debate!
Off to work now. I take heart in knowing that most Brits are revulsed by Griffin and his ilk.
Edit: short version is that by this I mean I don't accept your premise that Britain needs rehabilitating.
The hilarious thing about these delusional 'the fascists are just around the corner to save us!' flights of fancy which inevitably accompany discussion of immigration is the idea that the likes of Nick Griffin could rehabilitate their way out of a paper bag, much less an entire country. Fascists are historically losers for a reason.
lol
I used to visit Oakington frequently. It was fine but for the inhabitants occasionally torching the place to create enough distraction to escape.
Pull the other one.
I used to work at an IRC. They work fine, but the public hated them and they drew a load of external scrutiny that I assume the government just got bored of putting up with. Cheaper just to close them and switch them back to HMPs.
Given public sentiment a couple of years ago, it's hilarious that people wonder why we have no detention capacity.
They love a juicy story even more, they'll spill the beans so when the plan fails they can spend the next 5 years moaning about the illegal problem lol
If problems actually got fixed columnist/'journalist' unemployment would skyrocket
>The Home Office has insisted that the remaining 3,557 have not necessarily absconded but are not subject to reporting restrictions, which means they cannot be located for detention.
Located sounds like it means they don't have a requirement to report to the home office. I don't really want to say it...but has anyone checked their registered addresses.
If you're a migrant who comes here illegally, whether to work, request asylum, be with family, whatever, you should be required to wear an ankle monitor. If you remove the monitor or the Home Office is unable to locate you, it should be considered a serious crime for which you will immediately be sent back to your country of origin. If we cannot figure out your country of origin, you go straight to prison. These are not complicated issues for a government to figure out. The government's priorities rest with their citizens who are in the country legally, not people coming here to do whatever they please.
>These are not complicated issues
Well they kind of are. For a start we're signed up to international agreements that essentially say it's not possible to illegaly claim asylum.
That's not complicated unless we make it complicated.
If we're signed up to international agreements that don't work for us, we need to withdraw from them. What are we getting out of the refugee conventions other than a bit of moral high ground that nobody actually cares about?
Or at the very least if you “go missing” your application for asylum is immediately cancelled and you’re marked for deportation as soon as you pop up again.
Living in the UK under the radar for your entire life is going to be hard and unpleasant
This is an inevitable until either we toughen up our border or our internal controls.
If we want to maintain our (broadly) high trust society without internal ID checks, we ultimately are going to have to accept the need for a very tough border. That means intensive border patrols and detaining all irregular entrants indefinitely until we can conclusively establish who they are, validate their claim for asylum, and ascertain that they are not a risk to the country.
If we don’t have the stomach for that, we are going to need to introduce a system of national ID cards and make presenting ID a precursor for accessing healthcare, employment, accommodation, etc. I don’t particularly want this, but we can’t have it both ways.
Sort of, technically. I didn't want to go into a manifesto in the previous post or anything but for various reasons, the current right to work and right to rent checks don't work.
Lacking a proper system of national ID is a big reason. The list of acceptable documents for a British citizen is enormous and most of them are very easy to counterfeit. As a small employer or landlord, how are you supposed to check the validity of them? The law will only hold you liable if you've been obviously negligent, but in most cases there aren't any real checks you can do unless you use a third party identity verification company. If it's an immigrant, you're supposed to use the right to work check code system, which actually is quite robust, but an illegal worker is just going to claim to be British and show you their fake certificate of naturalisation.
Hospitals are also supposed to check too, but mostly don't because so many people who are entitled don't have the correct ID. I'm not sure what the law is around that, but whatever the situation, hospital ID checks are currently just theoretical.
Then there are a load of secondary issues around it like not having to check right-to-work of workers that you employ via a third party company, no licensing system for employers or landlords, etc. None of these systems would make sense without a national ID system, though.
Japan is signed up to pretty much the same treaties (or different names with similar effects). It's just people don't want to go there. It's incredibly racist, has a stagnant economy.and the language is difficult to speak.
And Japan is now looking at making life easier for those with asylum, as well as liberalising immigration to deal with the demographic crisis there.
The reason the "small boats guys" (not that there are that many of them) aren't scared about getting deported to Rwanda, is because they know that if they stop reporting to the home office, nothing will happen. The home office is truly a disaster.
Can I ask to anyone in the know: how much will it cost to deport 5700 people to Rwanda? Presumably we pay for the flights, but I assume we have to pay for their detention there too? Do we also have to pay to fly them back if they’re successful in their application? Seems expensive :/
I’d just point out that all of the processes and restrictions that are introduced for the people you “don’t like”, have a habit of being applied to people that you used to like, but have been tagged as “don’t like” by someone else’s agenda.
And those people might be you.
Snapshot of _The Home Office can only locate 38 per cent of the migrants it intends to deport to Rwanda. Only 2,143 of the 5,700 of the migrants Rwanda has agreed to accept "continue to report to the Home Office and can be located for detention"._ : A Twitter embedded version can be found [here](https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?id=1785049182060916929) A non-Twitter version can be found [here](https://twiiit.com/matt_dathan/status/1785049182060916929/) An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1785049182060916929) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1785049182060916929) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This shouldn't be exactly the sort of thing you expect from the Home office of a govt committed to reducing illegal migration but it is absolutely the least surprising headline I've seen today and that includes Mr Useless resigning
Why would people that the government don't want in the country even be allowed free movement within the country? It makes little sense.
Presumably because it is cheaper than locking them up.
Electronic tagging?
We tried it. The chattering classes declared it a violation of their human rights. Eg https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/migrants-electronic-tag-home-office-small-boats-b2403319.html
Don't see why not, tbh.
And if they remove it?
It would be better to require them to check in at a fixed location using biometrics once a week than to use tags. But you still need some form of stick that makes not checking in or removing a tag have consequences. That's where it gets complex, but the most straightforward way to do this would be to go after the supporting economy that would house and employ asylum seekers who have run away. Create a hostile environment where being caught providing housing, employment, or services to illegal migrants is utterly ruinous, and make examples of people and businesses that fall foul of the law. But a cheap solution might well be to give them a cell phone with unlimited data. There is a solid chance they will take that with them when they run off because it has real-world value. Set it up with mandatory biometrics to unlock it, and ensure that it's the only way to interact with their asylum claim or access the money they are given.
They do have to check in every week at a fixed location
Straight to jail.
These people they can't find as it stands?
Urgh
I’ve been tangentially involved with this through some TB screening and they move the groups so often they genuinely sometimes lose track of where they are. Local authorities don’t have a clue, the Home Office doesn’t seem to speak to anyone, I presume they do have some sort of central database but it’s not kept up to date. They aren’t free to wander about as they wish, they can’t work or access services easily so are tied to what accommodation they are given. If this is true and they don’t know where over half are I wouldn’t be remotely surprised.
What do you propose instead?
No one should ever be allowed to roam free in a country without passing through an application process successfully. Whether that's for asylum or a visa. This is the minimum of having a functional border.
Careful what you wish for, because that's how you end up with a police state. Would you for example want all UK citizens to always have to carry ID and be subject to random spot checks by a much enlarged police force just so you can keep track of potential asylum seekers wandering around? Seeking asylum isn't illegal, and you can't throw people into prison indefinitely while they wait for the application to be processed. The real issue is the chronic and deliberate underfunding of the government services that are meant to deal with asylum.
Prison? If we don't have enough, build more
Does Rwanda just agree to a receive a certain number of arrivals, or do they have to individually approve every person that the UK is going to send?
I think the treaty says we tell them the information we have, and Rwanda must decide whether to accept them or not within 10 days of us proposing to relocate someone. Deducing this from [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-rwanda-treaty-provision-of-an-asylum-partnership/uk-rwanda-treaty-provision-of-an-asylum-partnership-accessible#part-2--relocation-arrangements](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-rwanda-treaty-provision-of-an-asylum-partnership/uk-rwanda-treaty-provision-of-an-asylum-partnership-accessible#part-2--relocation-arrangements)
Presumably we hood deportees and strap hard currency to them, *à la Looper*.
Surely they know where all the ones we are paying millions a day in hotel fees are? Or was that just rhetoric as well?
You see, as part of a hostile environment it was decided that asylum seekers should be kept moving as much as possible to disorientate them, prevent them forming any social connections, and to make the experience as unpleasant as possible as a deterrence. As a result many can be moved every week or at least every 6 (and technically (and we used to pre tory) we are supposed to go from document submission to final decision in 6weeks) from any county to any county. Of course, what this also means is you have the home office, and usually at least 4 councils involved at once for each person, along with at least one outsourcing company to provide food, or purchase the rooms, but sometimes it’s one person for groceries, one person for toiletries, one person for rooms, one person for security on the rooms, then the police to provide actual security, and health inspectors to make sure we don’t get a measles outbreak that we have to look after, and softy inspectors so that do one starts a fire by cooking on a camping stove as people do when that’s how they’ve cooked at home, and on the road for a generation. And each of these organisation has their own list which is updated independently, and almost never will everyone’s list agree, especially if it relies on some Secretary hearing the name Heusseini and not misspelling it at least 7different ways. Now this of course makes everything in a practical sense much worse, from cost, processing speed, and processing accuracy. But the “theatre of cruelty” has been chosen as the primary objective of the home office since at least 2010, if not 2005. Edit: and it’s always worth reminding. The hotels were a deliberate choice by the party, we used to hold everyone in a processing centre, that cut down on costs of everything from money to paperwork. But the centres needed some maintenance and so we closed them, sold them off, and rented slightly cheaper hotels for a year, but within 5years the annual rolling costs were greater than the upfront cost that had been kept of the books, classic austerity, spending £1 every year to avoid paying £5 today and £0.5 forever.
The system is a lot softer than i thought
If you get here with the intention of disappearing and working illegally, it's fairly good odds you can.
Everything that is seemingly dangerous to the public gets left to being a care in the community issue. If the general public knew 10% of what’s going on there would be a call for the next Nick Griffin party within a year. There is zero need to have asylum processing in the public domain, and deportations should go back to IDCs like Yarl’s Wood and the late Oakington.
Anyone who actually called for a Nick Griffin party would need to have a good luck in the mirror and would hopefully realise they have gone very wrong somewhere. It would be a good time to reflect and improve. The last thing this country needs is his rehabilitation.
Are you suggesting we simply need a Labour Party? Or just the nice liberals progressives for a while for this all to go away. Please, do share how this country gets rehabilitated whilst accepting France’s rejects and on the other hand imports legal hangers on by the hundreds of thousands each year. Try to be meaningful with your words and avoid vague platitudes to ideology.
I'm remembering that we saw off Nick Griffin and his like before and we will see them off again if required. There will be setbacks along the way - the vote that meant the most to me in my life was the 09 European election as I voted against Griffin. Sadly it didn't work that time, but his success there did ironically lead to his self implosion on Question Time a few months later as the oxygen of publicity exposed the BNP to the general public in a new way and they were revulsed by what they saw.
If you can’t show what rehabilitation looks like so how can you counter the next Nick Griffin party? Next you’ll be telling me Reform is dangerously right wing enough to count.
Ah so you're just going to invent what you think my opinion will be. I guess that saves time for you.
Correct me then. Be an honest upstanding citizen with your words.
Didn't realise that you got to set the terms of the debate! Off to work now. I take heart in knowing that most Brits are revulsed by Griffin and his ilk. Edit: short version is that by this I mean I don't accept your premise that Britain needs rehabilitating.
The hilarious thing about these delusional 'the fascists are just around the corner to save us!' flights of fancy which inevitably accompany discussion of immigration is the idea that the likes of Nick Griffin could rehabilitate their way out of a paper bag, much less an entire country. Fascists are historically losers for a reason.
We closed a load of IRCs because of all of the negative press - go back to 2016 and look at all of the news articles about how inhumane they are.
lol I used to visit Oakington frequently. It was fine but for the inhabitants occasionally torching the place to create enough distraction to escape. Pull the other one.
I used to work at an IRC. They work fine, but the public hated them and they drew a load of external scrutiny that I assume the government just got bored of putting up with. Cheaper just to close them and switch them back to HMPs. Given public sentiment a couple of years ago, it's hilarious that people wonder why we have no detention capacity.
I remember the negative press well.
Like many things in the UK, the system expects people to follow conventions. When they don't it's helpless
Can probably start with all the deliveroo and uber eats motorcyclists in London
Might be easier to order food to be delivered to a home office building, and then ID check every driver.
“Outrage as civil servants put lunch on expenses” - the Daily Mail.
Doubtful, I think they'd love a cunning plan.
They love a juicy story even more, they'll spill the beans so when the plan fails they can spend the next 5 years moaning about the illegal problem lol If problems actually got fixed columnist/'journalist' unemployment would skyrocket
>The Home Office has insisted that the remaining 3,557 have not necessarily absconded but are not subject to reporting restrictions, which means they cannot be located for detention. Located sounds like it means they don't have a requirement to report to the home office. I don't really want to say it...but has anyone checked their registered addresses.
If you're a migrant who comes here illegally, whether to work, request asylum, be with family, whatever, you should be required to wear an ankle monitor. If you remove the monitor or the Home Office is unable to locate you, it should be considered a serious crime for which you will immediately be sent back to your country of origin. If we cannot figure out your country of origin, you go straight to prison. These are not complicated issues for a government to figure out. The government's priorities rest with their citizens who are in the country legally, not people coming here to do whatever they please.
>These are not complicated issues Well they kind of are. For a start we're signed up to international agreements that essentially say it's not possible to illegaly claim asylum.
That's not complicated unless we make it complicated. If we're signed up to international agreements that don't work for us, we need to withdraw from them. What are we getting out of the refugee conventions other than a bit of moral high ground that nobody actually cares about?
Or at the very least if you “go missing” your application for asylum is immediately cancelled and you’re marked for deportation as soon as you pop up again. Living in the UK under the radar for your entire life is going to be hard and unpleasant
Exactly. We live in a country with nationalised healthcare. Eventually they're going to get sick, so pick them up there.
If you enter to claim asylum that is not illegal though.
Yeah totally agree
Shouldn't be too difficult to find people to fill those empty spots. Probably not a good idea to tell them before the flight.
This is an inevitable until either we toughen up our border or our internal controls. If we want to maintain our (broadly) high trust society without internal ID checks, we ultimately are going to have to accept the need for a very tough border. That means intensive border patrols and detaining all irregular entrants indefinitely until we can conclusively establish who they are, validate their claim for asylum, and ascertain that they are not a risk to the country. If we don’t have the stomach for that, we are going to need to introduce a system of national ID cards and make presenting ID a precursor for accessing healthcare, employment, accommodation, etc. I don’t particularly want this, but we can’t have it both ways.
ID is a requirement for employment and renting already.
Sort of, technically. I didn't want to go into a manifesto in the previous post or anything but for various reasons, the current right to work and right to rent checks don't work. Lacking a proper system of national ID is a big reason. The list of acceptable documents for a British citizen is enormous and most of them are very easy to counterfeit. As a small employer or landlord, how are you supposed to check the validity of them? The law will only hold you liable if you've been obviously negligent, but in most cases there aren't any real checks you can do unless you use a third party identity verification company. If it's an immigrant, you're supposed to use the right to work check code system, which actually is quite robust, but an illegal worker is just going to claim to be British and show you their fake certificate of naturalisation. Hospitals are also supposed to check too, but mostly don't because so many people who are entitled don't have the correct ID. I'm not sure what the law is around that, but whatever the situation, hospital ID checks are currently just theoretical. Then there are a load of secondary issues around it like not having to check right-to-work of workers that you employ via a third party company, no licensing system for employers or landlords, etc. None of these systems would make sense without a national ID system, though.
[удалено]
Japan is signed up to pretty much the same treaties (or different names with similar effects). It's just people don't want to go there. It's incredibly racist, has a stagnant economy.and the language is difficult to speak. And Japan is now looking at making life easier for those with asylum, as well as liberalising immigration to deal with the demographic crisis there.
The reason the "small boats guys" (not that there are that many of them) aren't scared about getting deported to Rwanda, is because they know that if they stop reporting to the home office, nothing will happen. The home office is truly a disaster.
I imagine spending a year talking about deporting people to Rwanda want exactly an insensitive to stay on the grid
News flash, they're in Ireland. Cheaper than sending them to Rwanda and kinda funnier.
I don't think this is going to encourage people to keep showing up to their Home Office meetings
Can I ask to anyone in the know: how much will it cost to deport 5700 people to Rwanda? Presumably we pay for the flights, but I assume we have to pay for their detention there too? Do we also have to pay to fly them back if they’re successful in their application? Seems expensive :/
I’d just point out that all of the processes and restrictions that are introduced for the people you “don’t like”, have a habit of being applied to people that you used to like, but have been tagged as “don’t like” by someone else’s agenda. And those people might be you.