This is just tinkering around the edges of the real problem. The HomeOffice is utterly shit and not fit for purpose. It needs root and branch reform and it needs bringing into the modern era. These gimmick policies from the Tories and now Labour won't do shit and will only waste money. Why the fuck is the HomeOffice incapable of processing applications quickly. That's what other countries do.
this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2023
23 points (96.0% liked)
UK Politics
3073 readers
144 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Well hang on - if you hand the problem of processing the applications off to a third party along with suitably constructed incentives and penalties to ensure fast and accurate processing in line with our actual rules on asylum, isn't that solving the problem rather than tinkering with it? The problem is blatantly that the government slow rolls the applications because a graph that shows an increase in asylum applications being granted is political suicide - and the home office follow their lead. Give it to a neutral third party and you can avoid looking like you're going easy on people whilst also doing a fast and effective job of assessing the claims
You maybe in to something but I don't have any faith in the HomeOffice absolving themselves of responsibility behind a third party contract which will, let's face it, not be as watertight as we would hope.
HomeOffice: it wasn't our fault, it was the fault of Asylum Processing Solutions Ltd
APS: we abide by the contract set with the HomeOffice.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The Labour leader has previously dismissed the plan to deport people to the African nation as a “gimmick” and made clear his party’s opposition.
While explicit backing for an offshoring scheme would mark a significant shift for Labour, Starmer did signal earlier this month that he would not be opposed to considering such an approach.
Labour has been contacted for comment about the report, which claims that the party has drawn up “three tests” for the scheme – that it is cost-effective, credible enough to deter migrants and would avoid the legal challenges that have delayed the Rwanda plan.
The prime minister, Rishi Sunak, and the home secretary, James Cleverly, are hoping fresh legislation, now in the Commons, will be enough to revive the flagship policy after it was declared unlawful by the supreme court earlier this year.
A Labour “red line” would be any scheme that would automatically block migrants being granted asylum in the UK, according to the Times, and British officials would be required to be in charge of processing claims.
In the early 2000s, Blunkett and the Tony Blair government were believed to be in talks with Tanzania about the possibility of housing asylum seekers in the country while claims were processed in the UK.
The original article contains 420 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 50%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
This issue is toxic for both parties. People have strong feelings about it on both sides but few people truly understand the problem.