Farmer Saint

But you can only deport if countries take them back, which again is unlikely to happen (and also likely puts those people in a lot of danger).

No, because it had to be shut down because of structural issues and is now derelict. Before being used for asylum seekers it had been shut for 10 years and let go to rack and ruin.

Why is it obviously a deterrent? There is no evidence of that.

I'm not saying they won't tell you, but they'd say they're from somewhere else and use their identity. Again, easy to do when you come from these countries where ID is not really a thing.

I'm not going to their website and giving it footfall, sorry. But if it's the stuff about leave to remain and not allowing people to claim benefits, I'm not sure that's going to do much. ATM you can only claim benefits after 5 years I thought. People come here to work, not live off the state.

The accommodation by us is utterly basic - so dilapidated you wouldn't want to even set foot in it. Either way, it is a means to an end where they are going to be accepted and can live and work here. It's not a deterrent, considering where they have come from and the dangers on the way.

How do you report them though - that's the problem? We can all come up with ideas as to what to do, but putting that into practice is the issue. Countries will just deny they are theirs, or the claimants will lie as to where they're from. What do you do in that scenario?

What is Reform's policy?

But you're saying it will reduce the numbers, but as the link above showed, these type of things don't seem to make a difference to the numbers.

I'd take the money, then just come back, wouldn't you? Other countries have looked at Rwanda, and also decided it doesn't work. Old army barracks could work, but then they'd need to be massively renovated to be inhabitable, and how long is that going to take? How do you control them and keep them there - I'm assuming you'd have the army posted there as well? If you read the link I put above, there have been many studies showing that disincentives don't work. If these are the best ideas that the world can come up with, and even you are picking holes in it and saying they could be unfeasible, does that not tell you there is nothing you can really do to solve it?

What idea?

But how do you stop it? I think everyone agrees with the above. The problem is how, and that's where no-one - literally no-one - has come up with a feasible idea.

Rwanda was for 300 people. What deterrent is that for 45k people coming over. That is a 0.6% chance you'll end up there. I'd fancy my odds TBH. It's not a deterrent and it never was.

So where are these holding camps? What is at these holding camps? Are they already built or do we need to build them? What do you class as a life or death situation as a lot of illnesses build from non-life threatening to life threatening. What happens if someone breaks their wrist for example? Or has an abscess in their mouth that could become infected? Just wondering how and where you draw the line.

Where do you send them to? How do you find out where they've come from? They just won't tell you if they knew that was being done. We've already got a similar agreement with Albania for instance, but hasn't seemed to make a difference. Countries like Eritrea - what difference does us imposing sanctions on them make? This has been done already. What are you going to offer them over and above what's been done, and surely this is just costing us more and more money?

How?

Interesting piece about it here: https://www.brunel.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/articles/Is-the-Rwanda-plan-acting-as-a-deterrent-Here's-what-the-evidence-says-about-this-approach

It's a farce. The whole fucking thing is a farce, and there is no way to stop it. Successive governments have tried and failed. The issue is global inequality, and it will continue until that is solved.

Absolutely we do, been saying it since Puel.

What, like last night's amazing play from Wood?

Oh well, we'll have to agree to disagree. You can't coach away individual errors/concentration issues, which seems to be what we look for in CBs.

I disagree, but TBF I have been wildly consistent on this back to before Martin joined. Our defensive players, especially our CBs, IMHO, are fucking shit.

Oh, the coaching is not good enough either, but the players are shit. We have been blessed with shit CBs for the past 6 or 7 years.

Yeah, and ground beef as well. Again, nowt to do with interest rates (as none of this inflation over the past 3 or 4 years has been). The fact the BoE has been using it's old school methods to try to sort it is stupid and has adversely affected the economy. Fingers crossed they will learn at some point but they don't seem to have so far.

Inflation stays where it is then for September. Still think it would be worth a substantial cut in interest rates (at least 0.5%) to try to kickstart the economy. As current inflation rates are mainly external factors it shouldn't affect inflation much.