UK will finally off shore illegal asylum seekers crossing the channel

Though from what I can gather, none of the Rwanda refugees were being deported for security reasons. None had criminal records or had been investigated over security concerns. It's debatable whether refugees or asylum seekers pose any sort of a credible security risk to a country (actual terrorists probably have the money and resources to enter a country quite legally with documentation and have no need to arrive on board a dinghy).

It may well be that Johnson views it as another version of the Irish Protocol. Something that will drag on for months or years and featuring regular clashes with the ECHR. This may have been the original plan - "what sort of scheme can we introduce that will really rile people up and galvanise the base?". It's definitely eye catching and hugely controversial, which might have been its aim.

An asylum seeker can never be "illegal" - to claim asylum is a 100% legal event under international law (despite anything Farage and the Daily Express say).

Such people cannot be deemed "illegal" until they have actually entered the country and are dealt with by the authorities and the legal system.

If they enter the country and then choose to go on the run and not apply for asylum, at that point they become an illegal immigrant, but not before then. In the case of the UK though, this is most often not even possible. We've seen that the dinghies are usually intercepted and Border Force officials are waiting for them on the beach (which is how they are able to announce the daily numbers that have arrived by dinghy).

One aspect of all this is that it is hugely divisive. Goodness knows what settled asylum seekers in the UK make of it all. The Tory Govt and one half of the population are making it clear that they are most unwelcome, are seen as most likely a bunch of chancers who slipped through the net and are a burden on British society.

That doesn't make any sense though - the message going out from the Tories, Daily Mail and their readers is that many refugees aren't refugees at all and are "economic migrants" who conned their way into the country, aided by bleeding heart liberal lefty lawyers and courts, plus the ECHR which now needs to be abolished. That they should have stayed in France and the question being asked is "what are they even doing here?".

The whole debate around asylum seekers is toxic and nasty.

The idea that the people railing against "illegal immigration" to the UK are fine with refugees and asylum seekers whose claims have been upheld is obviously a nonsense. Their line is that even those refugees are a potential security risk and / or a burden on the state. They would like to see all refugees and asylum seekers refused entry to the UK - they don't even try to conceal it.

You don't HAVE to turn up at a recognised port of entry though.

No that's not what I am saying, those asylum seekers will make their way to France anyway because there is no way to apply from thier own countries.

The French have actually asked the UK to set up asylum processing centers in France

"

French officials have already suggested that British immigration officials process asylum requests in northern France from migrants camped out around the major ports on France's coast."

The UK doesn't have "lax employment laws" and if you think they do then you obviously have no idea what it's like there.

As for France and Italy doing that? You would have to ask thier respective governments. You asked how I would do things, I gave you my response, the French government also seem happy to set up processing centers. You don't like it so you are trying to find holes in it.

The Nationality and Borders Bill reinterprets the 1951 Refugee Convention and amends the protections of the 1999 immigration and asylum act. The bill is based on a bogus premise, i.e., that there are 'safe and legal pathways' to enter the UK for asylum seeker, much like your, "bonafide means".  These pathways only apply to some people already recognised as refugees and to some family members of refugees already in the UK. There is no provision for any person to come, or apply to come, to the UK for the purpose of making an asylum claim. It is nearly impossible for people from most countries where asylum seekers come from to get visas to enter the UK. If they arrive in the UK without valid entry clearance they will be committing an offence and will be liable to prosecution. The Bill criminalises the very act of entering the UK to claim asylum.