Asylum seekers to be sent 6,000 miles to Rwanda for processing under plans to halt Channel crossings

The government plans to fly asylum seekers to Rwanda for processing in an attempt to tackle small boat crossings in the Channel.

Boris Johnson is set to argue action is needed to combat the “vile people smugglers” turning the ocean into a “watery graveyard” in a speech on Thursday.

After the prime minister’s speech, Home Secretary Priti Patel is expected to set out further details of a “migration and economic development partnership” with Rwanda after she visited the East African nation.

Charities have warned that the “cruel and nasty decision” to “offshore” some asylum seekers more than 6,000 miles away will not only fail to address the issue but “lead to more human suffering and chaos” and cost an estimated £1.4bn.

Mr Johnson will warn the number of people making the crossing across the Channel could reach 1,000 a day within weeks. Around 600 people arrived on Wednesday.

“I accept that these people – whether 600 or 1,000 – are in search of a better life, the opportunities that the United Kingdom provides and the hope of a fresh start,” he is expected to say.

“But it is these hopes – these dreams – that have been exploited. These vile people smugglers are abusing the vulnerable and turning the Channel into a watery graveyard, with men, women and children drowning in unseaworthy boats and suffocating in refrigerated lorries.”

Lord Wolfson: Conservative peer quits as justice minister over ‘scale’ of COVID breaches in Downing Street as second MP calls on Johnson to resign

Partygate: Tory MP is first backbencher to call for Boris Johnson to quit after fine issued

Partygate fines: What comes next for the PM and chancellor?

He will argue the country voted to “control” immigration in the Brexit referendum and say “our compassion may be infinite, but our capacity to help people is not”.

“So just as Brexit allowed us to take back control of legal immigration by replacing free movement with our points-based system, we are also taking back control of illegal immigration, with a long-term plan for asylum in this country,” he is expected to say.

“It is a plan that will ensure the UK has a world-leading asylum offer, providing generous protection to those directly fleeing the worst of humanity, by settling thousands of people every year through safe and legal routes.”

It remains unclear if the new rules would apply to only those who arrived by what the government calls illegal means.

The British Red Cross said it was “profoundly concerned” about the plans to “send traumatised people halfway round the world to Rwanda”.

Zoe Abrams, the humanitarian network’s executive director, said: “The financial and human cost will be considerable; evidence from where offshoring has been implemented elsewhere shows it leads to profound human suffering, plus the bill that taxpayers will be asked to foot is likely to be huge.”

She added: “We are not convinced this drastic measure will deter desperate people from attempting to cross the Channel either. People come here for reasons we can all understand, like wanting to be reunited with loved ones, or because they speak the language. Making it harsher may do little to stop them risking their lives.”

News correspondent

The prime minister’s announcement signals an attempt to reset the government’s immigration policy after a record year for migrant crossings.

Behind language and messaging we have seen before about “taking back control of our borders” and fulfilling the Brexit referendum result is a policy proposal that will be highly controversial.

After the PM’s speech Home Secretary Priti Patel, who is in Rwanda, will sign a deal described as a migration and economic development partnership with the East African country.

In essence, that deal means some of those people arriving illegally in the UK on small boats will be relocated to Rwanda to have their asylum claims processed on a different continent, thousands of miles away.

This drastic action to deter the flow of migrants crossing from Calais will attract considerable controversy, with criticism already coming in from all sides. Charities have called the policy “cruel,” while calling into question its cost, which they estimate could exceed more than £1bn.

There has also been strong opposition from both sides of the parliamentary divide. The House of Lords have already tabled several amendments to this proposal, while senior Conservative MPs such as David Davis have questioned whether it is legal.

With a tight window between now and 11 May when the Queen’s Speech is due to take place, the government has a battle on its hands. Ministers need to find a way to not only convince parliament, but activists, campaigners and some sections of the public that processing migrants in Rwanda is not just a successful strategy, but a morally justifiable one too.

Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “Offshoring the UK’s asylum system will do absolutely nothing to address the reasons why people take perilous journeys to find safety in the UK.

“It will do little to deter them from coming to this country, but only lead to more human suffering and chaos – at a huge expense of an estimated £1.4bn a year.”

Several other locations, including Ascension Island, Albania and Gibraltar have previously been rejected.

Government ministers have faced pressure to accept more refugees fleeing Russia’s war in Ukraine and the UK’s visa system has been criticised for being too bureaucratic.

Read Entire Article