Boris Johnson’s plans to send unauthorized asylum seekers on a one-way ticket to Rwanda have been harshly condemned amid warnings that they will be challenged in court and could lead to further deaths in the English Channel.
After the prime minister outlined plans to provide an initial £ 120m advance to the Rwandan government in hopes of accepting “tens of thousands” of people, politicians and refugee groups condemned the move as inhumane, incapacitated and a waste of public money. .
The proposal for Rwanda was one of a series of measures announced by the prime minister and Priti Patel, the interior minister, as they sought to deal with the heated political dispute over crossing the English Channel. The number of people crossing has already exceeded 5,000 this year, more than twice the total number for 2021 at the same point.
Amid calls for the government to disclose the total cost of unpublished plans, it turned out that:
Men and women can fly 4,500 miles to Rwanda, where they will be encouraged to apply for refugee status. However, the children and their parents will not be sent.
The Royal Navy was given control of the English Channel after another day when hundreds of people arrived in small boats to seek refuge in the United Kingdom.
Tobias Eloud, the Conservative chairman of the Defense Committee, accused Johnson of revealing plans as part of a “mass distraction” from becoming the first prime minister to be found guilty on criminal charges while in office.
An employee of the Border Forces union warned that the announcement would lead to a short-term jump in refugees trying to cross the English Channel, with an increased risk of traveling in poor conditions, putting their lives in danger.
A surprise YouGov poll of nearly 3,000 voters on Thursday found that only 35% of people support the measures and 43% oppose them.
Speaking at a news conference in Kent, Johnson said the scheme was needed to “save countless lives” from human trafficking by disrupting the business model of human smugglers.
“The deal we made [with Rwanda] is unlimited and Rwanda will have the capacity to settle tens of thousands of people in the coming years. “And let’s be clear, Rwanda is one of the safest countries in the world, recognized worldwide for its records of welcoming and integrating migrants,” he said.
Asked about the poor human rights situation in Rwanda, where some groups have reported torture of detainees, he said: “Rwanda has changed completely. In the last few decades, it has changed completely from what it was. ”
Refusing to comment on his breach of the blockade rules, Johnson said the Royal Navy would take over the Channel’s “operational command” from the Border Guards on Thursday to ensure that “no boats reach the UK undetected”. .
Measures will be put in place to intercept more small boats and the fleet will be given a “lead” to track and intercept them – with £ 50 million in new funding to pay for Wildcat helicopters, search and rescue planes and drones.
According to the plans of those sent to Rwanda, asylum will be offered there, and the applications will be processed within three months. The successful will be able to stay for at least five years with a training and support package.
As Johnson turned to reporters, the newcomers reached the shore in Dover in what authorities acknowledged was a busy day.
While visiting the capital of Rwanda, Kigali, Patel was shown virgin accommodation that will be used to accommodate people who have left the UK. The guest house has 50 rooms on four floors, which can accommodate a maximum of 100 people. Two more units will be built, which will provide a maximum capacity of 300.
Speaking to Rwanda’s Foreign Minister Vincent Biruta on Thursday, Patel said: “Our world’s leading partnership for migration and economic development is the world’s first and will change the way we collectively fight illegal migration through new, innovative and leading in the world of solutions ”
Patel: “Anyone who enters the UK illegally” will be considered for relocation to Rwanda – video
However, the UN refugee agency opposed the plans, saying they could be challenged under the Refugee Convention.
“[The UN High Commissioner for Refugees] Remains strongly opposed to agreements aimed at transferring refugees and asylum seekers to third countries in the absence of sufficient guarantees and standards. “Such arrangements simply transfer responsibilities for asylum, evade international obligations and run counter to the letter and spirit of the Refugee Convention,” said UNHCR Assistant High Commissioner for Protection Gillian Trigs. “People fleeing wars, conflicts and persecution deserve compassion and empathy. They must not be traded as goods and transferred abroad for processing. “
Tory peer Sayeda Varsi called the scheme inhuman and cynical. “This proposal to offshore asylum seekers in Rwanda is ineffective and costly,” she said. “This is also inhumane and shame on our proud history as defenders of human rights and the refugee convention.
She said the plan was incompatible with the UK’s “generous response” to Ukraine’s crisis, and described the moment as cynical and political.
British Red Cross Executive Director Zoe Abrams said the humanitarian network was “deeply concerned” about plans to “send traumatized people around the world to Rwanda”.
“We are not convinced that this drastic measure will stop desperate people from trying to cross the English Channel. People come here for reasons we all understand, such as wanting to reunite with loved ones or because they speak the language. “The harsher one can stop them from risking their lives,” she said.
Lucy Morton, a professional officer with the ISU Immigration and Border Union, warned that the announcement could lead to further loss of life in the English Channel as people desperately want to reach the UK before any plans are implemented. to send to Rwanda.
She said: “What was announced today is likely to increase immediate numbers. And that will mean that people are going through unfavorable conditions, putting their lives at risk.
“We are worried that they will just panic and hurt themselves, or inadvertently hurt us, or intentionally hurt us to stay in the UK to be tried instead of being sent to Rwanda. It’s not going to happen fast, probably for months, and you’re scaring everyone until then. “
The president of the Law Society of England and Wales, Stephanie Boyce, said there were serious questions about whether the plans were in line with international law.
“The government is announcing this scheme before parliament approves the necessary powers,” she said. “There are serious questions as to whether these plans would or could not live up to the UK’s promises under an international treaty.
Add Comment