Priti Patel has been accused of losing hundreds of thousands of kilos of taxpayers’ cash on a political stunt, after plans to deport seven asylum seekers to Rwanda had been blocked on Tuesday evening.
The aborted flight to the east African nation is believed to have value as much as £500,000, on prime of an upfront fee of £120m paid to the federal government in Kigali as a part of a “migration and economic development partnership” signed by the house secretary in April.
Government officers insisted that planning was already below approach for an additional flight, however authorized specialists mentioned it was unlikely any aircraft would take off earlier than the conclusion of a judicial evaluation subsequent month. Defeat within the courts may imply that no migrants are ever despatched to Rwanda.
Shadow dwelling secretary Yvette Cooper mentioned it was clear that the deportation plan was a “gimmick” designed to permit Boris Johnson’s authorities to choose fights with Tory bogey figures like human rights attorneys, with none expectation it could be an efficient use of taxpayers’ cash.
Her remark got here after Boris Johnson was ticked off by the deputy speaker within the Commons for claiming that Labour was “on the side of the people traffickers”. His press secretary later justified the allegation on the grounds that Keir Starmer’s occasion opposes the coverage of deportation to Rwanda for migrants who might have crossed the Channel in small boats from France.
And Ms Patel lashed out at “the usual suspects”, who she mentioned had been making an attempt to “thwart … these efforts, and, with that, the will of the British people”.
Ms Cooper demanded to be instructed how a lot the deportation flights had been costing, and exactly how a lot Rwanda would obtain for every migrant on prime of the £120m upfront fee.
The Home Office has confirmed the UK will fund lodging and integration for deported people for as much as three months, at a price estimated at £30,000-£50,000 per head.
“She knows this is unworkable, unethical and won’t stop the criminal gangs,” Ms Cooper instructed the Commons. “Yet she still went ahead and spent half a million pounds chartering a plane she never expected to fly.
“She still went ahead and wrote a £120m cheque to Rwanda with a promise of more to come, and she still went ahead because all she really cares about is picking fights and finding someone else to blame.
“This isn’t a long-term plan, is a short-term stunt. Everyone can see it, it’s not a serious policy, it’s shameless posturing and she knows it. It’s not building consensus, it’s just pursuing division. It is government by gimmick. It’s not in the public interest, it’s just in their political interest.”
Ms Patel rejected the cost that the hundreds of thousands spent on the deportation scheme had been wasted, claiming that the programme would save lives by deterring migrants from risking the perilous crossing of the Channel by dinghy.
“You cannot put a price on lives that are lost and we believe in saving lives and breaking the people-smuggling model,” mentioned the house secretary.
But Liberal Democrat dwelling affairs spokesperson Alistair Carmichael instructed The Independent that Ms Patel’s coverage made no sense in monetary phrases.
“Priti Patel’s Rwanda plan is morally bankrupt, and if she continues trying to fly four refugees in a plane costing half a million pounds it will soon be financially bankrupt too,” mentioned Mr Carmichael.
“This makes no sense for the taxpayer and no sense for anyone concerned about an efficient and effective asylum system. If the Tories have money to burn like this, they should be spending it on ensuring that the enormous and growing backlog of asylum applications is dealt with.”
He added: “At £120m a seat, even Boris Johnson would blush at that sort of expenditure for himself.”
Ms Patel mentioned that preparations for future flights to Rwanda had been already below approach. Tuesday’s last-minute rulings by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the UK’s High Court didn’t quantity to an “absolute bar” on removals, and the people concerned could be tagged whereas efforts are made to get them on a later aircraft, she mentioned.
Sources in Downing Street and the Home Office held the door open for additional makes an attempt to take away migrants forward of July’s judicial evaluation. But they refused to place any timeline on departures.
The ECHR injunctions mentioned that particular person asylum seekers shouldn’t be despatched to Africa till three weeks after the evaluation is concluded, however didn’t place a blanket ban on deportation flights.
But the director of public legislation at Duncan Lewis Solicitors, Toufique Hossain, instructed The Independent it was “extremely unlikely” {that a} additional flight could possibly be chartered earlier than the evaluation course of is accomplished.
“Anyone served removal directions can just go back to the High Court and the High Court will presumably grant the injunctive relief based on the EHCR ruling,” mentioned Mr Hossain. “It’s not unrealistic that they’re going to try, because it’s this government.
“The question is would they waste public money in chartering another flight, which costs about half a million pounds, the financial resources of detaining and trying to remove people, the cost of further legal challenges and getting people off planes, getting injunctions, wasting courts’ time, when they could just wait until July?”
Need Your Help Today. Your $1 can change life.
Source: countryask.com
