Rishi Sunak's Rwanda plan is expensive and ridiculous. There is a better, more humane way to 'stop the boats' – Scotsman comment
The deaths of a girl, a woman and three men while trying to cross the English Channel demonstrate the need to stop dangerous small-boat crossings. They do not, however, provide evidence in support of the UK Government’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, as Rishi Sunak claimed yesterday. In fact, the opposite is true.
Following the passing of the Safety of Rwanda Bill, the first planes are expected to take off in ten to 12 weeks. The Prime Minister declared there would be “multiple flights a month” to serve as a “deterrent”.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdHowever, despite the deaths of five people on the small boat in question, 58 people refused to leave the clearly unseaworthy vessel and instead continued on their way. It is hard to fathom why Sunak thinks a relatively small chance of being sent to Rwanda will deter people so desperate to make it to Britain that they will risk their lives to make the crossing, even after seeing other passengers drown.
Running sick joke
There are suggestions that Sunak may call the general election during the school summer holidays, just as the first flights take off. This will annoy many parents but has the advantage of avoiding the actual effect of the Rwanda policy becoming clear. Given the cost – £370 million over five years with a one-off lump sum of £120m if more than 300 asylum seekers are sent – this may be smart politics by the fools who think this represents value for money.
Letting voters discover just how “bats***” – a description attributed to Home Secretary James Cleverly – this scheme truly is would likely be a mistake. As some Conservative figures have pointed out, there may never be a day when more asylum seekers are flown to Rwanda than arrive on small boats, turning Sunak’s flagship policy into a running sick joke.
Hostility towards immigration helped win the Brexit referendum and the Conservatives have clung to this one source of hope as their political fortunes have waned. It’s almost as if the economy and the NHS no longer matter, even though the parlous state of both are the main reasons why Sunak and co are about to be voted out of office.
Why Sunak focusses on small boats
Despite the rhetoric, however, behind the scenes the government has recognised the need to fill job vacancies, with 337,000 work visas given to the main applicants in 2023. Cutting off this source of labour would see vacancies gradually disappear, reducing the size of the economy. It makes more financial sense to get the many British people of working age on sickness benefit healthy again and back in employment – reducing the welfare bill and increasing tax revenue – but until this happens the economy needs migrants, most of whom only stay a few years, to fill the gap.
The difficulties of reducing mass immigration explain why Sunak has been so focussed on the high-profile problem of small boats despite the far fewer numbers involved. Less than 30,000 people arrived this way last year. But spending £370m or more on his Rwanda “gimmick”, as Keir Starmer rightly calls it, is simply ridiculous. That money would be far better spent on a comprehensive operation by UK and French police, which would physically prevent crossings while also serving as a “deterrent”.
A policy of allowing a quota of asylum seekers to make a UK claim while in France, effective police enforcement, and the denial of asylum claims by anyone arrested would stand a much better chance of stopping the boats and saving lives, and would also demonstrate the UK is still willing to live up to its international humanitarian responsibilities.