London, July 18, GNA – The United Kingdom government’s £120 million deal with Rwanda to send illegal migrants to the East African country to claim asylum there is unlikely to stop unlawful crossings across the English Channel, MPs on the British parliament’s Home Affairs Committee have warned.

In its report published on Monday, the Committee said it found that the asylum agreement with Rwanda “so far shows no evidence of being the deterrent it is intended to be”.

The Chair of the Committee, Dame Diana Johnson, said the UK government’s “deterrent policy of sending asylum applicants to Rwanda appears to have gone unnoticed by those who attempt to cross the Channel”.

According to the report, crossings in small boats continued to rise significantly with 28,5000 people arriving in the UK in 2021 and 14,000 having arrived so far in 2022.

It said that the total expected by the end of the year could reach 60,000.

In April, when Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced the deal with Rwanda, he said “this innovative approach…will provide safe and legal routes for asylum, while disrupting the business model of the gangs” that had been smuggling people.

The 20-mile journey across the English Channel is said to be hazardous, traversing the world’s busiest shipping lane in the small craft commonly used.

At least 166 people have died or gone missing attempting the crossing, including 27 in a single day.

The report found that efforts by the government to “find a single, low-cost, solution to close off this route of entry are unrealistic and will not succeed”.

It added: “Threats of being put on a flight to Rwanda with no chance of return to the UK have so far failed to stop people making the extremely dangerous journey across the Channel. “Their motivations, and their understanding of what will happen when they arrive in the UK, are also poorly understood and insufficient to inform good policy.”

The Committee, however, pointed out that the aim should be to have an asylum system that was “fair and efficient”.

“This will require policy based on detailed evidence, fully costed, fully tested, and recognising that change will be incremental.

“The UK also needs to do more to work with European partners, sharing intelligence and equipment, and working together to clamp down on criminal gangs that drive people smuggling,” the report added.

The Home Affairs Committee report suggested: “The government should also explore setting up UK asylum processing facilities in France, with the agreement of the French government, so that claims can be assessed there.

“Safe and legal routes need to be established to support those with an asylum claim in coming to the UK without the need to use criminal gangs to get there.”

Committee Chair Dame Diana said: “The failure to ensure safe routes are available to all those who would have a rightful asylum claim leaves people little choice but to use drastic measures to get here.”

A UK Home Office spokeswoman said: “Our new plan for immigration will bring in the biggest package of reforms in decades, allowing us to support those in genuine need while preventing illegal and dangerous journeys into the UK, and breaking the business model of vile people smugglers.”

However, the Home Affairs Committee has not been impressed by government statements on the issue, noting: “The government should reveal the detailed costings for its Migration and Economic Development Partnership with Rwanda, including the costs for relocation.

“If part of its reasoning is that it will reduce the £1.5 billion current cost of the asylum system, it needs to prove that is the case.”

The scheme has been mired in controversy since it was announced, with criticism coming from European governments, the UN, and human rights and refugee groups.

Steve Valdez-Symonds, Amnesty International UK’s Refugee and Migrant Rights Director, said: “Instead of rounding up people with the intention of flying them 4,000 miles away to an uncertain future, the UK government should be working in cooperation with the French authorities to share responsibility for the needs of people seeking asylum in northern France.”

So far, no flights have taken off for Rwanda after the High Court in the UK postponed a judicial review hearing over the legality of the UK government’s asylum policy.

GNA

London, July 18, GNA – The United Kingdom government’s £120 million deal with Rwanda to send illegal migrants to the East African country to claim asylum there is unlikely to stop unlawful crossings across the English Channel, MPs on the British parliament’s Home Affairs Committee have warned.

In its report published on Monday, the Committee said it found that the asylum agreement with Rwanda “so far shows no evidence of being the deterrent it is intended to be”.

The Chair of the Committee, Dame Diana Johnson, said the UK government’s “deterrent policy of sending asylum applicants to Rwanda appears to have gone unnoticed by those who attempt to cross the Channel”.

According to the report, crossings in small boats continued to rise significantly with 28,5000 people arriving in the UK in 2021 and 14,000 having arrived so far in 2022.

It said that the total expected by the end of the year could reach 60,000.

In April, when Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced the deal with Rwanda, he said “this innovative approach…will provide safe and legal routes for asylum, while disrupting the business model of the gangs” that had been smuggling people.

The 20-mile journey across the English Channel is said to be hazardous, traversing the world’s busiest shipping lane in the small craft commonly used.

At least 166 people have died or gone missing attempting the crossing, including 27 in a single day.

The report found that efforts by the government to “find a single, low-cost, solution to close off this route of entry are unrealistic and will not succeed”.

It added: “Threats of being put on a flight to Rwanda with no chance of return to the UK have so far failed to stop people making the extremely dangerous journey across the Channel. “Their motivations, and their understanding of what will happen when they arrive in the UK, are also poorly understood and insufficient to inform good policy.”

The Committee, however, pointed out that the aim should be to have an asylum system that was “fair and efficient”.

“This will require policy based on detailed evidence, fully costed, fully tested, and recognising that change will be incremental.

“The UK also needs to do more to work with European partners, sharing intelligence and equipment, and working together to clamp down on criminal gangs that drive people smuggling,” the report added.

The Home Affairs Committee report suggested: “The government should also explore setting up UK asylum processing facilities in France, with the agreement of the French government, so that claims can be assessed there.

“Safe and legal routes need to be established to support those with an asylum claim in coming to the UK without the need to use criminal gangs to get there.”

Committee Chair Dame Diana said: “The failure to ensure safe routes are available to all those who would have a rightful asylum claim leaves people little choice but to use drastic measures to get here.”

A UK Home Office spokeswoman said: “Our new plan for immigration will bring in the biggest package of reforms in decades, allowing us to support those in genuine need while preventing illegal and dangerous journeys into the UK, and breaking the business model of vile people smugglers.”

However, the Home Affairs Committee has not been impressed by government statements on the issue, noting: “The government should reveal the detailed costings for its Migration and Economic Development Partnership with Rwanda, including the costs for relocation.

“If part of its reasoning is that it will reduce the £1.5 billion current cost of the asylum system, it needs to prove that is the case.”

The scheme has been mired in controversy since it was announced, with criticism coming from European governments, the UN, and human rights and refugee groups.

Steve Valdez-Symonds, Amnesty International UK’s Refugee and Migrant Rights Director, said: “Instead of rounding up people with the intention of flying them 4,000 miles away to an uncertain future, the UK government should be working in cooperation with the French authorities to share responsibility for the needs of people seeking asylum in northern France.”

So far, no flights have taken off for Rwanda after the High Court in the UK postponed a judicial review hearing over the legality of the UK government’s asylum policy.

GNA