The Rwandan bill, intended to relocate asylum seekers to the African nation, has received approval from the House of Lords, clearing the way for flights to Rwanda. However, the implementation of this policy is still pending.
Despite being a flagship policy of the Tory Party, which has been criticized for its lax immigration stance, the Rwanda plan is unlikely to gain favor with the skeptical public. Many view it as insufficient, tardy, and failing to address the broader problem of large-scale legal immigration. The intended beneficiaries of this strategy are the 50,000-plus individuals who have crossed the English Channel in small boats, and their cases will now be processed offshore.
The plan has sparked criticism for its harshness, with concerns raised about Rwanda’s safety. The Supreme Court has also ruled against the plan. The Lords eventually received a government assurance that asylum seekers who had assisted the British military would not be deported. While Royal Assent is anticipated, the initial flights are unlikely to depart before summer at the earliest.
Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper argues that while dangerous small boat crossings undermine border security, the costly and ineffective Rwanda scheme, which covers only 1% of those arriving in the UK, worsens the situation by diverting attention from more pressing matters. Cooper emphasizes that half a billion pounds of British taxpayers’ money is being sent to Rwanda for just 300 asylum seekers to be processed, amounting to a staggering £2 million per person.
Cooper’s Labour Party would redirect the Rwanda funds to bolster border security. The plan, however, would take more than three years to remove all eligible asylum seekers, assuming a threefold increase in the current removal rate. It is understandable why the plan has been labeled a gimmick, particularly given the 12-day notice period and the right to appeal, which could further delay the process, despite the new law instructing judges to disregard human rights protections.
There is also the European Court of Human Rights, though ministers could potentially disregard the body if it were appealed to, assuming the government is prepared to violate international law that Britain has already agreed to. One cannot help but wonder if the Rwanda plan, a superficial attempt at a solution, is intended to give the impression of a solution rather than actually providing one. The numbers involved are insignificant, and the government has presided over record-breaking immigration levels, much to the dismay of its core supporters. Rwanda will not salvage the Tories and is likely to be abandoned once Sir Keir assumes office.
