Utterly bonkers Rwanda plan is riven with problems before it even gets started

Once again Number 10’s obsession with focus-groups is dictating policy. And once again the Prime Minister’s obsession with polling – particularly those who voted for Brexit – is leading to terrible policy decisions. 

The utterly bonkers plan to send illegal asylum seekers who cross the Channel directly to Rwanda for “processing” is but the latest and is one riven with problems before it even gets started.

Making up policy to keep some of the public happy is not a good one at any time. Apparently, this latest Rwandan plan is being driven because the PM and his advisers are desperate to appease those in the public realm who are unhappy with the government’s migration policy. 

According to the latest research by Ipsos Mori, some 60% of the public are dissatisfied with the government’s migration policy, more than half of whom cited Channel crossings as their particular beef. 

So they may be upset to learn that this latest £120 million wheeze to find new lives for asylum seekers in the Great Rift valley of Africa is going down like a lead balloon. A snap YouGov poll taken today after Boris Johnson announced the plan showed that 35% of those asked supported the proposal, while 42% opposed it.

Even Nigel Farage, the scourge of immigration and Channel crossers specifically, criticised the convoluted plan, claiming is was  “not much more than a short-term solution”. He prefers the idea that the UK should send the small – and often dangerous – boats that try to cross the Channel back packing to France. 

That’s not much of a better idea, loaded with problems and potentially dangerous for those individuals in the boats and those policing the boats.

Yet Farage also hit the nail – and it’s a big one – on the head when he argued that the problem with sending people away to islands or other countries was “it’s not very long before you start to hear tales of abuse” and after that the Human Rights Act could be invoked to stop it. 

That’s precisely the problem: once the asylum seekers make it the 4,000 miles to Kigali, it will be difficult to track whatever the government might say today. 

It’s no wonder that politicians, charity leaders and – well just about everybody – have piled in to criticise the plan as chilling and nasty and fraught with a million and one problems. 

How will the asylum seekers – mainly single men from largely the Middle East or indeed elsewhere on the African continent – be treated in these Rwandan hostels? Will they be taken for cheap labour and abused? Will their applications to come to the UK be seriously vetted or will they be forced to stay in their camps? There are endless questions. 

Zoe Abrams, executive director of the British Red Cross, warned the “financial and human cost will be considerable” while Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said the charity was “appalled by the government’s cruel and nasty decision” that would “do little” to deter people from coming to the UK.

Indeed, it was the UK government which expressed concern at the United Nations over “continued restrictions to civil and political rights and media freedom” in Rwanda only last year. Steve Valdez-Symonds, Amnesty International UK’s refugee and migrant rights director, was another who warned that sending people seeking asylum in the UK to another country “let alone one with such a dismal human rights record” was “the very height of irresponsibility”.

Yet the PM was ready for the brickbats coming in all directions, arguing that this new process would smash the “vile people smugglers” and save countless lives. This is an honourable objective but it’s not at all certain that this will put those vile people smugglers off tempting – and bribing – young Syrians and North Africans fleeing their country, off the chance of making it to Europe and the UK.

He also said we should be careful about “stereotyping” Rwanda, as it has over the last few decades since the horrendous civil war seen a huge transformation for the better under the long-term leader, Paul Kagame.

 This may well be the case but it’s not at all clear that Kagame’s human rights record has improved much which is why NGOs and other charities who work on the continent are so concerned. 

Where the PM was right was that global migration patterns are a huge problem, and one that needs to be addressed on a global scale. Some of the more extreme forecasts suggest that up to 45 million people will seek new homes in the West from elsewhere over the next decade, a number that dwarfs today’s illegal migration. 

There’s no doubt the number is on the rise: 28,526 people are known to have crossed in small boats last year alone, up from 8,404 in 2020. On Wednesday alone, another 600 made the crossing and Johnson warns the figure could reach a 1,000 a day in coming weeks, particularly as a result of the flow of refugees not just from Ukraine, but the central asian region which has been affected by the war. Potential food shortages because of the high prices and supply problems could exacerbate the problem.

Flying those who have escaped already tough conditions at home the 4,000 miles to Rwanda is not the answer. Getting together with international partners – and doing more to help these individuals in their countries – is the only way.