The government has been instructed to reveal the complete expenses of the hidden agreement made by Rishi Sunak to expel immigrants to Rwanda, while sources report chaos within the Home Office regarding the contentious strategy.
On Monday, the public accounts committee will summon Matthew Rycroft, who is the permanent secretary of the Home Office. This comes after the scheme’s initial costs increased from £140m to £290m.
He was also charged with displaying a complete disregard for the home affairs and public accounts committee in regards to the Home Office’s disclosure of costs, just days after refusing to be open and honest.
Sunak is facing another challenge as he works to pass his emergency legislation on Tuesday, which aims to override court objections to the Rwanda scheme. Some members of his party on the right believe it is not tough enough, while centrist Tories are worried about its impact on human rights.
His team are set to spend the weekend pressing Tory MPs to back the legislation, despite a lack of legal certainty about the workability of the plan. According to the Times, the government’s own legal advisers have said there is a no more than 50% chance of deportation flights leaving for Rwanda before the next election.
Amid increasing pressure on the Home Office, a reliable source connected to James Cleverly, the current home secretary, seemed to suggest that his fired predecessor, Suella Braverman, is responsible for the department’s management thus far.
“It is a challenging task for departments that have been following a certain approach for several months and have received attention in the media, to rapidly and effectively adapt to a new approach that yields results within a short period of time,” the informant stated. “However, they are currently making the necessary adjustments.”
Conservative politicians with right-leaning views are raising concerns about Chancellor Sunak’s future after reports emerged on Friday that suggest former Prime Minister David Cameron may have influenced Rwanda’s recent statement denying any violations of international human rights laws. The Foreign Office has denied these claims.
One Nation MP expresses concern over the increasing expenses for the Rwanda policy and suggests that Sunak may be wasting money on a futile plan, causing concern among Conservatives.
The Home Office and government officials have consistently declined to disclose the complete expenses of the project, citing business confidentiality. However, they announced on Thursday night that an additional sum of £100m was disbursed to Rwanda in April and an additional £50m will be given next year.
The overall expense amounts to £290m, not including the expenses for deporting migrants to the country, which may ultimately raise the total cost to over £400m.
According to the scheme’s impact evaluation, it is estimated that it would cost £169 million, or £169,000 per person, to send 1,000 migrants to Rwanda. This is in comparison to the £106 million it would cost to house them in the UK.
Out of the total £290 million assigned to Rwanda, only £20 million has been used for the establishment expenses of the deportation plan. The remaining £270 million has been designated for “economic transformation” purposes, including education, healthcare, agriculture, infrastructure, and job opportunities in the African nation.
On Friday, number 10 argued that the plan remains cost-effective as it will discourage more migrants from crossing to the UK, ultimately reducing expenses for housing, detaining, and deporting them in the future.
Yvette Cooper, the opposition’s spokesperson for home affairs, expressed her disbelief at the government’s assertion that giving £300 million to Rwanda is a worthwhile expense. She believes that the payments to Rwanda are in addition to, rather than a replacement for, the exorbitant costs of housing asylum seekers in hotels.
Diana Johnson, the chair of the home affairs select committee, who will also attend the hearing, said she believed that there were “hidden costs” in the treaty which should be revealed next week when ministers and Rycroft give evidence before MPs.
She stated that the Home Office consistently mentions their commitment to decrease expenses in the asylum system, but when we try to examine the numbers, we are told not to anticipate continuous updates.
“We would like to review the evidence supporting the claim that the Rwanda scheme is a cost-effective solution for the UK’s asylum obligations, as the expenses continue to escalate with no indication of flights being scheduled.”
after newsletter promotion
Sources from the Home Office have stated that the department experienced a tumultuous week, with overall recognition among employees that the Rwanda strategy is not sustainable in the future, even if a flight is successfully arranged.
According to sources in Whitehall, Rycroft, the permanent secretary, was kept separate from decision-making under Braverman’s leadership. There are concerns that ministers may now be looking to place blame on him for any lack of transparency surrounding the finances of the contentious scheme. Despite the fact that it was initially launched by Priti Patel, approved by Braverman, and closely overseen by Sunak in No 10.
After joining the department last month, Cleverly effectively eased the nerves of anxious staff by providing reassurance. However, in the past week and especially after Robert Jenrick’s resignation as immigration minister on Wednesday, senior staff have expressed feelings of frustration and hopelessness regarding the attention on the Rwanda policy.
According to a source, there are numerous employees dedicated to a policy that is not making progress. The main policies concerning the protection of individuals are not given much consideration.
At this point, approximately £1.5m has already been used for legal expenses related to the project. In addition, there will be additional expenses for establishing an appeals process in Rwanda and addressing any future legal challenges. There is also the expense of sending government officials to Rwanda.
Judges from Britain and the Commonwealth will oversee the appeals procedure, however it has not been confirmed by the Home Office whether UK citizens will cover the cost of their permanent relocation to Rwanda or if they will be transported in and out, or even if they will participate through video conferencing. It is believed that the UK taxpayers will fund training on Rwandan laws and procedures, as well as asylum and humanitarian laws and practices.
The United Kingdom will cover the expenses of housing, legal representation, interpreters, and other support for asylum seekers during their appeals for a period of five years. However, specifics regarding these costs have not been provided by the government, such as the possibility of hiring lawyers from either the UK or Rwanda, or if they will be brought to Kigali for in-person interviews.
Sources from Whitehall have verified that guidance provided by lawyers at the Home Office has cautioned that the most recent bill pertaining to Rwanda, which Sunak has strongly advocated for in order to enable flights to commence by the spring, may potentially be delayed due to prolonged legal proceedings.
According to insiders, ministers were advised two weeks prior that declaring the bill legally sound would be a bold move.
Legal professionals have stated that the bill is likely to face legal challenges within the country, as it is believed to be in violation of the constitution by contradicting a previous ruling by the supreme court.
A representative from the Home Office stated: “With guidance from ministers and senior officials, countless employees at the Home Office dedicate themselves to fulfilling the responsibilities of the current government, which includes our focus on addressing illegal migration and implementing the Migration and Economic Development Partnership.”
“Illegal immigration not only has a significant financial impact on British taxpayers, but it also has a devastating human toll. This highlights the urgency for innovative and courageous approaches to putting an end to it.”
“Expanding on our legally binding agreement, the Rwanda Safety Bill will explicitly state in UK legislation that Rwanda is a secure nation.”
Source: theguardian.com
