Connect with us
...

Politics

Plan for life ban for migrants is unworkable

Published

on

Government plans to ban migrants from re-entering the UK if they cross the Channel in small boats are unworkable and will leave thousands of people in limbo, refugee groups have said.

Under new legislation, Channel migrants would be removed from the UK, banned from future re-entry and barred from applying for British citizenship.

Supporters say the PM is “getting a grip” on illegal migration.

The government is expected to outline the plans on Tuesday.

The proposed measures will apply to anyone arriving on UK shores in a small boat – but there are few details on how they will be implemented, with previous efforts to tighten procedures – such as the Rwanda policy – mired in legal challenges.

PM Rishi Sunak, who has made the issue one of his top priorities, told the Mail on Sunday: “Make no mistake, if you come here illegally, you will not be able to stay.”

But the Refugee Council, one of a number of charities to criticise the plans, accused ministers of shattering the UK’s long-standing commitment under the UN Convention to give people a fair hearing, regardless of how they get to the UK.

The group’s head Enver Solomon said the plans would “add more cost and chaos to the system”, adding: “It’s unworkable, costly and won’t stop the boats”.

It is thought the legislation would place a duty on the home secretary to remove all those arriving on boats to Rwanda or a “safe” third country “as soon as reasonably practicable” – no matter where they had come from – and would also permanently ban them from returning.

Currently, asylum seekers arriving in the UK have the right to seek protection under the UN’s Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights.

But the Mail on Sunday says a clause in the Illegal Migration Bill is expected to apply a “rights brake” to effectively allow the conventions to be circumvented. It is not clear how this would work.

The proposed legislation would also stop those coming to the UK in small boats from applying for British citizenship.

Under current UK law, a person can seek to settle permanently and apply for citizenship after five years in the country – but this is not straightforward.

Last year’s immigration act already gave the home secretary the power to bar Channel migrants from seeking to resettle. It is possible the new plans might be aiming to make this an automatic ban and not a discretionary one.

Chart showing number of UK asylum applications by nationality in the 12 months to December 2022, in descending order: Albania, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Bangladesh, Eritrea, Sudan, Bangladesh, India, Sudan and Pakistan

Downing Street said the government would eventually open up more safe routes for asylum claims, but only “once we have control over our borders”.

While declining to give a timeline, Mr Sunak’s official spokesman said rising numbers of Channel crossings meant “there is no time to waste” on implementing the new plans.

But Labour’s Wes Streeting called the measures “the latest in a long line for unworkable gimmicks” and predicted they would not “see the light of day” or get through Parliament.

The shadow health secretary said the government should instead create better safe routes into the country, speed up the processing of asylum claims and direct money into the National Crime Agency to arrest criminal gangs trafficking people.

More than 100 people in three boats were brought to shore by Border Force and the RNLI in Dover on Monday.

Despite a deal being reached last year, not one migrant has been sent to Rwanda yet and any plans to do so are currently on hold after the policy was met with fierce opposition and legal interventions.

In December, the High Court ruled the scheme did not breach the UN’s Refugee Convention. But that decision is facing further challenges in the courts, with a preliminary hearing expected on Monday at the Court of Appeal.

There is no agreement in place on the return of migrants with the EU.

The home secretary – who will introduce the new laws – told the Sun on Sunday “the only route to the UK will be a safe and legal route”.

The Home Office says there are a number of these routes to the UK.

However, some are only available to people from specific countries, such as Afghanistan and Ukraine, or for British National status holders in Hong Kong.

Other asylum routes accept a limited number of refugees according to precise criteria.

Graph showing how migrant removals have crept up since the pandemic

Meanwhile, figures obtained by the BBC show that Home Office charter flights to forcibly remove illegal immigrants from the UK cost more per seat than a first class ticket to New York.

The government spent £12.7m last year on the flights – removing 1,500 people – a Freedom of Information request by BBC News has revealed.

A quarter of the flights took off with 20 or fewer passengers on board, including two flights with less than 10.

Of the 62 flights chartered by the Home Office in 2022, the data shows the flights worked out at an average of £205,000.

What are the current rules for claiming UK asylum?

By Tom Edgington, BBC Reality Check

It is already illegal for migrants to knowingly enter the UK without a visa or special permission.

The rule, part of last year’s Nationality and Borders Act, means people who illegally arrive in the UK can be jailed for up to four years and removed to a safe country. However, very small numbers are likely to be prosecuted.

That’s because the UK has an international legal obligation not to criminally penalise anyone who seeks protection as a refugee.

The government says “safe and legal” routes for those seeking UK asylum already exist. However, most are only available to people from specific countries – like Afghanistan and Ukraine.

Elsewhere, others have criticised the new plans with the Lib Dems calling them “immoral, ineffective and incredibly costly for taxpayers while doing nothing to stop small boat crossings”.

Freedom from Torture, a charity which provides therapy to asylum seekers, described the measures as “vindictive and dysfunctional”.

And Amnesty International called them “disgraceful posturing and scaremongering”.

The government has previously said the Rwanda plan would discourage others from crossing the English Channel but so far there is no evidence that has happened.

In 2022, 45,756 migrants crossed the English Channel to Britain in small boats, according to government figures collated by the BBC.

That is the highest number since the first records in 2018.

Latest Home Office figures show 2,953 migrants have crossed the Channel using this method already this year, originating from a range of countries including Albania, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.

Reports /TrainViral/

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Gething downfall delivers Starmer 1st headache

Published

on

By

Just when you’d have been forgiven for thinking politics might quieten down a bit…

The Welsh Labour government was for so long a case study in how the party could operate in power during its long years of opposition at Westminster.

And yet here we are less than a fortnight into a UK Labour government, and the Welsh Labour government is imploding.

So much for all that talk about bringing stability back to politics.

Last week Vaughan Gething was sharing smiles here not just with the new prime minister but the King too.

Now, he’s a goner, delivering Sir Keir Starmer a headache rather than a handshake.

When I was here in March covering Mr Gething’s victory, the seeds of his political demise were germinating before our eyes.

The donations row had already sprouted and his defeated opponent, Jeremy Miles, legged it from the venue without so much as any warm words about the victor on camera.

It was another sign of the cultivating anger, the political knotweed that would soon flourish and ensnare Vaughan Gething.

Along came the row about alleged leaking, a sacking, a confidence vote — and a first minister whose tenure up until today at least amounts to 2.4 times that of Liz Truss. Ouch.

Westminster has generated its fair share of turbulence in the last decade.

But it is far from unique as a source of turbulence in UK politics.

In February, Michelle O’Neill became first minister of Northern Ireland with Emma Little-Pengelly her deputy, after a long period without devolved government at Stormont.

In March, we had a new first minister of Wales, when Mark Drakeford stood down and Vaughan Gething took the job.

In April we had the resignation of the first minister of Scotland Humza Yousaf.

He was replaced the following month by John Swinney. June was the quiet month then. Just the small matter of a general election campaign.

And here we are in July, and Mr Gething is resigning.

So will begin another leadership race, a new government in Wales, a new first minister and a new team of senior Welsh ministers.

There will also be more arguments about Welsh Labour – its direction, its priorities, its capacity to govern effectively and its relationship with the UK party.

If you’re watching this in Downing Street, it’s the last thing you need.

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Politics

Shoplifting crackdown expected to be unveiled

Published

on

By

A crackdown on shoplifting is expected to be announced in the King’s Speech on Wednesday.

The government is due to unveil a new crime bill to target people who steal goods worth less than £200.

The policy would be a reversal of 2014 legislation that meant “low-value” thefts worth under £200 were subject to less serious punishment.

The government is also expected to introduce a specific offence of assaulting a shop worker to its legislative agenda.

It will not be clear until legislation passes through Parliament what the punishments for any new or strengthened offences would be.

Data from the Office for National Statistics shows that last year was the worst on record for shoplifting in England and Wales.

Police recorded over 430,000 offences in those nations in 2023 – though retailers say underreporting means these figures are likely to represent only a fraction of the true number of incidents.

Michelle Whitehead, who works at a convenience store in Wolverhampton, said her shop had been “hit every day” by thieves.

People were stealing “absolutely anything” including “tins of spam, tins of corned beef, all the fresh meat”, Ms Whitehead told BBC Radio 4’s World at One programme.

“They’re just coming in, getting their whole arm and sweeping the lot off the shelves,” she said. “The shelves were always empty.”

She said she believed “organised” criminal gangs, rather than individuals struggling with the cost of living, were behind the thefts in her shop.

The crackdown on “low-value” shoplifting “will help a lot of little shops,” Ms Whitehead said.

While retailers and shop workers have welcomed the anticipated proposals, a civil liberties group has raised concerns about criminalising people struggling to make ends meet and overburdening the prison system.

The new legal measures are expected to be announced as part of the King’s Speech on Wednesday, a key piece of the State Opening of Parliament that allows the government to outline its priorities over the coming months.

Before the general election, the Labour Party pledged to reverse what it described as the “shoplifter’s charter” – a piece of 2014 legislation that reduced the criminal punishment for “low-value shoplifting”.

Tom Holder, spokesperson for the British Retail Consortium (BRC), told BBC News the impact of the 2014 legislation has been to “deprioritise it in the eyes of police”.

“I think police would be less likely to turn up to what they see as low-level theft,” he said.

Shoplifting cost retailers £1.8 billion in the last year, which could impact prices, according to the BRC.

“Shoplifting harms everyone in that sense – those costs eventually get made up somewhere, whether it’s prices going up or other prices that can’t come down,” Mr Holder said.

Co-op campaigns and public affairs director Paul Gerrard said the supermarket chain had also recorded rising theft and violence against shop workers.

“There’s always been people who will steal to make ends meet. That’s not what is behind the rise we’ve seen,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Tuesday. “What’s behind that rise is individuals and gangs targeting large volumes of stock in stores for resale in illicit venues like pubs, clubs, markets, and out the back of cars.”

But Jodie Beck, policy and campaigns officer at civil liberties organisation Liberty, had concerns about the expected proposals, saying there is “already a wide range of powers” the police can use to tackle shoplifting and anti-social behaviour levelled at retail staff.

Ms Beck said the “£200 threshold” would not just target criminal gangs but also “people who are pushed into the desperate situation of not paying for things” because they cannot afford to make ends meet.

She urged the government to avoid focusing on “criminal justice and policing solutions instead of doing the thoughtful work of looking at the root causes of crime, which we believe are related to poverty and inequality”.

Ms Beck also argued the additional legislation could serve to worsen the UK’s “enormous court backlog” and its “bursting prison system”.

Last week, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans to release thousands of prisoners early to ease overcrowding in the country’s prisons.

A spokesperson for Downing Street said the government would not comment on the King’s Speech until it has been delivered by the monarch.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council has been approached for comment.

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Politics

Government launches ‘root and branch’ review

Published

on

By

Defence Secretary John Healey hailed the government’s defence review as the “first of its kind” and said it will “take a fresh look at the challenges we face”.

Mr Healey noted the “increasing instability and uncertainty” around the world, including the conflict in the Middle East and war in Ukraine, and said “threats are growing”.

The strategic defence review will consider the current state of the armed forces, the threats the UK faces and the capabilities needed to address them.

Sir Keir Starmer has previously said the review will set out a “roadmap” to the goal of spending 2.5% of national income on defence – a target he has made a “cast iron” commitment to but is yet to put a timeline on.

On Monday, the prime minister said the “root and branch review” of the armed forces would help prepare the UK for “a more dangerous and volatile world”.

The review will invite submissions from the military, veterans, MPs, the defence industry, the public, academics and the UK’s allies until the end of September and aims to deliver its findings in the first half of 2025.

“I promised the British people I would deliver the change needed to take our country forward, and I promised action not words,” Sir Keir said.

“That’s why one of my first acts since taking office is to launch our strategic defence review.

“We will make sure our hollowed out armed forces are bolstered and respected, that defence spending is responsibly increased, and that our country has the capabilities needed to ensure the UK’s resilience for the long term.”

The review will be overseen by Defence Secretary John Healey and headed by former Nato Secretary General Lord Robertson along with former US presidential advisor Fiona Hill and former Joint Force Commander Gen Sir Richard Barrons.

The group will have their work cut out.

The global security threats facing the UK and its Western allies are more serious and more complex than at any time since the end of the Cold War in 1990.

They also coincide with what many commentators have said is a catastrophic running down of the UK’s armed forces to the point where the country is arguably no longer considered to be a Tier One military force.

In terms of the number of troops in its regular forces, the British Army is now at its smallest size since the time of the Napoleonic Wars two centuries ago.

Recruitment is failing to match retention, with many soldiers and officers complaining about neglected and substandard accommodation.

The Royal Navy, which has spent vast sums on its two centrepiece aircraft carriers, is in need of many more surface ships to fulfil its tasks around the globe.

Its ageing fleet of nuclear-armed Vanguard submarines, the cornerstone of the UK’s strategic defence and known as the Continuous At Sea Deterrent (CASD), is overdue for replacement by four Dreadnought class submarines and costs are mounting.

Commenting on the review, Mr Healey said: “Hollowed-out armed forces, procurement waste and neglected morale cannot continue.”

Too many UK commitments?

The defence and security threats facing the UK, Nato and its allies further afield are multiple.

They include a war raging on Europe’s eastern flank in Ukraine against Russia’s full-scale invasion. The UK, along with the EU and Nato, has opted to help defend Ukraine with multi-billion pound packages of weapons and aid, stopping short of committing combat troops.

The policy behind this is not entirely altruistic. European governments, especially those closest to Russia like Poland and the Baltic states, fear that if President Putin wins the war in Ukraine it will not be long before he rebuilds his army and invades them next.

Some of those countries are already busy beefing up their own defence spending closer to 3% or even 4% of GDP.

The challenge for Nato has been how to provide Ukraine with as much weaponry as it can, without provoking Russia into retaliating against a Nato state and risk triggering a third world war.

The Royal Navy has been in action recently in the Red Sea, where it has been operating alongside the US Navy in fending off attacks on shipping by the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.

But the UK has also made naval commitments further afield in the South China Sea with the Aukus pact, comprising of Australia, UK and the US, aimed at containing Chinese expansion in the region.

Critics have questioned whether a financially-constrained UK can afford to make commitments like this on the other side of the world.

Closer to home in Europe, there is a growing threat from so-called “hybrid warfare” attacks, suspected of coming from Russia.

These are anonymous, unattributable attacks on undersea pipelines and telecoms cables on which Western nations depend.

As tensions increase with Moscow there are fears such actions will only increase and the UK cannot possibly hope to guard all of its coastline all of the time.

But while those nervous Nato partners living close to Russia’s borders are busy beefing up their defence spending closer to 3 or even 4% of GDP, the UK has so far declined to put a timetable on when it will raise its own defence spending to just 2.5%.

Opposition figures have criticised the government for refusing to say when defence spending will be increased.

Before his election defeat, former prime minister Rishi Sunak committed to reaching 2.5% by 2030.

Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge previously said: “In a world that is more volatile and dangerous than at any time since the Cold War, Keir Starmer’s Labour government had a clear choice to match the Conservatives’ fully funded pledge to spend 2.5% of GDP on defence by 2030.

“By failing to do so, they’ve created huge uncertainty for our armed forces, at the worst possible time.”

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 TechDaja News.