LONDON:The Government’s plan to reduce Channel crossings by asylum seekers has been slammed as “woefully inadequate” for not providing more legal options to reach the UK.Campaigners accused ministers of neglecting the urgent need to prevent the risky trips and urged them to create new safe and legal pathways, such as a humanitarian visa for refugees.The Prime Minister faces a Commons clash next week over his plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.
Rishi Sunak announced last year that the Illegal Migration Act would bar asylum claims from those who enter the UK illegally, and pledged to “stop the boats”, raising concerns about the legal options for people escaping war and persecution to seek refuge in the UK. The Act required the Government to publish a report explaining what safe and legal asylum routes are, and listing the existing and planned programmes. On Thursday, as the report was released, Home Secretary James Cleverly said the UK had a “long tradition of protecting the most vulnerable”, and cited resettlement schemes for people from Hong Kong, Syria, Afghanistan and Ukraine, as well as family reunion routes for refugees.
He claimed the report showed the Government’s dedication to providing safe and legal routes for those who need them most, even though no new plans for such routes were revealed.
He said: “As we manage the numbers, we will monitor whether we can do more to help vulnerable refugees and whether we need to explore new safe and legal routes.”
The Refugee Council criticised the report for “lacking any new safe routes or any enhancement of existing ones”, saying they are essential to address Channel crossings.
The charity’s chief executive Enver Solomon said: “There is an urgent need for a bold plan to increase safe routes by boosting resettlement and family reunion as well as testing humanitarian visas.
“The Government’s plans are severely lacking with no real pledge to increase safe routes for refugees from conflict-ridden countries such as Sudan and Syria, and those escaping oppressive regimes in countries such as Iran.
“The Government has ignored the urgent need to provide safe passage to our shores for asylum seekers by only outlining the existing limited schemes, instead of reducing the perilous Channel crossings.”
He said the Government must act decisively to expand safe routes for refugees, rather than pursuing the illegal, expensive and futile Rwanda plan, if it was “serious” about its “stop the boats” promise.
Katie Morrison, chief executive of Safe Passage, said: “It’s very frustrating that this Government is still not opening safe routes for refugees now. The Government’s plan is completely wrong. Without safe routes, people will have to risk their lives crossing the Channel with smugglers.
“This Government needs to show it is serious about providing safe routes for those who need them, and stop producing worthless reports and actually open them.”
Olivia Field, policy and advocacy director for the British Red Cross, said safe routes were “vital if we really want to prevent people from taking dangerous journeys to the UK, after they leave their homes and look for a place of safety” because there are “no safe routes available” for most asylum seekers.
She emphasized the need for a humanitarian visa scheme, allowing individuals to apply for asylum from outside the UK. She warned that without such a scheme, people would continue to risk their lives in pursuit of safety.
The Government, however, plans to limit the number of individuals it offers sanctuary to each year starting from 2025. Proposals are anticipated to be presented to Parliament by summer, following the publication of a report in spring. This report will detail a consultation with councils on their ability to house and provide services to refugees.
When questioned about the absence of new safe and legal routes in the report, the Prime Minister’s official spokesperson stated that the UK already has a significant number of such routes. However, this will be kept under review. He highlighted that over half a million people have been granted sanctuary in the UK since 2015, adding that while the UK’s compassion is boundless, its capacity is not.
Right-wing Tory MPs are preparing for a parliamentary dispute, cautioning the Prime Minister that his Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill will not be effective unless it is substantially strengthened. Numerous MPs support amendments to the proposed legislation, aiming to disregard international law and severely restrict individual migrants’ ability to oppose being sent to Kigali.
In the meantime, former justice secretary Robert Buckland, a member of the One Nation group of moderate Tories, has proposed removing clauses that designate Rwanda as a safe country, disregard human rights laws, and compel courts to partially ignore rulings from the European Court of Human Rights. This proposal comes ahead of the Bill’s further examination by MPs on Tuesday and Wednesday.
