Rishi Sunak says migrants crackdown needed as current system ‘unfair on British people’

Published

3 years ago

March 7, 2023

admin

Rishi Sunak has said the crackdown on small boats crossing the Channel is needed as the current system that is being exploited is “unfair on the British people”.

The prime minister described the new Illegal Migration Bill as “tough, but it is necessary and it is fair”.

“This will always be a compassionate and generous country… but the current situation is neither moral nor sustainable, it cannot go on. It is completely unfair on the British people.”

As Mr Sunak spoke, the UN Refugee Agency said it is “profoundly concerned” by the government’s plans which it said would “amount to an asylum ban”.

But Mr Sunak insisted “we have tried it every other way, and it hasn’t worked”.

The prime minister was speaking from Downing Street after Suella Braverman, the home secretary, unveiled new legislation that will mean people arriving on small boats in the UK will be detained and removed and banned from ever returning.

Mr Sunak confirmed that the rules would apply retrospectively, affecting everyone arriving in the UK illegally from Tuesday.

Speaking earlier in Dover to mark the announcement, he said removals could happen “within weeks”.

“We will detain those who come here illegally and then remove them in weeks, either to their own country if it is safe to do so or to a safe third country like Rwanda,” he said.

The government has admitted the bill might not be compatible with international human rights laws – but the prime minister told the press conference he is “up for the fight” in the courts “and we are confident we will win”.

Responding to a question by Sky News about where predecessors went wrong and why this policy is different, Mr Sunak said: “This is not about dwelling on the past because the situation has just got far worse.

“In the last two years the numbers of people crossing the Channel illegally has more than quadrupled. That is the scale of what is happening.

“It’s not just us, this is happening across Europe… that’s because globally this is a challenge.”

When pressed on what success would look like, the prime minister refused to set specific targets, saying it is “us stopping the boats” and “having a system where people coming here illegally are returned”.

“And if we can get that working… we will see the numbers come down,” he said.

Home secretary accused of ‘inflammatory language’ – live politics updates

Under the proposed plan:

People arriving on small boats will be detained within the first 28 days without bail or judicial review and can be detained after that if there is a reasonable prospect of removal
The onus to remove those who enter illegally will be on the home secretary – to “radically” narrow the number of challenges and appeals
Only those under 18, those medically unfit to fly or at “real risk” of serious harm in the country they are removed to will be able to lodge an appeal to stop them from being deported
Any other claims, including the right to private or family life, will be heard remotely after they have been removed
People will be prevented from using modern slavery laws to oppose their removal
Deportation can only be deferred for modern slavery when a person is cooperating with law enforcement agencies in trafficking investigations
An annual cap on the number of people entering via safe routes – to be set by parliament – will “ensure an orderly system”
A lifetime ban on settlement, citizenship and re-entry to the UK for those removed under the scheme.

UN: ‘Bill amounts to asylum ban’

The bill has attracted a wave of criticism from charities, opposition MPs and human rights lawyers.

The UN’s refugee agency, the UNHCR, said in a lengthy statement that if the legislation is passed it “would amount to an asylum ban – extinguishing the right to seek refugee protection in the United Kingdom for those who arrive irregularly, no matter how genuine and compelling their claim may be, and with no consideration of their individual circumstances”.

The statement said this would “be a clear breach of the Refugee Convention and would undermine a longstanding humanitarian tradition of which the British people are rightly proud”.

Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, suggested the plans were “more akin to authoritarian nations” such as Russia and insisted the proposals would not stop desperate people crossing in small boats but would instead leave “traumatised people locked up in a state of misery being treated as criminals and suspected terrorists without a fair hearing on our soil”.

He added the new legislation “ignores the fundamental point that most of the people in small boats are men, women and children escaping terror and bloodshed from countries including Afghanistan, Iran and Syria”.

Earlier, Ms Braverman told the Commons that she “can’t say definitively” if the new bill complies with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which the UK is part of.

Mr Sunak insisted there is “absolutely nothing improper or unprecedented” about pursuing legislation with a warning that they may not be compatible with the ECHR, adding: “We believe we are acting in compliance with international law, in compliance with the ECHR, and if challenged… we will fight that hard because we believe we’re doing the right thing and it is compliant with our obligations.”

Officials indicated hopes of the bill being passed by the end of the year, which could see it in force ahead of any anticipated 2024 election.

Mr Sunak has staked his premiership on curbing Channel crossings, among four other priorities.

In 2022, a record 45,755 migrants arrived in the UK after crossing the Channel, while more than 3,000 have made the journey so far this year.

UK

‘Victory for Virginia’, says family of Prince Andrew’s accuser – as royal gives up all his titles

Published

7 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

'Victory for Virginia', says family of Prince Andrew's accuser - as royal gives up all his titles

The family of Virginia Giuffre has said Prince Andrew’s decision to give up his titles, including the Duke of York, is “vindication for our sister and survivors everywhere”.

“This is not just a victory for her, but for every single survivor of the horrific crimes perpetrated by [Jeffrey] Epstein and his co-conspirators,” they said in a statement.

Andrew will no longer be known as the Duke of York, in a move which finally completes his banishment from royal life. However, he will remain a prince, as the son of Queen Elizabeth II.

His former wife, Sarah Ferguson, will also no longer use her title of The Duchess of York, it is understood.

In a statement, Prince Andrew said: “In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.

“I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life.

“With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.

“As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

Why is this happening now?

The decision comes following increased pressure on Prince Andrew after continuing reports of his relationship with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein, and his relationship with an alleged Chinese spy.

The posthumous memoir of Virginia Giuffre, who died in April, is due to be released on Tuesday. She had accused Andrew of sexual assault, and sued him in August 2021.

The book will go on sale a week after an email emerged showing Andrew told Epstein “we are in this together”, three months after he said he had stopped contact with the convicted sex offender.

On Friday evening, the US House Oversight Committee also released documents from Epstein’s estate showing “Prince Andrew” listed as a passenger on the financier’s private jet – the so-called Lolita Express – from Luton to Edinburgh in 2006, alongside Ghislaine Maxwell.

He was also listed on another flight to West Palm Beach, Florida, in 2000.

The flight logs have been reported on for years but the release may have added to pressure.

“The situation has become untenable and intolerable, and this week in particular, the tipping point had been reached,” said Sky News royal correspondent Laura Bundock.

What is Prince Andrew giving up?

Prince Andrew is giving up his Duke of York title
His knighthood as a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO)
His Garter role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter
Christmas with the Royal Family at Sandringham
He had already stopped using his HRH title and and was stripped of military patronages by the Queen in 2022
He will retain his dukedom, which can only be removed by an Act of Parliament, but will not use it
He will also remain a prince as he was born the son of Elizabeth II

It is understood the changes will take effect immediately, with the Giuffre family calling for the King to go further and “remove the title of Prince”.

King ‘glad’ of the outcome

The King is glad of the outcome, it is understood, and the decision was taken in close consultation with His Majesty and other members of the Royal Family.

Andrew will continue to be known as Prince Andrew and will remain living at the Windsor Estate at the Royal Lodge.

The move does not impact the position of his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

For the second year running, he is not expected to attend the Royal Family’s annual Christmas celebrations at Sandringham.

‘An unwelcome distraction’

Sky News royal correspondent Rhiannon Mills said: “This is quite an extraordinary move. I think it shows that, actually, things had gone too far.

“Prince Andrew, and allegations about him and Virginia Giuffre, were continuing to be too much of a distraction for the Royal Family.”

Jack Royston, chief royal correspondent at Newsweek, told Sky News: “This does not go far enough.”

There should be an acknowledgement from the Royal Family, he said, “irrespective of whether Prince Andrew denies the substantive allegations against him [that] it was morally wrong for him to grovel to Jeffrey Epstein”.

The Guardian’s former royal correspondent Stephen Bates also told Sky News: “He’s shown no sign of any sort of contrition. He continues to deny all the allegations against him. And he speaks of his duty to the family. Well, it’s a bit late to be thinking about that.”

What is Prince Andrew accused of?

Prince Andrew has denied allegations made by Ms Giuffre – one of Epstein’s victims – of sexual assault.

She had filed a civil lawsuit against him, accusing him of sexually assaulting her on three occasions after she was introduced to him by Epstein.

In a 2019 interview with BBC Newsnight, Andrew said he had no knowledge of ever meeting Ms Giuffre, claiming a well-known image of them together had been doctored.

The case was settled outside court for a sum believed to have been around £12m.

Following Ms Giuffre’s death in April, aged 41, her family said she “lost her life to suicide” at her farm in Western Australia.

Giuffre’s family: ‘Victory for Virginia’

In a statement, the family of Ms Giuffre said they supported Andrew’s decision but repeated accusations that he had made misleading statements. Andrew has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.

Analysis: Prince Andrew giving up titles was clearly not entirely his decision

It is extraordinary that it has come to this but the distraction had to stop.

The statement comes straight from Prince Andrew, the tone of it very personal as he says he is putting his “duty to my family and country first”.

But this was clearly not entirely his decision.

From the first sentence, where he says “in discussion with the King”, we’re left in no doubt that his brother must have said enough was enough.

UK

Prince Andrew giving up titles was clearly not entirely his decision

Published

7 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

Prince Andrew giving up titles was clearly not entirely his decision

It is extraordinary that it has come to this but the distraction had to stop.

The statement comes straight from Prince Andrew, the tone of it very personal as he says he is putting his “duty to my family and country first”.

But this was clearly not entirely his decision.

From the first sentence, where he says “in discussion with the King”, we’re left in no doubt his brother must have said enough was enough.

The fact we’re being guided that the King is glad of this outcome says it all; for the monarch and the wider family, the questions of what they were going to do about Andrew had to stop.

After years of upset caused by his association with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, he has done the family one favour by personally announcing that he will no longer use his titles.

For the King to forcibly remove them would have taken up precious parliamentary time and weeks of column inches.

To be clear, his titles aren’t removed, they remain extant but inactive like his HRH title.

But Andrew won’t use them any more, and that will be humiliation enough for a man who has already been stripped of his military affiliations, his charity patronages and his ability to have any kind of public profile.

This ends the questions on what more the monarch could do to show how the family felt about the accusations, the upset and the embarrassment caused.

Will it stop the stories, the allegations and the interest in Prince Andrew? That is far less certain.

But in what is his first public statement since that ill-fated Newsnight interview in 2019, it is striking that he signs it off by saying: “I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

UK

Everything we know about Prince Andrew’s titles decision

Published

7 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

Everything we know about Prince Andrew's titles decision

Prince Andrew has announced he is giving up his royal titles, including the Duke of York.

The decision is understood to have been made in close consultation with King Charles and other members of the Royal Family.

Prince Andrew said continued accusations against him were distracting from the King’s work.

He had been accused by Virginia Giuffre, who died in April, of sexual assault. He denies this.

Which titles is he giving up?

Prince Andrew is giving up his Duke of York title. Sky News understands this will be immediate.

He will also give up his knighthood as a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO) and his Garter role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.

He will retain the dukedom, which can only be removed by an Act of Parliament, but will not use it.

Prince Andrew will also remain a prince, as the son of Queen Elizabeth II.

Why is this happening now?

Ms Giuffre, who was one of billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, alleged Prince Andrew sexually assaulted her on three occasions when she was 17, and sued him in 2021.

In her posthumous memoir Nobody’s Girl, due to be published on Tuesday, she alleged he was “entitled” and “believed having sex with me was his birthright”.

Prince Andrew has always denied the allegations.

He has also always claimed that a well-known image of them together was doctored. Before her death, which her family said was by suicide, the case was settled outside of court for a sum believed to have been around £12m.

Ms Giuffre’s posthumous memoir goes on sale a week after an email emerged showing Andrew told Epstein “we are in this together”.

The email was reportedly sent three months after he said he had stopped contact with the convicted sex offender.

He was also listed on another flight to West Palm Beach, Florida, in 2000.

The flight logs have been reported on for years but the release may have added to pressure.

“The situation has become untenable and intolerable, and this week in particular, the tipping point had been reached,” said royal correspondent Laura Bundock.

It is understood that the changes will take effect immediately.

The Giuffre family has called for the King to go further and “remove the title of Prince”.

Prince Andrew’s decision to relinquish his titles also comes following increased pressure over his relationship with an alleged Chinese spy.

Will this affect his ex-wife and daughters?

Sky News understands that Andrew will continue to live at the Windsor Estate at the Royal Lodge. His ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, will also remain living at the Royal Lodge.

But for the second year running, he will not attend the Royal Family’s annual Christmas celebrations at Sandringham, it is understood.

Andrew’s ex-wife will also no longer use her Duchess of York title.

She was dropped by numerous charities last month after it emerged that she wrote to convicted sex offender Epstein, calling him a “supreme friend”, despite publicly disowning him in the media.

The decision over Andrew’s titles will not impact on the position of his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, it is understood.

Sky News royal correspondent Rhiannon Mills says the move may not stop the influx of negative stories about him.

She said: “This ends the questions on what more the monarch could do to show how the family felt about the accusations, the upset and the embarrassment caused.

“Will it stop the stories, the allegations and the interest in Prince Andrew? That is far less certain. But in what is the prince’s first public statement since that ill-fated Newsnight interview in 2019, it is striking that he signs it off by saying, ‘I vigorously deny the accusations against me’.”

What did Prince Andrew say in his statement?

In his statement, Prince Andrew said: “In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.

“I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life.

“With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.

“As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”