Ministers ‘being forced’ to send migrants to Rwanda, claims Oliver Dowden

Published

2 years ago

March 20, 2023

admin

The government “doesn’t relish” deporting migrants to Rwanda but is being “forced” to pursue the controversial policy because of the rise in Channel crossings, a cabinet minister has claimed.

Oliver Dowden was asked by Sky’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday if he is “comfortable” with the idea of sending children and families to the east African nation if they arrive in the UK illegally.

He said: “I don’t relish any of this and I really wish we didn’t have to do it… we are being forced to do it.”

Listing the reasons why the government is being “forced” into the policy, Mr Dowden said: “With those children seeking to cross the Channel, I think of the danger that their lives are being put in, the evil people smugglers in whose hands they’re placed.

“And unless we are willing as a government and as a country to take tough action in relation to this, the numbers will keep on growing and more people’s lives will be put at risk, the lives of young children. And I’m simply not willing to allow that to happen.”

Labour’s Lisa Nandy asked what the government has been “forced to do” as she pointed out the £140m deportation scheme is yet to get off the ground since it was launched last April.

She said “everybody accepts” that the small boat crossings amount to a “crisis… but the question is what is the government actually doing so far?”

Ms Nandy said: “They’ve done several PR opportunities and photo ops. We’ve had £140m of cheques written to Rwanda in order to implement a scheme that hasn’t removed a single person. This is just more stunts from this government.”

The shadow housing secretary said the government should use the money that is being spent on the “unethical unworkable scheme” and put it into the National Crime Agency “to create a cross-border cell in order to disrupt the criminal gangs who are profiting from people’s misery”.

She insisted this was not a “magic wand solution”, saying “what it’s doing is the hard yards that this government hasn’t been prepared to do”.

Migration bill will ‘seal off all loopholes’

The Rwanda scheme has been stalled by legal challenges since it was launched almost a year ago by Priti Patel, the home secretary at the time, but a government source has told Sky News UK officials are working towards getting the flights started “by the summer”.

Suella Braverman, the home secretary, signed an update to the migrants agreement during a visit to the African country this weekend, expanding its scope to “all categories of people who pass through safe countries and make illegal and dangerous journeys to the UK”.

A Home Office statement said this would allow ministers to deliver on its new Illegal Migration Bill as it would mean those coming to the UK illegally, who “cannot be returned to their home country”, will be “in scope to be relocated to Rwanda”.

The government source said it would “seal off all the loopholes” for those arriving illegally, including those claiming to be victims of modern slavery.

Dowden defends ‘tone-deaf’ comment

Ms Braverman’s trip has been shrouded in controversy after some members of the media were excluded from going along.

She has also faced criticism for joking about the interior design while touring potential accommodation for asylum seekers.

Good spirits on show were somewhat jarring at times

Rob Powell

Political correspondent

@robpowellnews

Given the sensitive topic under discussion in Rwanda this weekend, it hasn’t escaped the attention of some that there’s been an awful lot of smiling going on in the various photo calls the home secretary has taken part in.

When the deportation scheme was initially unveiled a year ago, it was pitched as a “partnership” between the UK and Rwanda.

That’s very much been the impression Suella Braverman has tried to give as she toured building sites and looked around migrant housing in Kigali.

That said, the apparent good spirits on show somewhat jarred at times given the purpose of the visit was to promote the government’s controversial scheme to deport cross-channel migrants to the central African country.

While inside a property potentially earmarked for refugees, the home secretary joked that she “liked the interior designer” and could do with their advice for her house.

Conservative MPs are generally behind the policy – believing it sends out a strong message that the government is taking a tough approach to this high-profile political issue.

But images like the ones we’ve seen this weekend risk making some feel a little queasy.

It was notable today that the cabinet office minister and Tory moderate Oliver Dowden said he didn’t “relish” the Rwanda policy but believed it was needed given the challenge presented by channel crossings.

Looking inside one of the properties, she said: “These houses are really beautiful, great quality, really welcoming and I really like your interior designer.

“I need some advice for myself.”

Asked if that was “tone-deaf”, Mr Dowden told Ridge: “Contrary to some of this characterisation of the policy, this is about making sure there is somewhere safe and secure for people to go to and actually the purpose of the Home Secretary’s visit was to further strengthen our relationships with Rwanda.”

The UN and human rights campaigners have warned that Rwanda is not a safe country to send asylum seekers, particularly those who are LGBT+.

The first deportation flight was stopped at the eleventh hour in June last year after an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights – and none have taken off since.

The scheme is seen as central to the Rishi Sunak’s plan to “stop the boats” – a promise he has staked his premiership on.

Throughout 2022, some 45,728 people crossed to the UK via the Channel – up 60% on the previous year.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Earlier this month, the prime minister announced a package that will see a new detention centre established in France as well as the deployment of more French personnel and enhanced technology to patrol beaches in a shared effort to drive down illegal migration.

However, the EU and UN are among those who have warned a new bill to ban asylum applications if people enter the UK through unauthorised means violates international law.

UK

Man, 76, charged after children fell ill at summer camp

Published

6 hours ago

August 1, 2025

admin

Man, 76, charged after children fell ill at summer camp

A 76-year-old man has been charged with child cruelty offences after youngsters fell ill at a summer camp.

Jonathon Ruben is accused of three offences of “wilful ill treatment of a child” relating to three boys.

Police received a report of children feeling unwell at a camp being held at Stathern Lodge, near Melton in Leicestershire, on Sunday.

Officers said paramedics attended the scene and eight boys – aged between eight and 11 – were taken to hospital as a precaution, as was an adult. They have since been discharged.

Ruben will appear at Leicester Magistrates’ Court on Saturday.

A statement from Janine McKinney, chief crown prosecutor for CPS East Midlands, said: “The Crown Prosecution Service has authorised the prosecution of a 76-year-old man with child cruelty offences following a police investigation into a summer camp held at Stathern Lodge, Leicestershire.

“This decision has been made after reviewing a file of evidence from Leicestershire Police.

“Jonathon Ruben, will be charged with three offences of wilful ill-treatment of a child relating to three boys. He will appear at Leicester Magistrates’ Court on Saturday, 1 August.

“This has been an extremely upsetting and shocking moment for the community, and especially for the children and parents most directly affected.”

Leicestershire Police said the owners and operators of Stathern Lodge are separate from the people who use or hire the venue, and are not connected to the incident.

It added in a statement: “This is an active criminal investigation and we ask that people do not speculate further about the incident, particularly on social media platforms.

“Leicestershire Police continues to work closely with partners ensuring that full safeguarding is provided to all those affected.”

The force has referred itself to the Independent Office for Police Conduct over its handling of the incident.

UK

What is the car finance scandal – and what could today’s ruling mean for motorists?

Published

21 hours ago

August 1, 2025

admin

What is the car finance scandal - and what could today's ruling mean for motorists?

The UK’s Supreme Court is set to deliver a landmark ruling today that could have billion-pound consequences for banks and impact millions of motorists.

The essential question that the country’s top court has been asked to answer is this: should customers be fully informed about the commission dealers earn on their purchase?

However, the Supreme Court is only considering one of two cases running in parallel regarding the mis-selling of car finance.

Here is everything you need to know about both cases, and how the ruling this afternoon may (or may not) affect any future compensation scheme.

What is the Supreme Court considering?

The Supreme Court case concerns complaints related to the non-disclosure of commission. This applies to 99% of car finance cases.

When you buy a car on finance, you are effectively loaned the money, which you pay off in monthly instalments. These loans carry interest, organised by the brokers (the people who sell you the finance plan).

These brokers earn money in the form of a commission (which is a percentage of the interest payments).

Last year, the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of three motorists who were not informed that the car dealerships they agreed finance deals with were also being paid 25% commission, which was then added to their bills.

The ruling said it was unlawful for the car dealers to receive a commission from lenders without obtaining the customer’s informed consent to the payment.

However, British lender Close Brothers and South Africa’s FirstRand appealed the decision, landing it in the Supreme Court.

What does the second case involve?

The second case is being driven by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and involves discretionary commission arrangements (DCAs).

Under these arrangements, brokers and dealers increased the amount of interest they earned without telling buyers and received more commission for it. This is said to have incentivised sellers to maximise interest rates.

The FCA banned this practice in 2021. However, a high number of consumers have complained they were overcharged before the ban came into force. The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) said in May that they were dealing with 20,000 complaints.

In January 2024, the FCA announced a review into whether motor finance customers had been overcharged because of past use of DCAs. It is using its powers to review historical motor finance commission arrangements across multiple firms – all of whom deny acting inappropriately.

The FCA also said it is looking into a “consumer redress scheme” that means firms would need to offer appropriate compensation to customers affected by the issue.

An estimated 40% of car finance deals are likely to be eligible for compensation over motor finance deals taken out between 2007 and 2021, when the DCAs were banned.

To find out how you can tell if you’ve been mis-sold car finance, read the following explainer from our reporter Megan Harwood-Baynes.

How does the ruling affect potential compensation?

In short, the Supreme Court ruling could impact the scale and reach that a compensation scheme is likely to have.

The FCA said in March that it will consider the court’s decision and if it concludes motor finance customers have lost out from widespread failings by firms, it is “likely [to] consult on an industry-wide redress scheme”.

This would mean affected individuals wouldn’t need to complain, but they would be paid out an amount dictated by the FCA.

However, no matter what the court decides, the FCA could go ahead with a redress scheme.

The regulator said it will confirm if it is proposing a scheme within six weeks of the Supreme Court’s decision.

What impact could this have on lenders?

Analysts at HSBC said last year the controversy could be estimated to cost up to £44bn.

Alongside Close Brothers, firms that could be affected include Barclays, Santander and the UK’s largest motor finance provider Lloyds Banking Group – which organises loans through its Black Horse finance arm.

Lloyds has already set aside £1.2bn to be used for potential compensation.

The potential impact on the lending market and the wider economy could be so great that Chancellor Rachel Reeves is considering intervening to overrule the Supreme Court, according to The Guardian.

Treasury officials have been looking at the potential of passing new legislation alongside the Department for Business and Trade that could slash the potential compensation bill.

The Treasury said in response to the claim that it does not “comment on speculation” but hopes to see a “balanced judgment”.

UK

Full details of Heathrow’s plans for a third runway revealed

Published

22 hours ago

August 1, 2025

admin

Full details of Heathrow's plans for a third runway revealed

Heathrow Airport has said it can build a third runway for £21bn within the next decade.

Europe’s busiest travel hub has submitted its plans to the government – with opponents raising concerns about carbon emissions, noise pollution and environmental impacts.

The west London airport wants permission to create a 3,500m (11,400ft) runway, but insists it is open to considering a shorter one instead.

In January, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced that the government supports a “badly needed” expansion to connect the UK to the world and open up new growth opportunities.

But London mayor Sir Sadiq Khan is still against a new runway because of “the severe impact” it will have on the capital’s residents.

Under Heathrow’s proposal, the runway would be constructed to the northwest of its existing location – allowing for an additional 276,000 flights per year.

The airport also wants to create new terminal capacity for 150 million annual passengers – up from 84 million – with plans involving a new terminal complex named T5XW and T5XN.

Terminal 2 would be extended, while Terminal 3 and the old Terminal 1 would be demolished.

The runway would be privately funded, with the total plan costing about £49bn, but some airlines have expressed concern that the airport will hike its passenger charges to pay for the project.

EasyJet chief executive Kenton Jarvis said an expansion would “represent a unique opportunity for easyJet to operate from the airport at scale for the first time and bring with it lower fares for consumers”.

Thomas Woldbye, the airport’s chief executive, said in a statement that “it has never been more important or urgent to expand Heathrow”.

“We are effectively operating at capacity to the detriment of trade and connectivity,” he added.

“With a green light from government and the correct policy support underpinned by a fit-for-purpose, regulatory model, we are ready to mobilise and start investing this year in our supply chain across the country.

“We are uniquely placed to do this for the country. It is time to clear the way for take-off.”

The M25 motorway would need to be moved into a tunnel under the new runway under the airport’s proposal.

London mayor still opposed

Sir Sadiq says City Hall will “carefully scrutinise” the proposals, adding: “I’ll be keeping all options on the table in how we respond.”

Tony Bosworth, climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth, also said that if Sir Keir Starmer wants to be “seen as a climate leader”, then backing Heathrow expansion is “the wrong move”.

Earlier this year, Longford resident Christian Hughes told Sky News that his village and others nearby would be “decimated” if an expansion were to go ahead.

It comes after hotel tycoon Surinder Arora published a rival Heathrow expansion plan, which involves a shorter runway to avoid the need to divert the M25 motorway.

The billionaire’s Arora Group said a 2,800m (9,200ft) runway would result in “reduced risk” and avoid “spiralling cost”.

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander will consider all plans over the summer so that a review of the Airports National Policy Statement can begin later this year.

It also comes after Sky News reported on a Heathrow Airport-funded group sending leaflets supporting a third runway to thousands of homes across west London.

The group, called Back Heathrow, sent leaflets to people living near the airport, claiming expansion could be the route to a “greener” airport and suggesting it would mean only the “cleanest and quietest aircraft” fly there.

Opponents of the airport’s expansion said the information provided by the group is “incredibly misleading”.

Back Heathrow told Sky News it had “always been open” about the support it receives from the airport. The funding is not disclosed on Back Heathrow’s newsletter or website.