Connect with us

Published

on

Local Tory councils have threatened to take legal action against the government over its plans to house asylum seekers in disused military bases in their areas.

Immigration minister Robert Jenrick confirmed the scheme today, saying “thousands” would be accommodated at former RAF sites in Essex and Lincolnshire.

But Braintree District Council said it was planning to “imminently” apply for a High Court injunction to challenge the proposed use of the Wethersfield airbase amid concerns over the “isolated” location and impact on local services.

And West Lindsey District Council said it was “extremely disappointed” by the plans to use RAF Scampton and was “considering all legal options, including urgent judicial review proceedings”.

Politics latest – Raab gets late Paul O’Grady’s name wrong at PMQs

The new housing plans are aimed at reducing the £6.8m a day the government says it spends on hotel accommodation while acting as a deterrent to prevent Channel crossings.

But charities said the military accommodation won’t stop the small boats and is “grossly inadequate” for people who have fled war.

And Labour said the proposals will not reduce spending “contrary to all of the briefing in the papers”.

Making the announcement in the Commons, Mr Jenrick claimed the use of hotels to house asylum seekers has resulted in a loss of tourism and cancelled weddings, saying: “We must not elevate the wellbeing of illegal migrants above those of the British people”.

He said the new accommodation “should meet their essential living needs and nothing more”, adding: “We cannot risk becoming a magnet for the millions of people who are displaced and seeking better economic prospects.”

The minister said the two RAF sites will be “scaled up over the coming months” to house “several thousand asylum seekers through repurposed barrack blocks and porta cabins”.

And he said Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was “showing leadership” by “bringing forward proposals” to use barracks in Catterick Garrison in his constituency, along with a separate site on private land in Bexhill, East Sussex.

“This government remains committed to meeting our legal obligations for those who would otherwise be destitute but we are not prepared to go further,” said Mr Jenrick.

But he faced a backlash from his own benches, with former home secretary Priti Patel saying the Essex site was not suitable – pointing to another RAF base in North Yorkshire.

She said: “Can I ask why it is deemed appropriate for asylum seeker accommodation to be placed in a rural village in Essex with single men where there is no infrastructure, no amenities, but it was not appropriate for somewhere like Linton-on-Ouse?”

Concerns about the Essex site had previously been voiced by Foreign Secretary James Cleverly, the Conservative MP for the area, though earlier deputy PM Dominic Raab told Sky News his cabinet colleague now “fully supports” the policy.

Sir Edward Leigh, the Conservative MP for the proposed site in Lincolnshire, also said using the former home of the Dambusters RAF squadron could jeopardise a £300m regeneration project to convert it into a heritage site.

He said the decision was “not based on good governance but the politics of trying to do something”.

A view of RAF Scampton, in Lincoln, as Immigration Minister Robert Jenrick is expected to announce the use of two RAF sites as he tries to reduce the £6.8 million a day the Government says it spends on hotel accommodation. Mr Jenrick will announce that people who arrive in the UK after making Channel crossings on small boats will be housed at RAF Wethersfield and RAF Scampton. Picture date: Wednesday March 29, 2023.
Image:
RAF Scampton is the former home of The Red Arrows

Transport minister Huw Merriman said voters in his Bexhill constituency would have “great concern” about plans to house asylum seekers in the former Northeye prison turned training centre.

The site is expected to need a considerable amount of work to make it suitable for up to the 1,200 people the Home Office intends to house there.

“I know that this decision will have an impact on local authorities and public services. It will also be of great concern to local residents,” Mr Merriman said.

Jenrick’s words on immigration send a message

As expected, Robert Jenrick today announced plans to house asylum seekers at disused RAF sites in Lincolnshire, Essex, and a former prison in East Sussex, instead of hotels.

He is addressing a subject many Conservative MPs feel very strongly about – one texts to say it is “about time” the government addresses the “hotel problem”.

It is estimated housing migrants in hotels costs the taxpayer almost £7m a day, but there are still plenty of questions about the workability of alternative accommodation.

Local councils are launching legal threats, and transport minister Huw Merriman has said he will be meeting the Home Office to “take forward local concerns”.

Immigration minister Mr Jenrick says the accommodation will “meet essential living needs, nothing more”.

The government hopes the new sites, including a former prison and military training camp, will act as a deterrent, and we understand they will be largely for new arrivals.

In the short-term at least, there is no prospect of moving the thousands of people already in hotels, but Mr Jenrick’s words today certainly send a message.

Opposition MPs also criticised the announcement, with Labour’s Yvette Cooper calling it an “admission of failure”.

Maybe that’s why the home secretary has asked the immigration minister to make it instead,” she quipped in a dig at her government counterpart Suella Braverman.

Ms Cooper said the Conservatives promised four years ago to halve Channel crossings but “they’ve gone up 20 fold since then”, while more hotels have opened up despite repeated promises to stop their use.

“The asylum system is broken because they broke it,” she said.

“They have let criminal gangs rip along the channel. People smuggler convictions have halved in the last four years, even though more boats and more gangs have been crossing. And yet Tory MPs voted against Labour’s plan for cross-border police units to go after the gangs.”

Read more: Sunak could turn the Tories’ chances around – but his party aren’t sold on him yet

There was also anger from charities, with Amnesty International UK describing the government’s argument that its plan will put migrants off travelling to the UK as “utter nonsense”.

Speaking to Sky News, the charity’s refugee and migrant rights programme director, Steve Valdez-Symonds, said: “People don’t get into dangerous boats or on the back of lorries and make dangerous journeys and put themselves in the hands of, quite frankly, very dangerous people on the basis of trying to get some meagre accommodation in a hotel, stuck in limbo in the UK’s asylum system.”

He added that the plan to house migrants on military bases “reflects a continuing failure by the government to simply get a grip on deciding the claims of people who arrive in this country and make asylum claims, something that it’s determined to stop doing, which is why we have this big backlog, and why it is constantly flailing around for places to accommodate people”.

The Home Office is also “continuing to explore” controversial plans to use vessels as a form of accommodation while asylum claims are being processed, Mr Jenrick said, comparing such schemes to those in Scotland and the Netherlands.

The announcement was met with cries of “it’s not the same” from Scottish MPs.

In Scotland, cruise ships have been used to house Ukrainian refugees fleeing the war.

Continue Reading

World

Court confirms sacking of South Korean president who declared martial law

Published

on

By

Court confirms sacking of South Korean president who declared martial law

South Korea’s constitutional court has confirmed the dismissal of President Yoon Suk Yeol, who was impeached in December after declaring martial law.

His decision to send troops onto the streets led to the country’s worst political crisis in decades.

The court ruled to uphold the impeachment saying the conservative leader “violated his duty as commander-in-chief by mobilising troops” when he declared martial law.

The president was also said to have taken actions “beyond the powers provided in the constitution”.

Demonstrators who stayed overnight near the constitutional court wait for the start of a rally calling for the president to step down. Pic: AP
Image:
Demonstrators stayed overnight near the constitutional court. Pic: AP

Supporters and opponents of the president gathered in their thousands in central Seoul as they awaited the ruling.

The 64-year-old shocked MPs, the public and international allies in early December when he declared martial law, meaning all existing laws regarding civilians were suspended in place of military law.

Read more from Sky News:
Highs and lows of Five-Year Keir
MP tells Sky News she was targeted online by Tate brothers

More on South Korea

The Constitutional Court is under heavy police security guard ahead of the announcement of the impeachment trial. Pic: AP
Image:
The court was under heavy police security guard ahead of the announcement. Pic: AP

After suddenly declaring martial law, Mr Yoon sent hundreds of soldiers and police officers to the National Assembly.

He has argued that he sought to maintain order, but some senior military and police officers sent there have told hearings and investigators that Mr Yoon ordered them to drag out politicians to prevent an assembly vote on his decree.

His presidential powers were suspended when the opposition-dominated assembly voted to impeach him on 14 December, accusing him of rebellion.

The unanimous verdict to uphold parliament’s impeachment and remove Mr Yoon from office required the support of at least six of the court’s eight justices.

South Korea must hold a national election within two months to find a new leader.

Lee Jae-myung, leader of the main liberal opposition Democratic Party, is the early favourite to become the country’s next president, according to surveys.

Continue Reading

World

Stock markets suffer sharp drops after Donald Trump announces sweeping tariffs

Published

on

By

Stock markets suffer sharp drops after Donald Trump announces sweeping tariffs

Stock markets around the world fell on Thursday after Donald Trump announced sweeping tariffs – with some economists now fearing a recession.

The US president announced tariffs for almost every country – including 10% rates on imports from the UK – on Wednesday evening, sending financial markets reeling.

While the UK’s FTSE 100 closed down 1.55% and the continent’s STOXX Europe 600 index was down 2.67% as of 5.30pm, it was American traders who were hit the most.

Trump tariffs latest: US stock markets tumble

All three of the US’s major markets opened to sharp losses on Thursday morning.

A person works on the floor at the New York Stock Exchange in New York, Monday, March 31, 2025. Pic: AP
Image:
The S&P 500 is set for its worst day of trading since the COVID-19 pandemic. File pic: AP

By 8.30pm UK time (3.30pm EST), The Dow Jones Industrial Average was down 3.7%, the S&P 500 opened with a drop of 4.4%, and the Nasdaq composite was down 5.6%.

Compared to their values when Donald Trump was inaugurated, the three markets were down around 5.6%, 8.7% and 14.4%, respectively, according to LSEG.

More on Donald Trump

Worst one-day losses since COVID

As Wall Street trading ended at 9pm in the UK, two indexes had suffered their worst one-day losses since the COVID-19 pandemic.

The S&P 500 fell 4.85%, the Nasdaq dropped 6%, and the Dow Jones fell 4%.

It marks Nasdaq’s biggest daily percentage drop since March 2020 at the start of COVID, and the largest drop for the Dow Jones since June 2020.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The latest numbers on tariffs

‘Trust in President Trump’

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told CNN earlier in the day that Mr Trump was “doubling down on his proven economic formula from his first term”.

“To anyone on Wall Street this morning, I would say trust in President Trump,” she told the broadcaster, adding: “This is indeed a national emergency… and it’s about time we have a president who actually does something about it.”

Later, the US president told reporters as he left the White House that “I think it’s going very well,” adding: “The markets are going to boom, the stock is going to boom, the country is going to boom.”

He later said on Air Force One that the UK is “happy” with its tariff – the lowest possible levy of 10% – and added he would be open to negotiations if other countries “offer something phenomenal”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

How is the world reacting to Trump’s tariffs?

Economist warns of ‘spiral of doom’

The turbulence in the markets from Mr Trump’s tariffs “just left everybody in shock”, Garrett Melson, portfolio strategist at Natixis Investment Managers Solutions in Boston, told Reuters.

He added that the economy could go into recession as a result, saying that “a lot of the pain, will probably most acutely be felt in the US and that certainly would weigh on broader global growth as well”.

Meanwhile, chief investment officer at St James’s Place Justin Onuekwusi said that international retaliation is likely, even as “it’s clear countries will think about how to retaliate in a politically astute way”.

He warned: “Significant retaliation could lead to a tariff ‘spiral of doom’ that could be the growth shock that drags us into recession.”

Read more:
Do Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ tariff numbers add up?

Tariffs about something more than economics: power

It comes as the UK government published a long list of US products that could be subject to reciprocal tariffs – including golf clubs and golf balls.

Running to more than 400 pages, the list is part of a four-week-long consultation with British businesses and suggests whiskey, jeans, livestock, and chemical components.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said on Thursday that the US president had launched a “new era” for global trade and that the UK will respond with “cool and calm heads”.

It also comes as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced a 25% tariff on all American-imported vehicles that are not compliant with the US-Mexico-Canada trade deal.

He added: “The 80-year period when the United States embraced the mantle of global economic leadership, when it forged alliances rooted in trust and mutual respect and championed the free and open exchange of goods and services, is over. This is a tragedy.”

Continue Reading

World

Donald Trump announces sweeping global trade tariffs – including 10% on UK imports

Published

on

By

Donald Trump announces sweeping global trade tariffs - including 10% on UK imports

Donald Trump has announced a 10% trade tariff on all imports from the UK – as he unleashed sweeping tariffs across the globe.

Speaking at a White House event entitled “Make America Wealthy Again”, the president held up a chart detailing the worst offenders – which also showed the new tariffs the US would be imposing.

“This is Liberation Day,” he told a cheering audience of supporters, while hitting out at foreign “cheaters”.

Follow live: Trump tariffs latest

He claimed “trillions” of dollars from the “reciprocal” levies he was imposing on others’ trade barriers would provide relief for the US taxpayer and restore US jobs and factories.

Mr Trump said the US has been “looted, pillaged, raped, plundered” by other nations.

President Donald Trump holds a signed executive order during an event to announce new tariffs in the Rose Garden of the White House, Wednesday, April 2, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
Image:
Pic: AP

His first tariff announcement was a 25% duty on all car imports from midnight – 5am on Thursday, UK time.

Mr Trump confirmed the European Union would face a 20% reciprocal tariff on all other imports. China’s rate was set at 34%.

The UK’s rate of 10% was perhaps a shot across the bows over the country’s 20% VAT rate, though the president’s board suggested a 10% tariff imbalance between the two nations.

It was also confirmed that further US tariffs were planned on some individual sectors including semiconductors, pharmaceuticals and critical mineral imports.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump’s tariffs explained

The ramping up of duties promises to be painful for the global economy. Tariffs on steel and aluminium are already in effect.

The UK government signalled there would be no immediate retaliation.

Business and Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: “We will always act in the best interests of UK businesses and consumers. That’s why, throughout the last few weeks, the government has been fully focused on negotiating an economic deal with the United States that strengthens our existing fair and balanced trading relationship.

“The US is our closest ally, so our approach is to remain calm and committed to doing this deal, which we hope will mitigate the impact of what has been announced today.

“We have a range of tools at our disposal and we will not hesitate to act. We will continue to engage with UK businesses including on their assessment of the impact of any further steps we take.

“Nobody wants a trade war and our intention remains to secure a deal. But nothing is off the table and the government will do everything necessary to defend the UK’s national interest.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Who showed up for Trump’s tariff address?

The EU has pledged to retaliate, which is a problem for Northern Ireland.

Should that scenario play out, the region faces the prospect of rising prices because all its imports are tied to EU rules under post-Brexit trading arrangements.

It means US goods shipped to Northern Ireland would be subject to the EU’s reprisals.

The impact of a trade war would be expected to be widely negative, with tit-for-tat tariffs risking job losses, a ramping up of prices and cooling of global trade.

Research for the Institute for Public Policy Research has suggested more than 25,000 direct jobs in the UK car manufacturing industry alone could be at risk from the tariffs on car exports to the US.

The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) had said the tariff costs could not be absorbed by manufacturers and may lead to a review of output.

The tariffs now on UK exports pose a big risk to growth and the so-called headroom Chancellor Rachel Reeves was forced to restore to the public finances at the spring statement, risking further spending cuts or tax rises ahead to meet her fiscal rules.

Read more:
What do Trump’s tariffs mean for the UK?
The rewards and risks for US as trade war intensifies

A member of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), David Miles, told MPs on Tuesday that US tariffs at 20% or 25% maintained on the UK for five years would “knock out all the headroom the government currently has”.

But he added that a “very limited tariff war” that the UK stays out of could be “mildly positive”.

He said: “There’s a bit of trade that will get diverted to the UK, and some of the exports from China, for example, that would have gone to the US, they’ll be looking for a home for them in the rest of the world.

“And stuff would be available in the UK a bit cheaper than otherwise would have been. So there is one, not central scenario at all, which is very, very mildly potentially positive to the UK. All the other ones which involve the UK facing tariffs are negative, and they’re negative to very different extents.”

Continue Reading

Trending