Bibby Stockholm: MP demands safety reports on asylum barge as it nears Dorset dock
A Tory MP has demanded to see safety reports for a barge that the government plans to use to house asylum seekers.
The Bibby Stockholm – which will accommodate 500 people waiting for decisions on their applications – departed from Cornwall today to head to its new dock at Portland Port in Dorset.
But Chris Loder, who represents West Dorset, claimed the figure was double the capacity the barge had been designed to hold.
Mr Loder has called on the home secretary to “stop” the vessel or provide the assessments that show it is “safe to cope with double the weight that it was designed to bear”.
Politics live: Labour mayor quits party as he slams Starmer
Government wins latest battle on migration bill
The government has been seeking out new accommodation for asylum seekers, including those who cross the Channel in small boats, claiming the hotel bill to house them has hit £6m a day.
As well as the barge, it has taken over former military bases, and reports have even suggested large marquees could be used.
But ministers have faced a backlash from local residents, councils and MPs if their areas have been chosen for the new sites.
Previously Richard Drax MP, a Conservative who represents South Dorset (including Portland), threatened the government with legal action over the barge.
Mr Loder, who has also spoken out against the Bibby Stockholm coming to his county, has now put pen to paper, writing to Home Secretary Suella Braverman and transport minister Baroness Vere with his concerns over the safety of the barge.
Dining facilities onboard the Bibby Stockholm
“For months, I have been asking for sight of the safety risk assessments that should have been done to allow the Bibby Stockholm to be used in Portland Harbour with 500 people on board whilst it was designed for 250,” he wrote.
“The Bibby Stockholm has now left Falmouth Dock. But visibility or assurances that adequate safety risk assessments have been completed have not been received.”
The MP also claimed that following a call with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, it was “clear they have also not undertaken that work, which we would typically expect them to do for a flagged vessel on water – which is what the Bibby Stockholm is”.
Mr Loder added: “I am writing to you this evening to ask that you either stop the Bibby Stockholm or that you provide the necessary safety risk assessments that confirm this vessel is safe to cope with double the weight that it was designed to bear.”
There are also bedrooms onboard.
The move of the three-storey vessel is already a month behind schedule, after Ms Braverman told MPs it would be in Portland within a fortnight on 5 June.
The 222-bedroom vessel contains “basic” accommodation, with healthcare provision, catering facilities and 24/7 security, at a reported cost of £20,000 a day, the Home Office said back in May.
Dorset Council has been given £2m in a funding package to meet the cost of providing services to residents.
In a statement in response to Mr Loder’s concerns, the Home Office said: “We can confirm that Bibby Stockholm is now on its way to Portland Port.
“Using vessels as alternative accommodation, like our European neighbours are already doing, will be better value for British taxpayers and more manageable for communities than costly hotels.
“We continue to work extremely closely with local councils and key partners to prepare for arrival of asylum seekers later this month and minimise disruption for local residents including through substantial financial support.”
Strategy’s Michael Saylor and BitMine’s Tom Lee are among 18 industry leaders who will look at ways to pass the BITCOIN Act and enable budget-neutral ways to buy Bitcoin.
The Fellowship PAC, launched in August, said it had “over $100 million” from unnamed sources to support the White House’s digital asset strategy.
Politics
Starmer was aware of the risks of appointing the ‘Prince of Darkness’ as his man in Washington – to an extent
It was a prescient and – as it turned out – incredibly optimistic sign off from Peter Mandelson after eight years as Chancellor of Manchester Metropolitan University.
“I hope I survive in my next job for at least half that period”, the Financial Times reported him as saying – with a smile.
As something of a serial sackee from government posts, we know Sir Keir Starmer was, to an extent, aware of the risks of appointing the ‘Prince of Darkness’ as his man in Washington.
But in his first interview since he gave the ambassador his marching orders, the prime minister said if he had “known then what I know now” then he would not have given him the job.
For many Labour MPs, this will do little to answer questions about the slips in political judgement that led Downing Street down this disastrous alleyway.
Like the rest of the world, Sir Keir Starmer did know of Lord Mandelson’s friendship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein when he sent him to Washington.
The business secretary spelt out the reasoning for that over the weekend saying that the government judged it “worth the risk”.
Keir Starmer welcomes Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte to Downing Street.
Pic: PA
This is somewhat problematic.
As you now have a government which – after being elected on the promise to restore high standards – appears to be admitting that previous indiscretions can be overlooked if the cause is important enough.
Package that up with other scandals that have resulted in departures – Louise Haigh, Tulip Siddiq, Angela Rayner – and you start to get a stink that becomes hard to shift.
But more than that, the events of the last week again demonstrate an apparent lack of ability in government to see round corners and deal with crises before they start knocking lumps out of the Prime Minister.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Had I known then, what I know now, I’d have never appointed him’ Starmer said.
Remember, for many the cardinal sin here was not necessarily the original appointment of Mandelson (while eyebrows were raised at the time, there was nowhere near the scale of outrage we’ve had in the last week with many career diplomats even agreeing the with logic of the choice) but the fact that Sir Keir walked into PMQs and gave the ambassador his full throated backing when it was becoming clear to many around Westminster that he simply wouldn’t be able to stay in post.
The explanation from Downing Street is essentially that a process was playing out, and you shouldn’t sack an ambassador based on a media enquiry alone.
But good process doesn’t always align with good politics.
Something this barrister-turned-politician may now be finding out the hard way.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment11 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024