Labour would keep housing asylum seekers on barges – as Bibby Stockholm scheme to start ‘in coming days’
The Labour Party has said it would have “no choice” but to continue housing asylum seekers on barges and ex-military bases if it forms the next government.
Shadow immigration minister Stephen Kinnock said Labour would “inherit a mess” from the Conservatives and that it would have to “deal with the infrastructure that we have”.
Speaking to Sky News, Mr Kinnock said Labour would try to move asylum seekers out of hotels, barges and military camps as “quickly as possible”.
But he added: “The reality is, on day one of a Labour government, we have to deal with the infrastructure that we have in the complete, chaotic, shambolic mess that the Conservative government will have left us.”
Pressed on whether that meant Labour would still use barges, he said: “We will be left with no choice but to deal with the mess that we inherit.”
Mr Kinnock’s admission comes as the two parties trade blows over the small boat crisis in the Channel and as asylum seekers prepare to arrive on the controversial Bibby Stockholm barge in Dorset “in the coming days”.
Sky News reported earlier this week that the first people were due to arrive on the vessel on Monday – from an original date of last week – following a series of delays around fire safety and working practices.
But asked about their impending arrival, immigration minister Robert Jenrick declined to give a date and said it would happen “in the coming days”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Inside the Bibby Stockholm barge
The minister told Sky News the Home Office did not “routinely” provide dates for arrivals, citing “security reasons” – despite the previous briefings.
“We do care about the security of the individuals concerned and our staff and so we don’t routinely give out those dates, but it will be soon,” he said.
“We expect it to be in the coming days.”
Asked if the barge was safe to be used, Mr Jenrick replied: “I can absolutely assure you that this is a safe facility.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Huge concerns’ over safety of migrant barge
“And remember, this is something that’s been used before by other governments, by oil and gas workers. If it’s good enough for them, I’m pretty sure it’s good enough for the migrants.”
Mr Kinnock said he was “personally deeply unhappy” at the prospect of continuing to use the Bibby Stockholm, adding it was “the last thing that we would want to be doing”.
“The hotels are costing the British taxpayer £6m a day – that is money that could be channelled into far more useful causes in terms of our schools, our hospitals, helping to grow our economy.”
His rhetoric about the use of temporary accommodation for asylum seekers marks a change in tone from what Labour has previously said about the issue.
How long can Labour use ‘Conservative legacy’ line?
Housing migrants on barges looks set to be UK immigration policy no matter who you vote for.
Despite how much it might get under Labour’s skin, the opposition has admitted it will continue to house migrants on barges and in hotels and military accommodation until it can get the asylum backlog under control.
Labour says this is their way of being realistic and honest with the public about the reality of the “mess” they say they will inherit from the Tories were they to win the next general election.
But this could be a hint of what we can expect from a Labour government on a range of policy areas.
Trying to lower expectations way ahead of a general election, the Labour Party will be concerned it could be judged for its predecessor’s sins if it fails to get a grip quickly on the people’s priorities.
As we saw from the fallout from Sir Keir Starmer’s refusal to scrap the two child benefit cap – a policy members of his own shadow cabinet have called “heinous” – Labour’s biggest challenge will be justifying keeping policies they have previously railed against.
But how long can they use that line for?
At some point the public will begin to hold them accountable for the nation’s woes, irrespective of the Conservative Party’s legacy.
The shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, has previously indicated she would not be able to immediately shut down the sites but was not explicit about what Labour would do if in power.
This weekend has seen a war of words escalate between the two parties over the small boats crisis.
Home Secretary Suella Braveman accused Sir Keir Starmer in the Sunday Express of trying to “sabotage” the government’s plans with its links to charities and lawyers who oppose the scheme to send asylum seekers to Rwanda – a policy that is currently held up in the courts.
She said the Labour leader was “secretly delighted at his web of cronies’ schemes to block our plans to stop the boats”.
“He’s in this for political point scoring and doesn’t care about what’s good for the country or the British people,” she said.
Meanwhile, Labour has accused the government of “cooking the books” on the asylum backlog by “artificially removing” people from it to give the illusion of progress.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Tories ‘cooking the books’ on asylum backlog
The party claims there are around 6,000 missing asylum applications.
“If somebody misses one appointment, they’re immediately classified as withdrawn,” Mr Kinnock said. “It doesn’t mean that they’ve been processed either.
“It just puts people into limbo and effectively then people are just slipping into the underground economy. The government’s got no idea where they are and what they’re doing, and that is the opposite of the right way to run our asylum system.”
Mr Jenrick said the Home Office was in fact taking a “robust approach” to the backlog and that asylum was a “privilege”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Asylum is a privilege’
“If you abuse it, you should be treated appropriately,” he continued.
Read more:
Solicitors firms shut down after investigation into fake asylum claims
Social media giants to crack down on posts encouraging migrants to make journey
“If somebody doesn’t turn up to an interview or isn’t compliant with the conditions of their asylum bail, then we withdraw their case and we pass the file to immigration enforcement, who will then prepare to remove that individual.
“We don’t give people lots of second and third chances in that respect.
“I think what Labour, as far as I can tell, are suggesting is that we should keep offering people asylum over and over again, even if they don’t turn up to interviews – that’s wrong.
“If somebody doesn’t turn up, if they’re not compliant, then they should be removed from the country and their asylum claim withdrawn.”
The last blast furnaces left operating in Britain could see their fate sealed within days, after their Chinese owners took the decision to cut off the crucial supply of ingredients keeping them running.
Jingye, the owner of British Steel in Scunthorpe, has, according to union representatives, cancelled future orders for the iron ore, coal and other raw materials needed to keep the furnaces running.
The upshot is that they may have to close next month – even sooner than the earliest date suggested for its closure.
Read more: Thousands of jobs at risk as British Steel consults unions over closure
The fate of the blast furnaces – the last two domestic sources of virgin steel, made from iron ore rather than recycled – is likely to be determined in a matter of days, with the Department for Business and Trade now actively pondering nationalisation.
The upshot is that even as Britain contends with a trade war across the Atlantic, it is now working against the clock to secure the future of steelmaking at Scunthorpe.
The talks between the government and Jingye broke down last week after the Chinese company, which bought British Steel out of receivership in 2020, rejected a £500m offer of public money to replace the existing furnaces with electric arc furnaces.
The sum is the same one it offered to Tata Steel, which has shut down the other remaining UK blast furnaces in Port Talbot and is planning to build electric furnaces – which have far lower carbon emissions.
These steel workers could soon be out of work
However, the owners argue that the amount is too little to justify extra investment at Scunthorpe, and said last week they were now consulting on the date of shutting both the blast furnaces and the attached steelworks.
Since British Steel is the main provider of steel rails to Network Rail – as well as other construction steels available from only a few sites in the world – the closure would leave the UK more reliant on imports for critical infrastructure sites.
However, since the site belongs to its Chinese owners, a decision to nationalise the site would involve radical steps government officials are wary of taking.
They also fear leaving taxpayers exposed to a potentially loss-making business for the long run.
The dilemma has been heightened by the sharp turn in geopolitical sentiment following Donald Trump’s return to the White House.
The incipient trade war and threatened cut in American support to Europe have sparked fresh calls for countries to act urgently to secure their own supplies of critical materials, especially those used for defence and infrastructure.
Read more:
Car manufacturers fined £461m for collusion
There were no winners from Trump’s tariff gameshow
Gareth Stace, head of UK Steel, the industry lobby group, said: “Talks seem to have broken down between government and British Steel.
“My advice to government is: please, Jonathan Reynolds, Business Secretary, get back round that negotiating table, thrash out a deal, and if a deal can’t be found in the next few days, then I fear for the very future of the sector, but also here for Scunthorpe steelworks.”
British Steel declined to comment.
UK
Prince Andrew’s Pitch@Palace branded ‘crude attempt to enrich himself’ as Chinese spy documents set to be released
Prince Andrew’s efforts to make money from his Pitch@Palace project have been branded as a “crude attempt to enrich himself” at the expense of “unsuspecting tech founders”, as new documents may shed more light on what he and his team have been attempting to sell.
Today is the deadline for documents to be released relating to Prince Andrew‘s former senior adviser Dominic Hampshire and his interactions with the alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo.
In February, an immigration tribunal heard how the intelligence services had contacted Mr Hampshire about Mr Yang back in 2022. Mr Yang helped set up Pitch@Palace China, a branch of the duke’s scheme to help young entrepreneurs.
The alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo, has links with Prince Andrew
Yang Tengbo. Pic: Pitch@Palace
Judges banned Mr Yang from the UK, saying his association with a senior royal had made Prince Andrew “vulnerable” and posed a threat to national security. Mr Yang challenged that decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).
Since that hearing, media organisations have applied for certain documents relating to the case and Mr Hampshire’s support for Mr Yang to be made public. SIAC agreed to release some information of public interest. It is hoped they may include more details on deals that he was trying to do on behalf of Prince Andrew.
So what do we know about potential deals for Pitch@Palace so far?
In February, Sky News confirmed that palace officials had a meeting last summer with tech funding company StartupBootcamp to discuss a potential tie-up between them and Prince Andrew relating to his Pitch@Palace project.
The palace wasn’t involved in the fine details of a deal but wanted guarantees to make sure it wouldn’t impact the Royal Family in the future. Sky News understands from one source that the price being discussed for Pitch was around £750,000 – there are, however, reports that a deal may have stalled.
Photos we found on the Chinese Chamber of Commerce website show an event held in Asia between StartupBootcamp and Innovate Global, believed to be an offshoot of Pitch.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Who is alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo?
Documents, released in relation to the investigations into Mr Tengbo, have also shown how much the duke has always seen Pitch as a way of potentially making money. One document from 21 August 2021 clearly states “the duke needed money at the time, and saw the relationships with China through Pitch as one possible source of funding”.
But Prince Andrew’s apparent intention to use Pitch to make money has led to concerns about whether he is unfairly using the contacts and information he gained when he was a working royal.
Norman Baker, former MP and author of books on royal finances, believes it is “a crude attempt to enrich himself” and goes against what the tech entrepreneurs thought they were signing up for.
Read more:
Who is Yang Tenbo?
Virginia Giuffre says she has days to live
Emails between Andrew and Epstein revealed
He told Sky News: “The data given by these business people was given on the basis it was an official operation and not something for Prince Andrew, and so in my view, Prince Andrew had no right legally or morally to take the data which has been collected, a huge amount of data, and sell it…
“And quite clearly if you’re going to sell it off to StartupBootcamp, that is not what people had in mind. The entrepreneurs who joined Pitch@Palace did not do so to enrich Prince Andrew,” he said.
Rich Wilson was one tech entrepreneur who was approached at the start of Pitch@Palace to sign up, but he stepped away when he spotted a clause in the contract saying they’d be entitled to 2% equity in any funding he secured.
He feels Prince Andrew is continuing to use those he made a show of supporting.
He said: “It makes me feel sick. I think it’s terrible – that he is continuing to exploit unsuspecting tech founders in this way. A lot of them, I’m quite grey and old in the tooth now, I saw it coming, but clearly most didn’t. And a lot of them were quite young.
“It’ll be their first venture and you’re learning on the trot, so to speak. So to take advantage of people in such a major way – that’s an awful, sickening thing to do.”
We approached StartupBootcamp who said they had no comment to make, and the Duke of York’s office did not respond.
With reports that a deal may have stalled, it could be a big setback for the duke – especially with questions still about how he’ll continue to pay for his home on the Windsor estate now that the King no longer gives him financial support.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports12 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
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
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway