Rishi Sunak has said he expects deportation flights to Rwanda to take off in the spring – despite reports that housing in the country intended for migrants has been sold off.
It came as the prime minister welcomed Rwandan president Paul Kagame to Number 10, where the pair reaffirmed their commitment to the controversial plans to send asylum seekers who arrive in the UK on small boats to the African nation.
In a statement following the talks, a Downing Street spokesperson said the duo discussed how the scheme would “break the business model of criminal gangs risking lives at sea” and said Mr Sunak had updated Mr Kagame on “the next stages of the legislation in parliament”.
“Both leaders looked forward to flights departing to Rwanda in the spring,” the spokesperson added.
Further questions over the viability of the scheme were raised this morning when The Times reported that most of the properties on a new housing estate in Rwanda that had been earmarked for migrants had been sold to local buyers.
The newspaper claimed that “sold” signs had appeared outside houses on the Bwiza Riverside estate in Kigali, the country’s capital, which was visited by Suella Braverman in March 2023 when she was home secretary.
Advertisement
It quoted developer ADHI-Rwanda as saying that 70% of the 163 affordable homes had now been taken by “private people who want to live in them”.
Ms Braverman, who was sacked from her post last year, told LBC that she was “disappointed to read that expectations have fallen and that the Rwandans are now selling off some of those properties”.
She added: “The way the plan should work – and the plan that I put forward to the prime minister – is that we need to have a large number of flights going to Rwanda on a regular basis, with a large number of passengers on them.
“I do believe that we may well get a flight off, a token flight with a low number of passengers on it, to Rwanda – that’s not deterrence.”
Rwanda government spokesperson Yolande Makolo denied the claims and said: ”It is simply not true that 70% of the houses are sold.
“Regardless, Bwiza Riverside Estate is just one of the housing options where migrants will live alongside Rwandans. None of the assigned housing estates were ever meant to be only for migrants. The idea is to integrate migrants into Rwandan communities, not create migrant ghettos.”
Stephen Kinnock, Labour’s shadow immigration minister, said: “The half a billion-pound Rwanda scheme is a failing farce, which will only cover less than one per cent of asylum arrivals.
“Now it seems there will be even less capacity to house those that are removed. The Tories’ so-called plan is unravelling by the day and taxpayers are footing the bill.”
A Home Office spokesperson said: “As the government of Rwanda have made repeatedly clear, they stand ready to host thousands of migrants under the partnership.
“The scheme is uncapped and provisions are in place to provide accommodation as required. We remain focussed on getting flights off the ground as soon as possible.”
The government’s Rwanda bill is due to be put before the Commons next week when MPs return from the Easter recess – and as migrants continue to cross the Channel in small boats. More than 80 made the journey on Monday.
The crypto industry has seen a significant shift toward regulatory compliance since its early days, according to James Smith, co-founder of Elliptic, a crypto compliance firm established in 2013.
“In the early days, only a few companies approached compliance in a serious way,” Smith told Cointelegraph at the Token2049 event. “Coinbase was our first customer — they knew from the start that they wanted to build their business that way. But for most others, it just wasn’t a major priority.”
Elliptic co-founder James Smith at Token2049. Source: Cointelegraph
That began to shift as regulators, including those in New York State, took a more active interest in the crypto industry. The involvement of traditional financial institutions like Fidelity and DBS Bank also contributed, as they entered the space with established compliance expectations from traditional finance services.
Fidelity, for instance, offered its first crypto service for customers in 2019, while the Asian giant DBS created a digital exchange for accredited and institutional investors in 2020.
“We’ve seen a big change in the last couple of years. Exchanges on the global map all care about compliance now, because they want to be part of a global ecosystem,” Smith said.
Crypto exchanges and peer-to-peer protocols remain the industry’s key compliance targets. For authorities, these firms are seen as critical choke points where Anti-Money Laundering and broader financial surveillance controls take effect. At the same time, they’re frequent candidates for sophisticated hacks and laundering operations, as seen in the Lazarus Group’s tactics.
The latest example comes from the Bybit hack, where the Lazarus Group engaged in a sophisticated money laundering scheme to funnel funds. The hackers quickly swapped low-liquidity tokens for Ether (ETH), then swapped them for Bitcoin (BTC) using no-KYC (Know Your Customer) decentralized exchanges.
“They went through some no KYC exchanges, which probably shouldn’t exist, but also through a decentralized protocol where there was lots of liquidity provision that enabled them to get it into Bitcoin,” Smith said, adding that “we’re making it too easy for them as an industry.”
Smith also noted that even after firms flagged the funds as stolen, users continued to trade them through decentralized platforms. “Why was there so much liquidity available to help launder this money?” he said, arguing that those providing liquidity to such protocols should be subject to basic checks on the source and destination of funds. “Go and look at who’s making money. And that’s the first place to start putting some controls.”
The UK has joined US forces in attacking a Houthi target in Yemen for the first time since Donald Trump was re-elected.
The Ministry of Defence (MoD) confirmed the strikes took place on Tuesday as part of the government’s response to Houthi attacks on international shipping in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden.
The ministry said careful intelligence analysis identified a cluster of buildings used by the Houthis to manufacture the sort of drones used to attack ships, located 15 miles south of the capital Sanaa.
RAF Typhoon FGR4s conducted strikes on several buildings using Paveway IV precision-guided bombs.
The planes had air refuelling support from Voyager tankers.
The ministry said the strike was conducted after dark to reduce the likelihood of civilians being in the area.
All the aircraft returned safely.
Image: John Healey. Pic: Reuters
Defence Secretary John Healey said: “This government will always act in the interests of our national and economic security.
“Royal Air Force Typhoons have successfully conducted strikes against a Houthi military target in Yemen and all UK aircraft and personnel have returned safely to base.
“We conducted these strikes, supported by the US, to degrade Houthi capabilities and prevent further attacks against UK and international shipping.”
Houthis a ‘persistent threat’ to ‘freedom of navigation’
Mr Healey said Houthi activities in the Red Sea are a “persistent threat” to “freedom of navigation”.
“A 55% drop in shipping through the Red Sea has already cost billions, fuelling regional instability and risking economic security for families in the UK,” he said.
“The government is steadfast in our commitment to reinforcing global stability and protecting British working people. I am proud of the dedication and professionalism shown by the service men and women involved in this operation.”
Follow The World
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
The group began launching attacks on shipping routes in November 2023 saying they were in solidarity with Palestinians over Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Will MPs get a vote on a trade deal with Donald Trump?
It used to be Labour policy, though Sir Keir Starmer didn’t sound keen on the idea at Prime Minister’s Questions.
The PM was challenged, first by Lib Dem MP Clive Jones, who wants a guarantee that parliament has the final say on any trade deal, including one with the US.
“This idea is not new,” said Clive, who used to be a director of various toy companies, and was president, chairman and director of the British Toy and Hobby Association, no less.
“It’s exactly what Labour promised to do in an official policy paper put forward in 2021, so I am asking this government to keep their promise,” he continued.
And, toying with the PM, he complained: “Currently, members of parliament have no vote or voice on trade deals.”
In reply, Sir Keir gave one of those non-answers we’re becoming used to at PMQs, saying rather tetchily: “As he knows, parliament has a well-established role in scrutinising and ratifying trade deals.”
More on Keir Starmer
Related Topics:
Later, Sir Ed Davey had a go. “Will the government give MPs a vote on the floor of the House on any deal he agrees with President Trump? Yes or no?” he asked.
He fared no better. Sir Keir said again: “If it is secured, it will go through the known procedures for this House.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:25
Chancellor’s trade deal red lines explained
So what are parliament’s “well-established role” and “the known procedures”? And what exactly did Labour promise in opposition back in 2021?
The 2021 promise was, in fact, one of those worthy pledges parties make in opposition and then either conveniently forget about or water down when they’re in government. U-turn if you want to.
The policy paper referred to by Mr Jones was: “Labour’s trade policy: putting workers first” – published in September 2021 by Emily Thornberry when she was shadow international trade secretary.
The secretary of state at the time was none other than Liz Truss. Whatever happened to her? Come to think of it, whatever happened to Emily Thornberry?
Back then idealistic Emily declared in her policy paper: “We will reform the parliamentary scrutiny of trade agreements…
“So that MPs have a guaranteed right to debate the proposed negotiating objectives for future trade deals, and a guaranteed vote on the resulting agreements…”
A guaranteed vote. Couldn’t be clearer. And there was more from Emily.
“…with sufficient time set aside for detailed scrutiny both of the draft treaty texts and of accompanying expert analysis on the full range of implications, including for workers’ rights.”
Sufficient time for detailed scrutiny. Again, couldn’t be clearer.
Image: Starmer was pushed on the deal at PMQs. Pic: PA
Then came a section headed: Parliamentary Scrutiny of Trade Deals.
“The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRAG) dictates that international treaties (including trade agreements) must be laid before parliament for a period of 21 sitting days before they can become law,” we were told back then.
“At present, a treaty can only be challenged and (temporarily) rejected by means of an opposition day debate, if one is granted by the government within that time.
“The CRAG legislation was agreed by parliament before Brexit was on the horizon. Its procedures for the ratification of trade treaties, which were then negotiated and agreed at EU level, were given no consideration during the passage of the Act, and no one envisaged that they would become the mechanism for parliamentary scrutiny of the government’s post-Brexit trade deals…
“Despite the flagrant evidence of the inadequacy of the CRAG Act to allow proper oversight of trade deals, the government repeatedly blocked numerous cross-party proposals to improve the processes for parliamentary scrutiny and approval during passage of the 2021 Trade Act.
“A future Labour government will return to those proposals, and learn from best practice in other legislatures, to ensure that elected MPs have all the time, information and opportunity they need to debate and vote on the UK’s trade deals, both before negotiations begin and after they conclude.”
So what’s changed from the heady days of Liz Truss as trade secretary and Labour’s bold pledges in opposition? Labour’s in government now, that’s what. Hence the U-turn, it seems.
Parliament’s role may be, as Sir Keir told MPs, “well-established”. But that, according to opponents, is the problem. It’s contrary to what Labour promised in opposition.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Sir Ed hit back at the PM: “I’m very disappointed in that reply. There was no ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response. We do want a vote, and we will keep pressing him and his government on that.”
And true to their word, Mr Jones and another Lib Dem MP, Richard Foord, have already tabled private member’s bills demanding a final say on any trade deal with President Trump.
Watch this space. And also watch out for Labour MPs also backing demands for a Commons vote on a Trump trade deal before long.