Connect with us

Published

on

The cost of the stalled Rwanda asylum scheme could balloon to half a billion pounds, plus hundreds of thousands more for each deportee, an investigation by the public spending watchdog found.

The Home Office has so far refused to say how much more money, on top of the £290m already confirmed, the UK has agreed to pay Kigali under the controversial plan.

Politics Live: Former Labour MP claims victory within minutes of polls closing in Rochdale

However, a National Audit Office (NAO) report has revealed millions more in spending including £11,000 for each migrant’s plane ticket.

Labour branded the figures “the national scandal the Tories have been trying to hide”.

The Rwanda policy was announced in April 2022 but no flights have taken off yet as the scheme has been mired in a series of legal challenges.

Despite this, the government has already paid the government in Kigali £220m under the Economic Transformation and Integration Fund designed to support Rwanda’s growth.

More on Migrant Crisis

It was also already known that an extra £50m was earmarked for the partnership for next year. But the NAO revealed the same sum will also be sent to Rwanda in 2025 and in 2026, taking the cost to £370m.

On top of that, once the first 300 migrants have been relocated, ministers have agreed to put another £120m into the fund, lifting the total to £490m.

In addition, an extra £20,000 will be paid to Rwanda for every asylum seeker relocated there.

The Home Office will also separately pay nearly £151,000 per person to cover asylum processing and integration costs, such as accommodation, food, healthcare and education, over five years if they stay in the country.

If they decide to leave, the UK would halt payments for that person, but would still give Rwanda a one-off £10,000 to help facilitate their departure.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Which other countries have immigration policies that mirror the Rwanda scheme?

The initial five-year deal runs to April 2027, with payments potentially continuing until 2033, the NAO said.

The watchdog investigated the costs after the chairs of the Public Accounts Committee and Home Affairs Committee (HAC) raised concerns about the lack of information available to parliament.

Dame Diana Johnson, the Labour chair of the HAC, called the figures “staggering” and said it was not clear how it would provide value for money.

The Rwanda policy is a key plank of Rishi Sunak’s plan to crackdown on illegal immigration as he believes it will be a deterrent to further Channel crossings – something refugee charities dispute.

It was dealt a blow in November when the Supreme Court ruled it unlawful.

The prime minister, who has staked his premiership on “stopping the boats”, is trying to revive the scheme by passing legislation deeming Rwanda a safe country and ratifying a new treaty with Kigali.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sunak warns Lords over Rwanda Bill

Read more:
What is the new Rwanda plan and why is it controversial?
UK-Rwanda deportation deal becomes a reality but questions remain over asylum-seekers’ safety

The Safety of Rwanda Bill is currently making its way through a House of Lords that is hostile to the plan.

Time is running out for flights to take off before the next general election, expected later this year.

Labour’s shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said: “This report reveals the national scandal the Tories have been trying to hide. Its shocking analysis shows the costs of the failed Rwanda farce are even higher than previously thought.

“In order to send less than 1% of UK asylum seekers to Rwanda on a few symbolic flights, the taxpayer will be forced to fork out over half a billion pounds – with no ability to recover any of the money already sent.”

yvette cooper
Image:
Yvette Cooper says Rishi Sunak must ‘account for Rwanda fiasco’

She added: “Rishi Sunak has staked his position on this scheme. He must account for this fiasco.”

Refugee Council chief executive Enver Solomon said: “These figures reveal the extortionate bill the taxpayer will have to pay the Rwandan government for an unworkable and inhumane scheme that will not deter people seeking protection on our shores.”

A Home Office spokesperson called the Rwanda partnership a “bold, long-term solution” to illegal migration.

They added: “Doing nothing is not without significant costs. Unless we act, the cost of housing asylum seekers is set to reach £11bn per year by 2026. Illegal migration costs lives and perpetuates human trafficking, and it is therefore right that we fund solutions to break this unsustainable cycle.

“We have a strong relationship with Rwanda and both sides remain absolutely determined to deliver on this partnership. Once the Safety of Rwanda Bill and Treaty are in place, we will focus on getting flights off the ground.”

Continue Reading

UK

Why seven household names – including Prince Harry – are suing one of Britain’s biggest media groups

Published

on

By

Why seven household names - including Prince Harry - are suing one of Britain's biggest media groups

Prince Harry and six other household names are suing the publishers of the Daily Mail newspaper over alleged unlawful information gathering dating back 30 years.

The case has been ongoing since 2022 and is just one of several Harry has filed against media organisations since 2019 over alleged breaches of privacy, unlawful practices and false stories.

Associated Newspapers (ANL) – which also publishes The Mail on Sunday and MailOnline – strongly denies any wrongdoing.

A full trial is not expected to start at London’s High Court until January, but a pre-trial hearing, which helps manage the case and resolve any outstanding issues, is set to take place today.

Here is everything you need to know about the case.

What’s alleged?

The alleged unlawful acts are said to have taken place from 1993 to 2011, including the publisher hiring private investigators to secretly place listening devices inside cars and homes and paying police officials for inside information.

When bringing the lawsuit in 2022, lawyers for the claimants said they had become aware of “highly distressing” evidence revealing they had been victims of “abhorrent criminal activity” and “gross breaches of privacy” by Associated Newspapers.

Associated Newspapers denies the allegations, describing them as “preposterous smears”, and claims the legal action is “a fishing expedition by [the] claimants and their lawyers”.

The accusations include:

• The hiring of private investigators to secretly place listening devices inside people’s cars and homes;

• The commissioning of individuals to surreptitiously listen into and record people’s live, private telephone calls while they were taking place;

• The payment of police officials, with corrupt links to private investigators, for inside, sensitive information;

• The impersonation of individuals to obtain medical information from private hospitals, clinics, and treatment centres by deception;

• The accessing of bank accounts, credit histories and financial transactions through illicit means and manipulation.

Pic: iStock
Image:
Pic: iStock

Who else is involved?

While Prince Harry is one of the key players, as a group litigation, he is not the only claimant.

The others include:

• Actress Elizabeth Hurley
• Actress Sadie Frost
• Sir Elton John and his husband, filmmaker David Furnish
• Baroness Doreen Lawrence, mother of Stephen Lawrence
• Former Liberal Democrat politician Sir Simon Hughes

Sadie Frost. Pic: PA
Image:
Sadie Frost. Pic: PA

Baroness Doreen Lawrence. Pic: AP
Image:
Baroness Doreen Lawrence. Pic: AP

They all allege they have been victims of “abhorrent criminal activity” and “gross breaches of privacy” by ANL.

David Sherborne is the lawyer representing all the claimants.

Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish (below). Pic: AP
Image:
Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish (below). Pic: AP

Pic: AP
Image:
Pic: AP

What happened in 2023?

During a preliminary hearing in March 2023, Judge Matthew Nicklin was tasked with ruling whether the case can proceed to trial.

ANL had asked for the case to be struck out entirely, arguing the legal challenges against it were brought “far too late”, but David Sherborne called for the publisher’s application to be dismissed.

Lawyers for the publishers said the claims fell outside the statute of limitations – a law indicating that privacy claims should be brought with six years – and the claimants should have known, or could have found out, they had a potential case before October 2016.

Prince Harry at the High Court in 2023
Image:
Prince Harry at the High Court in 2023

They also argued some aspects of the cases should be thrown out as they breach orders made by Lord Justice Leveson as part of his 2011 inquiry into media standards.

During the hearing, a number of the claimants attended the High Court, including Prince Harry, to the surprise of the British media.

Witness statements from all seven claimants were also released. The duke’s statement said he is bringing the claim “because I love my country” and remains “deeply concerned” by the “unchecked power, influence and criminality” of the publisher.

“If the most influential newspaper company can successfully evade justice, then in my opinion the whole country is doomed,” he said.

On 10 November 2023, Mr Justice Nicklin gave the go-ahead for the case to go to trial, saying ANL had “not been able to deliver a ‘knockout blow’ to the claims of any of these claimants”.

What’s happened since?

Earlier this year, lawyers for the claimants sought to amend their case to add a swathe of new allegations for the trial.

They argued that they should be allowed to rely on evidence that they said showed the Mail was involved in targeting Kate, the Princess of Wales.

However, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled this allegation was brought too late before trial.

In a further development in November, the High Court heard that a key witness in the case, private investigator Gavin Burrows, claimed his signature on a statement confirming alleged hacking had taken place, was forged.

Lawyer David Sherborne is representing all the claimants
Image:
Lawyer David Sherborne is representing all the claimants

In the statement from 2021, Mr Burrows allegedly claimed to have hacked voicemails, tapped landlines, and accessed financial and medical information at the request of a journalist at the Mail On Sunday.

The statement was important, as five of the seven claimants involved in the case told the court they embarked on legal action against ANL based on evidence apparently obtained by Mr Burrows.

Mr Burrows previously retracted his statement in 2023, but the court heard he reiterated the denial to ANL’s lawyers in September this year.

It is now up to the claimant’s lawyer Mr Sherborne to decide if he still wants to call Mr Burrows as a witness for the trial.

Mr Justice Nicklin previously said if Mr Burrows gave evidence that was inconsistent with the evidence they had obtained, then he could apply to treat him as “hostile”.

Could the case end before going to trial?

In short, yes.

During pre-trial reviews, cases can either be settled or dismissed from court in both civil and criminal cases, meaning no trial will take place.

This happened in Harry’s case against News Group Newspapers (NGN), which publishes The Sun. The duke made similar accusations about NGN, which involved unlawful information gathering by journalists and private investigators.

Before an up-to 10-week trial began earlier this year, it was announced both sides had “reached an agreement” and that NGN had offered an apology to Harry and would pay “substantial damages”.

The settlement was reported to be worth more than £10m, mostly in legal fees.

Another of Harry’s legal cases, this time against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) over accusations of historical phone hacking, did go to trial.

The trial saw Harry take to the witness box, making him the first senior royal to give evidence in a courtroom since the 19th century.

In December 2023, the Honourable Mr Justice Fancourt concluded that the duke’s phone had been hacked “to a modest extent” between 2003 and 2009, and 15 of 33 articles he complained about were the product of unlawful techniques.

He was awarded £140,600 in damages. During a further hearing in February 2024 a settlement was reached between Harry and MGN over the remaining parts of his claim.

If the ANL trial does go ahead early next year, it is unknown if Harry will travel to London to attend.

Continue Reading

UK

Families of women who died after violence demand reform

Published

on

By

Families of women who died after violence demand reform

Bereaved families of black, minorities and migrant women who died after suffering violence and abuse have called on the prime minister to help end femicide.

At a Downing Street vigil on International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, the group said urgent reforms to policing and sentencing are needed “to address systemic failures”.

Yasmin Javed, whose daughter Fawziyah Javed was killed after being pushed by her husband from Arthur’s Seat in Edinburgh, said authorities had ignored Fawziyah’s reports of abuse.

Fawziyah Javed died after being pushed by her husband from Arthur’s Seat in Edinburgh
Image:
Fawziyah Javed died after being pushed by her husband from Arthur’s Seat in Edinburgh

“It fell on deaf ears,” she told Sky News, explaining that Fawziyah, 31, who was pregnant when she died, had made complaints about her husband but had been murdered days before she was set to leave him.

“We’ve had our hearts ripped into millions of pieces. It’s not getting any easier, it’s getting more and more difficult.”

Kashif Anwar was convicted of Fawziyah’s murder and was jailed for at least 20 years in 2023.

Tuesday’s vigil highlighted key legislative amendments the families, led by campaign group Southall Black Sisters, are championing.

The amendments include Banaz’s Law, named after 20-year-old Banaz Mahmod, who was subjected to an horrific assault, strangled and stuffed in a suitcase by family members on the orders of her father.

The Downing Street vigil took place on International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women
Image:
The Downing Street vigil took place on International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women

The amendment seeks to explicitly recognise “honour-based” abuse as an aggravating factor in sentencing for relevant offences.

The families also want courts to impose sentences equivalent to murder for self-harm and suicides driven by domestic and “honour”-based abuse, and say the government must ensure all women have equal access to safety and support, regardless of immigration status.

Banaz Mahmod’s sister Bekhal, who testified against her relatives to help secure their conviction, said nearly two decades after the murder, efforts to protect women had not progressed.

Banaz Mahmod was killed on the orders of her father
Image:
Banaz Mahmod was killed on the orders of her father

Speaking from an undisclosed location in the witness protection scheme, she said the murder “happened in 2006, and we’re almost in 2026 – that’s 20 years later. Not much has changed and it’s very, very disappointing.

“What happened to Banaz has happened, but what we could do is prevent it from happening to other people. I don’t understand why much more hasn’t been done to better the situation for others.”

Continue Reading

UK

London: Man charged with murdering two women and raping third appears in court

Published

on

By

London: Man charged with murdering two women and raping third appears in court

A man charged with the murder of two women within five months of each other, and the rape of a third, has appeared in court.

Appearing at the Old Bailey via videolink on Wednesday, Simon Levy only spoke to confirm his name and was not asked to enter a plea to any of the charges.

Levy, 40, of Beaufoy Road, Tottenham, was charged in September with the murder of 39-year-old Sheryl Wilkins in Tottenham, north London, on 24 August.

While in custody, he was also charged with the murder of Carmenza Valencia-Trujillo, from Colombia, who died on the Aylesbury Estate, southeast London, in March.

Levy is alleged to have murdered Carmenza Valencia-Trujillo in March. Pic: Met Police
Image:
Levy is alleged to have murdered Carmenza Valencia-Trujillo in March. Pic: Met Police

Prosecutor Tom Little KC told the court that Ms Valencia-Trujillo was found in a block of flats that is “very largely disused” with few residents or passers-by except security guards.

He said: “The body of the deceased was found in the early evening of 17 March 2025 in a block of flats very largely disused, so it does not contain many residents nor many people passing by apart from the odd security officer who patrol the area for safety.”

It is alleged that he travelled to the area the day before and that he killed her during the course of a sexual encounter.

Levy was also charged with the murder of Sheryl Wilkins. Pic: Met Police
Image:
Levy was also charged with the murder of Sheryl Wilkins. Pic: Met Police

Levy was also accused of grievous bodily harm with intent, non-fatal strangulation and two counts of rape against a third woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, in Haringey, north London, on 21 January, police said.

The Met Police said on Monday that all three cases are now being treated as part of a single, joined investigation and a trial date has been set for June 2026 at the Old Bailey.

Read more from Sky News:
Paul Doyle in tears as he admits driving into Liverpool fans at parade
Man accused of trying to drown daughter-in-law released after plea deal

Judge Mark Lucraft KC remanded him in custody to appear at the Old Bailey for a plea and case management hearing on 23 February.

Continue Reading

Trending