Migrants refused asylum in the UK to be offered thousands of pounds to move to Rwanda – report
Migrants who have been refused asylum in the UK will be offered thousands of pounds to move to Rwanda under a new “voluntary” scheme drawn up by the government, according to reports.
The move, which is separate to the government’s plan to send to people to Rwanda to have their claims processed, has already been agreed with the east African country, The Times newspaper is reporting.
The new relocation scheme is designed to remove migrants who have no legal right to stay in the UK but cannot be returned to their home country.
The Home Office hasn’t yet confirmed the payment scheme, but has said it is “exploring voluntary relocations… to Rwanda”.
The Times reports it will be aimed at individuals who do not have an outstanding asylum claim and are in a position to be relocated swiftly to Rwanda, which the government deems a safe third nation.
Politics latest: Sunak says alleged Tory donor comments were ‘racist’
Immigration officials will reportedly approach migrants whose asylum applications have failed and encourage them to accept the money and relocate to Rwanda.
The scheme is said to be an extension of the existing Home Office voluntary returns scheme, under which migrants are offered financial assistance worth up to £3,000 to leave the UK for their country of origin.
Asylum seekers who refuse the financial incentive to move to Rwanda will be unable to officially work or claim benefits in the UK, The Times says.
In response to the report, a Home Office spokesperson said: “In the last year, 19,000 people were removed voluntarily from the UK and this is an important part of our efforts to tackle illegal migration.
“We are exploring voluntary relocations for those who have no right to be here, to Rwanda, who stand ready to accept people who wish to rebuild their lives and cannot stay in the UK.
“This is in addition to our Safety of Rwanda Bill and Treaty which, when passed, will ensure people who come to the UK illegally are removed to Rwanda.”
The government is understood to believe the voluntary scheme can be brought into effect quickly because it will draw on existing structures outlined by the deportation agreement already in place with Rwanda and existing voluntary returns processes.
However, the new Rwanda deal would reportedly mark the first time migrants will have been paid to leave the UK without going back to their country of origin.
Rishi Sunak’s pan to deport some asylum seekers to Rwanda is heading back to the Commons.
It comes as Prime Minister Rishi Sunak‘s legislation designed to revive his plan to deport some asylum seekers to Rwanda – the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill – heads back to the House of Commons.
The government will seek to overturn a string of amendments to the bill agreed by peers in the House of Lords.
Changes backed by the Lords include overturning the government’s bid to oust the courts from the deportation process.
The extension of the voluntary scheme raises further questions about the bill, which is intended to prevent continued legal challenges to the stalled deportation scheme after the Supreme Court ruled the plan was unlawful.
Labour accused ministers of having to resort “to paying people” to go Rwanda because they know their deportation scheme “has no chance of succeeding”.
Shadow immigration minister Stephen Kinnock MP said: “We know from the treaty that capacity in Rwanda is very limited, so ministers should now explain what this new idea means for the scheme as it was originally conceived, and they should also make clear how many people they expect to send on this basis, and what the cost will be.
“There have been so many confused briefings around the Rwanda policy that the public will be forgiven for treating this latest wheeze with a degree of scepticism.”
The prime minister had previously warned the House of Lords against frustrating “the will of the people” by hampering the passage of the bill, which has already been approved by MPs.
The Commons will get a chance to debate and vote on the amendments on 18 March.
Before US Election Day, Brian Armstrong said Coinbase was “prepared to work” with either a Kamala Harris or Donald Trump administration.
Politics
Row over how many farms will be affected by inheritance tax policy – as PM doubles down ahead of farmers protest
Sir Keir Starmer has insisted the “vast majority of farmers” will not be affected by changes to Inheritance Tax (IHT) ahead of a protest outside parliament on Tuesday.
It follows Chancellor Rachel Reeves announcing a 20% inheritance tax that will apply to farms worth more than £1m from April 2026, where they were previously exempt.
But the prime minister looked to quell fears as he resisted calls to change course.
Speaking from the G20 summit in Brazil, he said: “If you take a typical case of a couple wanting to pass a family farm down to one of their children, which would be a very typical example, with all of the thresholds in place, that’s £3m before any inheritance tax is paid.”
Politics latest: No 10 insists chancellor has been ‘straight’ about her CV
The comments come as thousands of farmers, including celebrity farmer Jeremy Clarkson, are due to descend on Whitehall on Tuesday to protest the change.
And 1,800 more will take part in a “mass lobby” where members of the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) will meet their MPs in parliament to urge them to ask Ms Reeves to reconsider the policy.
Speaking to broadcasters, Sir Keir insisted the government is supportive of farmers, pointing to a £5bn investment announced for them in the budget.
He said: “I’m confident that the vast majority of farms and farmers will not be affected at all by that aspect of the budget.
“They will be affected by the £5bn that we’re putting into farming. And I’m very happy to work with farmers on that.”
Sir Keir’s spokesman made a similar argument earlier on Monday, saying the government expects 73% of farms to not be affected by the change.
Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs Secretary Steve Reed said only about 500 out of the UK’s 209,000 farms would be affected, according to Treasury calculations.
However, that number has been questioned by several farming groups and the Conservatives.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Farming industry is feeling ‘betrayed’ – NFU boss
Government figures ‘misleading’
The NFU said the real number is about two-thirds, with its president Tom Bradshaw calling the government’s figures “misleading” and accusing it of not understanding the sector.
The Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said the policy could affect 70,000 farms.
Conservative shadow farming minister Robbie Moore accused the government last week of “regurgitating” figures that represent “past claimants of agricultural property relief, not combined with business property relief” because he said the Treasury does not have that data.
Read more:
Farmers warn of food price hikes due to inheritance tax policy
Minister downplays risk of empty shelves if farmers strike
Welsh farmers carried out a protest outside the Welsh Labour conference in Llandudno, North Wales, over the weekend
Agricultural property relief (APR) currently provides farmers 100% relief from paying inheritance tax on agricultural land or pasture used for rearing livestock or fish, and can include woodland and buildings, such as farmhouses, if they are necessary for that land to function.
Farmers can also claim business property relief (BPR), providing 50% or 100% relief on assets used by a trading business, which for farmers could include land, buildings, plant or machinery used by the business, farm shops and holiday cottages.
APR and BPR can often apply to the same asset, especially farmed land, but APR should be the priority, however BPR can be claimed in addition if APR does not cover the full value (e.g. if the land has development value above its agricultural value).
APR and BPR can apply to farmland, which the Conservatives say has been overlooked by the Treasury in compiling its impact figures. File pic: iStock
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Mr Moore said the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Treasury have disagreed on how many farms will be impacted “by as much as 40%” due to the lack of data on farmers using BPR.
Lib Dem MP Tim Farron said last week1,400 farmers in Cumbria, where he is an MP, will be affected and will not be able to afford to pay the tax as many are on less than the minimum wage despite being asset rich.
Politics
Cabinet split over assisted dying as Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson latest to reveal she will vote against bill
A split is emerging in the cabinet, with Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson revealing she will join several of her colleagues and vote against the bill to legalise assisted dying.
Ms Phillipson told Sky News she will vote against the proposed legislation at the end of this month, which would give terminally ill people with six months to live the option to end their lives.
She voted against assisted dying in 2015 and said: “I haven’t changed my mind.
“I continue to think about this deeply. But my position hasn’t changed since 2015.”
Politics latest: Starmer on Ukraine as he attends Rio G20
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Details of end of life bill released
MPs will be given a free vote on the bill, so they will not be told how to vote by their party.
The topic has seen a split in the cabinet – however, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has yet to reveal how he will vote on 29 November.
Ms Phillipson joins some other big names who have publicly said they are voting against the bill
These include Deputy PM Angela Rayner, Health Secretary Wes Streeting, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds.
Border security minister Angela Eagle is also voting against the bill.
Senior cabinet members voting in favour of assisted dying include Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, Science Secretary Peter Kyle, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn, Transport Secretary Louise Haigh and Welsh Secretary Jo Stevens.
The split over the issue is said to be causing friction within government, with Sir Keir rebuking the health secretary for repeatedly saying he is against the bill and for ordering officials to review the costs of implementing any changes in the law.
Read more:
What is in the assisted dying bill?
Why is assisted dying so controversial and where is it already legal?
Health Secretary Wes Streeting has called for a cost report into assisted dying. Pic: PA
Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates has been told Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s chief of staff, is concerned about the politics of the bill passing.
He is understood to be worried the issue will dominate the agenda next year and, while he is not taking a view on the bill, he can see it taking over the national conversation and distracting from core government priorities like the economy and borders.
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Details of the bill were published last week and include people wanting to end their life having to self-administer the medicine.
It would only be allowed for terminally ill people who have been given six months to live.
Two independent doctors would have to confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge would have to give their approval before it could go ahead.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports8 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Environment1 year agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway