The government “doesn’t relish” deporting migrants to Rwanda but is being “forced” to pursue the controversial policy because of the rise in Channel crossings, a cabinet minister has claimed.
Oliver Dowden was asked by Sky’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday if he is “comfortable” with the idea of sending children and families to the east African nation if they arrive in the UK illegally.
He said: “I don’t relish any of this and I really wish we didn’t have to do it… we are being forced to do it.”
Listing the reasons why the government is being “forced” into the policy, Mr Dowden said: “With those children seeking to cross the Channel, I think of the danger that their lives are being put in, the evil people smugglers in whose hands they’re placed.
“And unless we are willing as a government and as a country to take tough action in relation to this, the numbers will keep on growing and more people’s lives will be put at risk, the lives of young children. And I’m simply not willing to allow that to happen.”
Labour’s Lisa Nandy asked what the government has been “forced to do” as she pointed out the £140m deportation scheme is yet to get off the ground since it was launched last April.
She said “everybody accepts” that the small boat crossings amount to a “crisis… but the question is what is the government actually doing so far?”
Ms Nandy said: “They’ve done several PR opportunities and photo ops. We’ve had £140m of cheques written to Rwanda in order to implement a scheme that hasn’t removed a single person. This is just more stunts from this government.”
The shadow housing secretary said the government should use the money that is being spent on the “unethical unworkable scheme” and put it into the National Crime Agency “to create a cross-border cell in order to disrupt the criminal gangs who are profiting from people’s misery”.
Advertisement
She insisted this was not a “magic wand solution”, saying “what it’s doing is the hard yards that this government hasn’t been prepared to do”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
The Rwanda scheme has been stalled by legal challenges since it was launched almost a year ago by Priti Patel, the home secretary at the time, but a government source has told Sky News UK officials are working towards getting the flights started “by the summer”.
Suella Braverman, the home secretary, signed an update to the migrants agreement during a visit to the African country this weekend, expanding its scope to “all categories of people who pass through safe countries and make illegal and dangerous journeys to the UK”.
A Home Office statement said this would allow ministers to deliver on its new Illegal Migration Bill as it would mean those coming to the UK illegally, who “cannot be returned to their home country”, will be “in scope to be relocated to Rwanda”.
The government source said it would “seal off all the loopholes” for those arriving illegally, including those claiming to be victims of modern slavery.
Image: Suella Braverman looked around housing for migrants in Rwanda and (below) toured a construction training academy
Image: The home secretary tours a new construction training academy in Kigali during her visit to Rwanda
Dowden defends ‘tone-deaf’ comment
Ms Braverman’s trip has been shrouded in controversy after some members of the media were excluded from going along.
She has also faced criticism for joking about the interior design while touring potential accommodation for asylum seekers.
Looking inside one of the properties, she said: “These houses are really beautiful, great quality, really welcoming and I really like your interior designer.
“I need some advice for myself.”
Asked if that was “tone-deaf”, Mr Dowden told Ridge: “Contrary to some of this characterisation of the policy, this is about making sure there is somewhere safe and secure for people to go to and actually the purpose of the Home Secretary’s visit was to further strengthen our relationships with Rwanda.”
The UN and human rights campaigners have warned that Rwanda is not a safe country to send asylum seekers, particularly those who are LGBT+.
The first deportation flight was stopped at the eleventh hour in June last year after an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights – and none have taken off since.
The scheme is seen as central to the Rishi Sunak’s plan to “stop the boats” – a promise he has staked his premiership on.
Earlier this month, the prime minister announced a package that will see a new detention centre established in France as well as the deployment of more French personnel and enhanced technology to patrol beaches in a shared effort to drive down illegal migration.
However, the EU and UN are among those who have warned a new bill to ban asylum applications if people enter the UK through unauthorised means violates international law.
In the long Gaza war, this is a significant moment.
For the people of Gaza, for the hostages and their families – this could be the moment it ends. But we have been here before, so many times.
The key question – will Hamas accept what Israel has agreed to: a 60-day ceasefire?
At the weekend, a source at the heart of the negotiations told me: “Both Hamas and Israel are refusing to budge from their position – Hamas wants the ceasefire to last until a permanent agreement is reached. Israel is opposed to this. At this point only President Trump can break this deadlock.”
The source added: “Unless Trump pushes, we are in a stalemate.”
The problem is that the announcement made now by Donald Trump – which is his social-media-summarised version of whatever Israel has actually agreed to – may just amount to Israel’s already-established position.
We don’t know the details and conditions attached to Israel’s proposals.
Would Israeli troops withdraw from Gaza? Totally? Or partially? How many Palestinian prisoners would they agree to release from Israel’s jails? And why only 60 days? Why not a total ceasefire? What are they asking of Hamas in return? We just don’t know the answers to any of these questions, except one.
We do know why Israel wants a 60-day ceasefire, not a permanent one. It’s all about domestic politics.
If Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was to agree now to a permanent ceasefire, the extreme right-wingers in his coalition would collapse his government.
Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich have both been clear about their desire for the war to continue. They hold the balance of power in Mr Netanyahu’s coalition.
If Mr Netanyahu instead agrees to just 60 days – which domestically he can sell as just a pause – then that may placate the extreme right-wingers for a few weeks until the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, is adjourned for the summer.
It is also no coincidence that the US president has called for Mr Netanyahu’s corruption trial to be scrapped.
Without the prospect of jail, Mr Netanyahu might be more willing to quit the war safe in the knowledge that focus will not shift immediately to his own political and legal vulnerability.
The Women’s Euros begin in Switzerland today – with extreme heat warnings in place.
Security measures have had to be relaxed by UEFA for the opening matches so fans can bring in water bottles.
Temperatures could be about 30C (86F) when the Swiss hosts open their campaign against Norway in Basel this evening.
Players have already seen the impact of heatwaves this summer at the men’s Club World Cup in the US.
Image: The Spain squad pauses for refreshments during a training session. Pic: AP
It is raising new concerns in the global players’ union about whether the stars of the sport are being protected in hot and humid conditions.
FIFPRO has asked FIFA to allow cooling breaks every 15 minutes rather than just in the 30th minute of each half.
There’s also a request for half-time to be extended from 15 to 20 minutes to help lower the core temperature of players.
More on Football
Related Topics:
FIFPRO’s medical director, Dr Vincent Gouttebarge, said: “There are some very challenging weather conditions that we anticipated a couple of weeks ago already, that was already communicated to FIFA.
“And I think the past few weeks were confirmation of all worries that the heat conditions will play a negative role for the performance and the health of the players.”
Football has seemed focused on players and fans baking in the Middle East – but scorching summers in Europe and the US are becoming increasingly problematic for sport.
Image: England are the tournament’s defending champions. Pic: AP
While climate change is a factor, the issue is not new and at the 1994 World Cup, players were steaming as temperatures rose in the US.
There is now more awareness of the need for mitigation measures among players and their international union.
FIFPRO feels football officials weren’t responsive when it asked for kick-off times to be moved from the fierce afternoon heat in the US for the first 32-team Club World Cup.
FIFA has to balance the needs of fans and broadcasters with welfare, with no desire to load all the matches in the same evening time slots.
Electric storms have also seen six games stopped, including a two-hour pause during a Chelsea game at the weekend.
This is the dress rehearsal for the World Cup next summer, which is mostly in the US.
Image: Players are also feeling the heat at the Club World Cup. Pic: AP
The use of more indoor, air conditioned stadiums should help.
There is no prospect of moving the World Cup to winter, as Qatar had to do in 2022.
And looking further ahead to this time in 2030, there will be World Cup matches in Spain, Portugal and Morocco. The temperatures this week have been hitting 40C (104F) in some host cities.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:08
Wildfires erupt in Italy and France amid heatwave
FIFA said in a statement to Sky News: “Heat conditions are a serious topic that affect football globally.
“At the FCWC some significant and progressive measures are being taken to protect the players from the heat. For instance, cooling breaks were implemented in 31 out of 54 matches so far.
“Discussions on how to deal with heat conditions need to take place collectively and FIFA stands ready to facilitate this dialogue, including through the Task Force on Player Welfare, and to receive constructive input from all stakeholders on how to further enhance heat management.
“In all of this, the protection of players must be at the centre.”
Around 14 million people could die across the world over the next five years because of cuts to the US Agency for International Development (USAID), researchers have warned.
Children under five are expected to make up around a third (4.5 million) of the mortalities, according to a study published in The Lancet medical journal.
Estimates showed that “unless the abrupt funding cuts announced and implemented in the first half of 2025 are reversed, a staggering number of avoidable deaths could occur by 2030”.
“Beyond causing millions of avoidable deaths – particularly among the most vulnerable – these cuts risk reversing decades of progress in health and socioeconomic development in LMICs [low and middle-income countries],” the report said.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:21
March: ‘We are going to lose children’: Fears over USAID cuts in Kenya
USAID programmes have prevented the deaths of more than 91 million people, around a third of them among children, the study suggests.
The agency’s work has been linked to a 65% fall in deaths from HIV/AIDS, or 25.5 million people.
Eight million deaths from malaria, more than half the total, around 11 million from diarrheal diseases and nearly five million from tuberculosis (TB), have also been prevented.
USAID has been vital in improving global health, “especially in LMICs, particularly African nations,” according to the report.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:24
Queer HIV activist on Trump and Musk’s USAID cuts
Established in 1961, the agency was tasked with providing humanitarian assistance and helping economic growth in developing countries, especially those deemed strategic to Washington.
But the Trump administration has made little secret of its antipathy towards the agency, which became an early victim of cuts carried out by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) – formerly led by Elon Musk – in what the US government said was part of a broader plan to remove wasteful spending.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:35
What is USAID?
In March, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said more than 80% of USAID schemes had been closed following a six-week review, leaving around 1,000 active.
The US is the world’s largest humanitarian aid donor, providing around $61bn (£44bn) in foreign assistance last year, according to government data, or at least 38% of the total, and USAID is the world’s leading donor for humanitarian and development aid, the report said.
Between 2017 and 2020, the agency responded to more than 240 natural disasters and crises worldwide – and in 2016 it sent food assistance to more than 53 million people across 47 countries.
The study assessed all-age and all-cause mortality rates in 133 countries and territories, including all those classified as low and middle-income, supported by USAID from 2001 to 2021.