Sending Migrants to Rwanda Costs More Than Keeping Them in the UK
According to the government, the cost of sending a migrant to a “safer” country like Rwanda can be £63,000 higher than keeping them in the UK. The British parliament is currently conducting an analysis of the economic impact of the law on illegal immigration, which has revealed that the expense of sending one person amounts to £169,000 (over 250 million Frw).
However, authorities might not agree to the £106,000 (£160 million) cost of settling migrants in England. The government argues that sending migrants to other locations would create intimidation, dissuading individuals from attempting to enter the country without proper documentation.
While the Home Secretary’s office maintains that there is no cost for individuals fearing illegal entry, there remains uncertainty about the level of threat posed by this untested policy. The agency also acknowledges the unreliability of the gap between the cost of repatriating a migrant and keeping them in the UK, attributing this to rising house prices.
Presently, Rwanda is the sole country that has agreed to accept immigrants from the UK, although the implementation process has not yet commenced. Additionally, besides settlement, the policy offers medical and other benefits for UK residents.
The government claims that this policy would deter and prevent 37% of illegal immigrants from entering the UK, with no additional costs incurred. The policy specifically targets those who arrive in the UK by small boats across the Channel/La Manche and subsequently claim asylum. The plan is to arrest and send them to Rwanda or another designated “safe” country.
To send one person to Rwanda or another country, the total cost includes approximately £105,000 (about 160 Frw million) paid to the receiving nation, as well as £22,000 (about 35 Frw million) for flights and accompanying the individual. Estimates indicate that each trip would accommodate 50 individuals, although some trips may carry fewer people.
It is crucial to note that the aforementioned costs are merely a comparison and do not reflect the actual agreement with Rwanda, a country known for its robust economy.
Opposition parties in the UK have dismissed the analysis as “ridiculous” and raised concerns about the government’s lack of awareness regarding the scheme’s full cost. Yvette Cooper, the minister overseeing the administration, suggests that the “real cost” could be higher, as the government fails to account for prolonged detention periods.
Defending the policy, Administration Minister Suella Braverman argues that doing nothing is not an option. She emphasizes that operations encouraging people to risk their lives and pay smugglers to enter the UK illegally burden the British taxpayer.
Currently, the UK spends £6 million per day on housing asylum seekers in hotels. Last year alone, over 45,700 individuals illegally crossed the Channel in small boats. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has made it a top priority to curtail such activities and prevent unauthorized entries.
Although Rwanda has agreed to accept immigrants from the UK, the implementation process has yet to commence. In December 2022, the High Court of England deemed the government’s plan legal, but an ongoing appeal could potentially reverse this decision. The bill on illegal immigrants still needs approval from the National Assembly, where it faces significant opposition and the possibility of being defeated in court before becoming law.
Critics argue that the project lacks consistency and violates international law.
Source: BBC
