Suella Braverman claims that the UK’s new asylum plan will “stop people jumping the queue” to live there.
The British public “have had enough,” the home secretary told the BBC, of migrants arriving in small boats.
She was defending new legislation that aims to get rid of all migrants who cross the Channel illegally.
Yvette Cooper, a member of Labour, said that ministers had made the situation “even more chaotic.”
Anyone found to have entered the country illegally will not only be expelled from the United Kingdom within 28 days under the new plans that were announced on Tuesday, but they will also be prevented from returning to the country or applying for British citizenship in the future.
Those who arrive in small boats would either be taken back to their home nation or relocated to another “safe third country,” such as Rwanda.
Watch live: Sunak will be asked about the plan for migrants at PMQs. When asked about the new policy and where the migrants would go, Ms. Braverman said that she expected at least 40,000 people to cross the Channel this year, but that 80,000 people were a possibility.
Ms. Braverman stated that individuals who arrive in the UK by boat “jumped the queue,” despite the fact that their claims are not processed any more quickly than those of other asylum seekers and frequently require more than six months to receive a decision.
She stated that the deal the government made to send migrants from the UK to Rwanda was “uncapped,” and that it could take thousands of people.
She stated, “If we need it, there is considerable capacity for people to be relocated there and live safe and secure lives.”
She stated that the United Kingdom also intended to increase its capacity for detention, but that the new law would prevent people from crossing the border in the first place.
“If you look at other nations, like Australia, once they were able to move people away from the territory of Australia, they actually saw a huge drop in the number of people making the journey,”
However, no one has been sent to Rwanda since the announcement of plans in April to send some UK asylum seekers there, and human rights groups are still suing to stop the plans.
Will this bill for migrant workers become law?
Sunak declares that he is willing to fight against migrant boats. Charity: Unworkable plan to ban migrants from the Channel. How is the UK preventing Channel crossings?
“The problems even worse, and make it more chaotic,” according to Labour’s Yvette Cooper, “more lives put at risk.”
She stated to Today that there were no signed return agreements, which would result in tens of thousands of individuals staying in hotels and accommodations for asylum seekers.
Ms. Cooper also said that ministers’ language was “irresponsible.” She argued that they had focused on “rhetoric” and “gimmicks.”
When asked what Labour would do, she stated that they agreed to “stop the boats” but would approach the issue in a different way by establishing a new cross-border police unit to pursue gangs, overhauling the asylum system, and seeking new agreements with Europe to return people.
The actions have been deemed “very concerning” by the refugee agency of the United Nations, and even those who have a compelling claim would be denied entry.
Vicky Tennant, the UNHCR representative in the UK, told BBC Newsnight that the measure would violate international law.
The 1951 Refugee Convention is a multilateral treaty that defines who is a refugee and the responsibilities of signatories to protect them.
In a letter to Conservative lawmakers, Ms. Braverman stated that the legislation is likely to be challenged in court and that there is “more than a 50% chance” that it is incompatible with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
She stated to BBC Breakfast that her measures were “compassionate, proportionate, and legal.”
She stated that ministers believed their plans were within the bounds of legal obligations, despite their desire to test those bounds.
She stated to the Today program, “We are confident that we are complying with the law, domestic and international.” However, we are also testing novel and innovative legal arguments and pushing the envelope.
