PRITI Patel has accused her opponents of “xenophobia” over their criticisms of her plans to send refugees to Rwanda.
The Home Secretary faced accusations that the policy – which will see Britain exchange asylum seekers with the Central African countries for development funds – is “unworkable, unethical and extortionate”.
Defending the UK’s record on the treatment of refugees, Patel said: “This Government has done more than any other in recent history to support those fleeing persecution, conflict or instability.”
Stuart McDonald, the SNP’s home affairs spokesperson, asked Patel why women and children would fall within the scope of the policy after she refused to confirm exact details of who would be included.
READ MORE: Home Office refuses to rule out sending kids to Rwanda under new deal
She hit back by questioning McDonald's "tone" after he also raised concerns about the UK Government’s ability to ensure the safety of refugees after flying them thousands miles away.
And she accused some critics of adopting a “xenophobic” tone in their criticisms of the plans.
McDonald said: “Why aren’t we allowed to see the criteria for deciding who will be sent?
“How will she monitor their treatment? [The UK Government] has completely failed to stop abuses in UK detention centres, never mind centres that are 5000 miles away.
“This disastrous policy has nothing to do with the global migration crisis, it has everything to do with distracting from the PM’s political crises and it is absolutely sickening.”
She described his “latter comment” as “absolutely unacceptable”, claiming he had “done a great disservice, not just to this government and officials that have worked for more than nine months on this partnership but also to our counterparts in the world and Rwanda.”
She added: “Rwanda actually is home to resettling over 130,000 and they have done that successfully and if I may, I think your comments are a slur against the successful efforts of our partners in Rwanda.
“I think members should just listen to the undercurrent of their tone towards the country of Rwanda, which has done a great deal to provide safety and refuge and security and a new life to many refugees around the world.
“Rwanda is beholden to the same legal obligations as the United Kingdom on human rights and, if I may, I just want to make the point again; I think there is something really, really quite unpleasant about the undercurrent of the tone that is taken to the Rwandan policy.”
READ MORE: Tory minister's 'WiFi fails' amid Rwanda questioning on GMB
The Home Secretary faced fury in the Commons on Tuesday over the plans which were unveiled last week.
Labour’s shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper accused the Tories of obscuring the true costs of the scheme. She said: “There is no information from the Home Secretary about the costs today. Will she admit the £120 million she has announced doesn’t pay for a single person to be transferred.
“She hasn’t actually got an agreement on the price for each person. In fact, the £120m is the eyewatering price the Home Office is paying just for a press release.”
Cooper added: “So, what’s the rest of the cost? What is this year’s budget? How many people will it cover? The Home Office has briefed it might be £30,000 per person to cover up to three months’ accommodation, but that is already three times more than the ordinary cost of dealing with asylum cases in the UK. And her statement says she is going to provide five years of costs.”
Patel hit back at Labour’s criticism, saying it was Tony Blair’s government that gave them the powers on which the Rwanda plan is based.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel