DOWNING Street has refused to rule out using Scottish islands as locations for new centres for the asylum seekers to be held while their applications to stay in the UK are processed.
It comes after it was revealed that Priti Patel instructed officials to work up plans that could see that such facilities established in Ascension Island, 4000 miles from the UK in the South Atlantic.
Asked about the plans today, a Downing Street spokesman refused to rule out basing the centres on Scottish islands.
He said: "But what we are looking to do is ensuring that we provide protection for those who need it. We do need to prevent abuse of the system, whereby gangs are charging people significant amounts of money to try to get to the United Kingdom.
"I think it is important that people are deterred from making life-threatening journeys, and that they claim asylum in the first safe country which they reach."
Asked if the UK was considering an Australian-style system where asylum seekers do not reach the country at all before their claims are processed, he said: "As part of the work that we are conducting on preventing abuse and criminality, we have been looking at what a whole host of other countries do, in order to inform a plan for the United Kingdom."
The spokesman was then asked if the government could use "a Scottish Island or somewhere in the channel" instead of a remote British overseas territory.
He did not rule out the prospect, instead saying there was "nothing more to add" at this stage of the preparations.
It emerged late last night that the Home Secretary Patel ordered work on how other countries dealt with what Tory ministers have called “illegal” migration — including the approach in Australia, which runs several offshore asylum facilities.
"We have been looking at how other countries have been dealing with this issue,” said one well-placed individual told the Financial Times.
“We have been scoping everything. No decisions have been made by ministers.”
Ascension Island, used as a staging post to supply and defend the Falkland Islands, has an RAF base and a population of less than 1,000.
The Home Secretary’s officials also looked at the possibility of building a unit on St Helena, part of the same island group.
Australia has used offshore processing and detention centres for asylum seekers since the late 1980s.
The proposal is further evidence of the influence of Tony Abbott’s ideas on the Johnson government. The former Australian Prime Minister, who is known for his anti-immigration stance, was appointed as a trade adviser to the Johnson government and recently met with Patel.
The SNP has said the Tory Government’s treatment of asylum seekers is “utterly toxic and inhumane”.
Stuart McDonald, the party's spokesman on immigration, asylum and border control, said the UK’s asylum system was broken beyond repair - and Scotland could build a fairer system as an independent country.
“The Tory Government’s treatment of migrants and asylum seekers is utterly toxic and inhumane," he said.
“The fact that the UK Government even considered shipping refugees thousands of miles to remote volcanic islands in the South Atlantic, like some sort of modern day penal colony, brings shame on the UK and typifies Westminster’s hostile approach to migrants and asylum seekers.
“The UK’s asylum system is broken beyond repair and completely out of step with the values of equality, community, justice and human rights. Scotland can do so much better by building a fairer system as an independent country.
“As toxic Tory Brexit Britain diverges ever further from Scotland’s values, it is no wonder that the growing majority of people in Scotland want to build a fairer future with independence.”
A Home Office official said: “The UK has a long and proud history of offering refuge to those who need protection. Tens of thousands of people have rebuilt their lives in the UK and we will continue to provide safe and legal routes in the future.
“As ministers have said we are developing plans to reform policies and laws around illegal migration and asylum to ensure we are able to provide protection to those who need it, while preventing abuse of the system and the criminality associated with it.”
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