PRITI Patel says "Rwanda is a safe country", and she wouldn’t lie. Would she?
Well, a court did rule the Home Secretary had not been straight about the accommodation in which she housed refugees.
She said Napier Barracks – where a Covid outbreak infected almost 200 people – had been “adapted in line with and in light of Public Health England guidance”. A judge found it had not.
But she wouldn’t lie again, would she?
She did deny bullying staff – only for an investigation to find that she had in fact done so.
READ MORE: Priti Patel wins court battle in bid to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda
Then, the statistics watchdog did find Patel had told fibs when she claimed crime was down – it was actually up overall.
She also got called out by the UN after claiming the organisation backed her Rwanda scheme. They don't.
But ignore all that. When Patel says that Rwanda is a “safe” country, we can believe what she says. Right?
Except the UK Government’s own website seems to contradict her.
On the foreign travel advice page for Rwanda, under “safety and security”, there are a few interesting points which give an insight into what Patel considers “safe”.
First, there’s the warning to “remain vigilant” in case of “grenade attacks”.
It says that “genocide memorial sites, markets, bus stops, and taxis” have been targets, and that “further indiscriminate attacks cannot be ruled out”. Very safe.
READ MORE: Scotland must make the Home Office's fascist Rwanda plan unworkable
Next, there are warnings about travelling to the south, west, or southwest of the country due to a risk of “armed incursions”.
In the west, the danger comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo, which the UK Government warns is “unstable, and conflict can flare up with little notice”.
It adds: “There have been incidents of violent clashes on the DRC-Rwanda border in recent years, and armed incursions into the southwest of Rwanda.”
The website further warns that, along the southern border with Burundi, there have been “allegations from both sides of cross-border raids targeting local inhabitants”.
On a less martial note, the Government page also states that “levels of health and safety in Rwanda are lower than in the UK”, adding: “There have been incidences of buildings and construction sites collapsing, causing deaths and serious injuries.”
It further adds that, due to “poor wiring and substandard electrical cables”, people should be careful when using electronics in case of starting a fire.
Away from the UK Government’s own website, The National’s own David Pratt highlights how Rwanda is known for having a track record of “transnational repression”.
He writes: “All the world over there is evidence of the regime conducting systematic assassinations, attempted killings, kidnappings and intimidation of Rwandan opposition leaders, human rights activists and journalists.”
“Most serious Africa watchers and experts know [Rwandan President Paul Kagame] to be a ruthless, self-serving control freak,” Pratt adds.
Sounds like a “safe” country. Unless Patel’s telling porkies.
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