TORY minister Chris Philp was left embarrassed on Question Time as he appeared to ask if Rwanda and Congo were different countries.
The policing minister’s blunder came on Thursday night’s Question Time as he was grilled on the Government’s deportation policy after it passed earlier this week.
An audience member questioned the minister on whether his family members from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) would be sent to Rwanda under the scheme had they been subject to the plans.
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf is not 'considering his position', sources insist
The person explained the volatile situation between DRC and Rwanda as he expressed concerns about the idea of Congolese people being sent to a hostile country.
Aid organisations are fearing a humanitarian crisis in the eastern Congo region, where the armed M23 group is in the midst of a new advance near the border with Rwanda.
The fighting has displaced 738,000 people in the first three months of this year alone, according to the UN aid agency OCHA.
Conservative minister Chris Philp here really struggling to grasp the fact that Rwanda and Congo are two entirely different countries. pic.twitter.com/S1I57Qk54Y
— Adam Bienkov (@AdamBienkov) April 25, 2024
Referring to the city of Goma in DRC, he asked: “Had my family members come from Goma on a crossing right now, would they then be sent back to the country that they’re supposedly warring with?”
However, the Tory MP seemed to find it difficult to understand that the two countries are separate.
Philip initially replied: “No, I think there’s an exclusion on people from Rwanda being sent to Rwanda.”
The audience member then interjected to explain the people he was talking about are “not from Rwanda, they’re from Congo”.
Looking puzzled, Philp then asked: “Well, Rwanda is a different country to Congo isn’t it?”
The question was met with visible bewilderment from the audience as well as shadow health secretary Wes Streeting.
Other onlookers were seen laughing while some simply shook their heads in disbelief at the comment.
Philp added: “There is a clause in the legislation that says if somebody would suffer seriously irreversible harm by being sent somewhere they wouldn’t be sent.”
READ MORE: Inside the room as Humza Yousaf tore up the Bute House Agreement
Many took to social media to criticise Philp for his question with one social media user describing it as “painful to watch”.
Another shared an image of the audience’s reaction to Philp and joked that it should be put “in the National Gallery”.
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