TORY leadership candidate Robert Jenrick has said he hoped to revive the plan to deport migrants to Rwanda – as he claimed immigration had made the UK “less united”.
The former Home Office minister, widely seen as the frontrunner in the race to replace Rishi Sunak, also claimed he would seek to reduce the level of net migration – the number of people entering the country minus the number leaving – to less than 10,000 people per year.
Jenrick, who quit his job as immigration minister because he felt the Rwanda plan did not go far enough, said he believed it would work as a deterrent.
He also claimed that had Britain left the European Convention on Human Rights, deportation flights would have taken off and the Tories would have done a “a hell of a lot better” in the General Election where they were dealt a historic defeat.
Speaking to GB News about his proposals for Britain to leave the convention, Jenrick (below) said: “I cannot predict what that would have meant for the general election, but I think I can confidently say it would have been a hell of a lot better than it was.”
He added: “A party like ours has to stand for ending illegal migration and the only way to do that is to get rid of this arsenal of laws that are used by illegal migrants to frustrate their removal from our country.”
Speaking about the historically high levels of migration to Britain, Jenrick said: “That has put immense pressure on housing, on public services, it’s undercut the wages of British workers and it has made our country less united.
“You can’t successfully integrate 1.2 million people a year into a country as small as ours.”
READ MORE: Robert Jenrick defends UK special forces 'killing people' claim
Jenrick also argued that the NHS was not a “religion to be worshipped”, adding: “Treat it like a public service to be reformed.”
Elsewhere, Jenrick doubled down on his claims that UK “special forces are killing rather than capturing terrorists because lawyers will set them free under the European Court”.
They have been disputed by leadership rival Tom Tugendhat (above), a former intelligence officer in the British Army, who said earlier on that Jenrick’s statement “risks making life much more dangerous for our soldiers”.
He added: “I’m extremely concerned about the use of language that suggests that it is appropriate to resist arrest and not surrender to the British Armed Forces when you’re asked to do so.”
READ MORE: Scottish Tories will try to block debates on independence, says Russell Findlay
Asked about the claims, made in a campaign video shared on social media, Jenrick said: “Our very respected former colleague Ben Wallace, one of the best defence secretaries in modern times, used his first intervention after leaving office to make almost this very point.
“He said that he would think it was difficult for the UK, our armed forces, to conduct a similar operation to the one that the United States did to kill or capture Osama bin Laden.
“That’s wrong. I don’t want our human rights apparatus to be standing in the way of taking the right operational decisions for our national security and for protecting the lives of the brave men and women who serve in our special forces.”
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