UK government weighs up alternatives if Rwanda scheme is ruled unlawful by Supreme Court
Ministers are considering sending asylum seekers to Ascension Island while their claims are processed in a “radical Plan B” should the Rwanda scheme be blocked again or scrapped altogether.
The mooted plan to send asylum seekers to the British overseas territory is “in its very early stages”. But it is reportedly being considered as a “fallback” alongside five other countries – all believed to be in Africa – if the government’s Rwanda scheme is ruled to be unlawful by the Supreme Court, said the Daily Mail.
- SEE MORE Why the UK chose Rwanda to process asylum seekers
- SEE MORE Will Rishi Sunak stem the tide of small boats?
- SEE MORE The cost of housing asylum seekers examined
Speaking to Times Radio, Home Office minister Sarah Dines said her department was looking at contingency plans should the Supreme Court rule against deporting migrants to Rwanda. Dines said that the government is “focused” on the Rwanda scheme as it is “pretty confident” it is a lawful policy, but confirmed that the government was looking at “additional measures” should the scheme fail.
Ascension Island is reportedly being considered due to its status as a British overseas territory. The thinking is that as the island is under British control, that would remove some of the legal difficulties in sending asylum seekers to a foreign state, said LBC.
In 2020, while home secretary, Priti Patel briefly considered building an asylum processing centre on Ascension Island, but the idea was quickly scrapped, reported the Financial Times.
Harry Cole, The Sun’s political editor, said in a social media post that the Home Office sought advice on using Ascension Island since the change of government in October last year, but was told the plan was “unworkable”. Cole said that while the plan had “[n]ot formally been ruled out at ministerial level” it was essentially “in the bin”.
“A cynic would suggest they are happy to let the hollow threat run,” added Cole.
But if the island was used, there would be serious logistical difficulties to consider. The “blackened, mainly unlovely lump of volcanic rock” has a population of just 806 people and “no hospital”, said Neil Darbyshire for Mail Online. There is also a question of what would happen to asylum seekers whose claims failed, with the nearest country 1,000 miles away.
