Priti Patel could rip up the Tories’ own modern slavery laws to allow more removal flights to Rwanda, it emerged today.
The Home Secretary will appoint an independent reviewer of the system pioneered by her predecessor Theresa May, according to the Mail on Sunday.
When she launched the Modern Slavery Act in 2015, Mrs May said it was “the great human rights issue of our time” adding: “We will make it a national and international mission to rid our world of this barbaric evil.”
But Ms Patel is said to be angry that asylum seekers she wants to force to Rwanda under a new scheme are using it to block their departure.
A Whitehall source told the Mail on Sunday: “Child rapists, people who pose a threat to national security and illegal migrants who have travelled to the UK from safe countries have sought modern slavery referrals, which have prevented and delayed their removal or deportation.
“It is imperative that this system is fixed quickly, and for good.”
It comes as lawyers for refugees and migrants launch a Court of Appeal bid tomorrow to block Tuesday’s flight forcing 31 people to Rwanda.
A source at the Home Office - which defeated a High Court bid for an injunction on Friday - said the flight will leave “even if only one migrant is on the plane”.
And they questioned whether taxpayers would keep funding the UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, after the body fought the Home Office’s claims in the High Court.
The Home Office have not denied the sources’ claims this morning. A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are always looking at how our world leading modern slavery reforms are supporting those who need it most and ensuring vulnerable people are not being exploited.”
A hard-hitting advertising campaign will launch towards the end of this week despite Prince Charles reportedly branding the scheme “appalling” in private.
It is thought to include a photo of a dinghy approaching the white cliffs of Dover with the words: “Arrive illegally in the UK and you could be leaving for Rwanda.”
Cabinet minister Brandon Lewis told the BBC : "This is a policy that is going to deliver to ensure that modern slavery and these people smugglers know that their criminal methods will be broken down.
“We've got to do that in a proper, legal, managed way and people who are encouraging you to travel illegally are wrong, and we're going to break their business model."
But the PCS union said civil servants should be allowed not to work on the scheme until a later court hearing into whether it’s unlawful.
General secretary Mark Serwotka told Sky's Sophy Ridge on Sunday programme: "Imagine if you're a civil servant now in the Home Office.
“[You go] to work because you want to see a humane immigration system where people are treated fairly and we comply with our international obligations.
"Imagine if you're told to do something on Tuesday, that in July is subsequently found to be illegal. That would be an appalling situation.
“If Priti Patel had any respect, not just for the desperate people who come to this country, but for the workers she employs, she would not ask a single one of them to be part of any deportation of any asylum seeker, until at least these cases are heard in court for the full legality judgment, which will be in July."
Mr Serwotka - whose union is one of the groups taking legal action - said he hoped to win an injunction against Tuesday’s flight in the Court of Appeal tomorrow.
He added: "We're absolutely confident that in July, in line with what the UNHCR (UN Refugee Agency) said very graphically in court, we believe these proposals will be found to be unlawful."
The Home Office was accused of giving “misleading” information about the scheme in Friday’s High Court hearing.
Raza Husain QC, for the claimants, said a Home Office document was "replete with the suggestion that the UNHCR has given this plan a green light".
"Regrettably, the material in this application demonstrates that to be misleading," he added.
Laura Dubinsky QC for UNHCR said there had been "inaccuracies" in the way the agency's views had been described by the Home Office.
She told the court that the agency is concerned about the risk of "serious, irreparable harm" caused to refugees sent to Rwanda, adding the body "in no way endorses the UK-Rwandan arrangement".
"UNHCR is not involved in the UK-Rwanda arrangement, despite assertions to the contrary made by the Secretary of State," she later said.
