STOP THE BOATS - A SOLUTION

This morning I listened to Suella Braverman being interviewed by Nick Robinson on the Today program. She was just as arrogant as ever and obsessed with her Stop the Boats solution of sending people to Rwanda, and barely answered any direct question. She also exhibited a serious lack of understanding when it comes to the law, which not surprising in her case, being a barrister who was shunned by colleagues for her lack of knowledge. Her continued reference to promises to the British people which must be kept, as if that was the prime concern of the British people. It is only her concern that appears to be of prime importance, no one else’s. She is apparently of the belief that instant deportation to Rwanda will act as a deterrent and stop people from making further attempts to reach the United Kingdom across the channel in a boat. To do that she is willing to sacrifice any idea of legal and humanitarian safeguards or civil liberties this country has for several centuries tied into its common law. 

What I do not understand is her idea of deterrence in the case for Rwanda. That people will be so terrified of being sent to Rwanda is what drives her thinking. At the same time she is desperate to classify Rwanda as a safe place to be sent to, where refugees will be given a proper place to stay, access to lawyers and all the good things that a safe and secure democracy founded on freedom can provide. They will be well looked after and Rwanda is happy to comply with this arrangement.  If it is so great, why would anyone be deterred from going there. It sounds like the ideal place to start a new life.

I would have thought the best thing to stop the dinghies would be to supply safer transportation across the channel, straight to an airport, show them the Welcome to Rwanda Brochures and send them on their way with a cash bonus of £20,000 to help them get settled once they arrive. Better yet, just fly them straight from the nearest airport in France.

Calais Airport

Given that some 27,284 people have travelled across the channel this year. That would represent something in the region of £545,680,000. This is one third of the two years rent the government has spent our money for the unused Bibby Stockholm barge. The whole of that sum could account for 70,000 refugees to get them started in Rwanda, and that’s just a one off payment not a continuous rental. I would have thought it made much greater economic sense to sell the country as THE place to be. If you’re not in Rwanda you’re nowhere. What could be a simpler solution, and you don’t even need to pass new legislation. Don’t just book it, Thomas Cook it. Now who would have thought of that?