Priti Patel was warned evidence behind Rwanda plan ‘highly uncertain’, as Home Office concerns made public
The top civil servant at the Home Office warned Priti Patel the evidence behind her plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda in order to deter people making the hazardous Channel crossing was “highly uncertain”.
It was revealed on Friday the home secretary was forced to issue a rare “ministerial directive” — the second at the Home Office since 1990 — in order to press ahead with the policy after objections were raised by the permanent secretary.
But details of the concerns were not made public until Saturday evening when the Home Office published correspondence between the official, Matthew Rycroft, and Ms Patel, dated 13 April — just two days before the initial £120 million deal with Rwanda was unveiled.
In his letter to the home secretary, Mr Rycroft said he was “satisfied myself that it is regular, proper and feasible for this policy to proceed”, as he cited the intention to prevent loss of life in the Channel and maintain “public trust and confidence in border controls”.
However, he stressed: “This advice highlights the uncertainty surrounding the value for money of this proposal. I recognise that, despite the high cost of this policy, there are potentially significant savings to be realised from deterring people entering the UK illegally.
“Value for money of the policy is dependent on it being effective as a deterrent. Evidence of a deterrent effect is highly uncertain and cannot be quantified with sufficient certainty to provide me with the necessary level of assurance over value for money.”
Requiring the home secretary’s “written instruction to proceed”, he added: “I do not believe sufficient evidence can be obtained to demonstrate that the policy will have a deterrent effect significant enough to make the policy value for money.
“This does not mean that the MEDP [Migration and Economic Development Partnership] cannot have the appropriate deterrent effect; just that it there is not sufficient evidence for me to conclude that it will.”
In her same-day response, Ms Patel said that “without actions, costs will continue to rise, lives will continue to be lost” and claimed Home Office modelling forecast showed the number of small boat Channel crossing are “expected to rise again this summer”.
The cabinet minister said: “It would therefore be imprudent in my view, as Home Secretary, to allow the absence of quantifiable and dynamic modelling — which is inevitable when developing a response to global crises influenced by so many geopolitical factors such as climate change, war and conflict — to delay delivery of a policy that we believe will reduce illegal migration, save lives, and ultimately break the business model of the smuggling gangs.”
The publication of the correspondence also came as the head of the Church of England, archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, described the government’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda as the “opposite of the nature of God” in a scathing intervention.
In his Easter sermon, Mr Welby said: “It cannot carry the weight of our national responsibility as a country formed by Christian values, because sub-contracting out our responsibilities, even to a country that seeks to do well like Rwanda, is the opposite of the nature of God who himself took responsibility for our failures.”
A Home Office spokesperson said: “The UK has a proud history of supporting those in need of protection and our resettlement programmes have provided safe and legal routes to better futures for hundreds of thousands of people across the globe.
“However, the world is facing a global migration crisis on an unprecedented scale and change is needed to prevent vile people smugglers putting people’s lives at risk and to fix the broken global asylum system.
“Rwanda is a fundamentally safe and secure country with a track record of supporting asylum seekers. Under this agreement, they will process claims in accordance with the UN Refugee Convention, national and international human rights laws.”
