Migration and Economic Development Partnership with Rwanda Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Home Office
Lord Murray of Blidworth Portrait Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

As we have seen from the judgment given by the court, there is nothing in principle unsafe about Rwanda, and few indeed will have reasons relating to them as to why Rwanda would be unsafe for them.

Lord Walney Portrait Lord Walney (CB)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

The Government have given at least initial costings to the Rwanda plan, as has been widely referenced in the House today. However, as far as I am aware, there has not been any costing at all of the suite of measures in the agreement with Albania last week—neither the policing measures nor the economic incentives to try to bind in the Albanian Government and deter people coming across. Can the Minister give costings now, or at least say which of these two schemes the Government anticipate being the greater burden to the taxpayer over the medium and long term?

Lord Murray of Blidworth Portrait Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The judgment about which these questions are being asked relates to those removed to Rwanda. Of the 40,000-odd people who have crossed the channel illegally during the past 12 months, 13,000 have been Albanians, and a large proportion of them have been single young men. It is the Government’s intention, following the recent agreement with the Government of Albania and decisions taken in such cases, to return them to Albania in the light of the assurances provided by the Albanian Government. Clearly it is cheaper to remove to Albania than it is to Rwanda. I should note that Albania is not only a NATO member but an EU accession country and a signatory to the European convention against trafficking. It is our hope to use both devices to bear down on illegal crossings of the channel.