Alternative plans, allegedly put forward by Priti Patel, have explored housing asylum seekers in the overseas territories of Ascension and St Helena. If true, it would have obvious human rights repercussions, notably restriction of liberty and undoubtedly many more.
ANTI-MIGRANT SENTIMENTS GROWING IN THE GOVERNMENT
The government appear to have been waging a war on asylum seekers in recent weeks.
There have been over 32,000 asylum applications between June 2019 and June 2020. On asylum seekers arriving on boats and dinghies, Priti Patel said that she was ‘working to make this route unviable.’ The UK Home Office have recently repeatedly attacked ‘activist lawyers,’ releasing videos discussing how our regulations – put in place to protect vulnerable people – are “open to abuse” and have compromised deportations.
Reports have suggested that the government have been working on ‘detailed plans’ for weeks. The idea reportedly was inspired by the Australian system – a system heavily criticised by the UN and many human rights organisations. Downing Street have allegedly asked the Foreign Office for advice ‘on possible options for negotiating an offshore asylum processing facility similar to the Australian model.’ Allegedly, the Foreign Office were unsupportive of such plans – the reason for their reluctance is unknown, though it may be financial. The Australian model costs AY$13bn per year, which is the equivalent of about £7.2bn, and 12 people have died in such detention centres.
HUMAN RIGHTS TRAVESTY
The UN refugee agency representative to the UK, Rossella Pagliuchi-Lor, stated that the proposal would breach the UK’s obligations to asylum seekers, and damage relations with other countries. This is consistent with the views of Behrouz Boochani, a Kurdish journalist, author and former detainee in one of the Australian detention centres. He warned that this approach damaged democracy in Australia and by implementing these measures, ‘you’re damaging the values and principles of your country.’
The Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman denounced some of the ideas, without stipulating which, claiming that ‘there are significant number of them [being reported] that I really don’t recognise.’ Recognition of any of them, however, is detrimental to a democratic state. To carry out any of the governments’ proposals – laughable as some of them are, like the wave machine proposal – would be to fundamentally undermine the basic human rights of people we are supposedly protecting. The gravity of the situation has been picked up by many – Nicola Sturgeon tweeted that she would strongly oppose ‘any proposal to treat human beings like cattle in a holding pen.’
It is put forward, therefore, that there must be a way that is more humane and less expensive, to help the migrants seeking refuge in our country. Asylum seekers are only provided with just over £5 per day and accommodation – usually in a hostel – if they are eligible for Asylum Support. This is a meagre cost when compared to the costs of creating and maintaining the ‘hostile environment.’
The government have reportedly been exploring how several other countries deal with migration. We can only hope that our government will choose a compassionate method that can benefit all parties, seeing as this one appears to benefit none.
Natalya is a third year Law student at the University of Manchester. Her goal after university is to become a solicitor, where she hopes to continue helping to bring human rights issues to light. While at university, she is working with the Innocence Project to appeal miscarriages of justice and will be working with the Legal Advice Centre in the coming year.