HOME Secretary James Cleverly spent £165,000 flying out to Rwanda on a private jet to sign Rishi Sunak’s deportation deal, a fresh document has revealed.
The one-day round trip took place on December 4 following the Supreme Court’s finding that the east African nation was an “unsafe country”.
It is understood the flight took Cleverly, members of his private office, a small team of civil servants, a photographer and a BBC TV crew to the capital Kigali.
Cleverly was the third home secretary to travel to Rwanda to sign an agreement after Suella Braverman and Priti Patel.
READ MORE: Jeremy Corbyn reveals 'hope' to run against Labour at next election
The cost of charting a private jet was disclosed in a transparency document on Thursday and comes after the Government was slated for planning to spend £1.8m on each of the first 300 asylum seekers it plans to send to Rwanda.
The treaty signed by Cleverly established a new appeal body, to be made up of judges with asylum expertise from a range of countries, to hear individual cases.
At a press conference in Kigali, Cleverly insisted Rwanda was a safe country and said “we feel very strongly this treaty addresses all of the issues of their lordships in the supreme court”. He added this would be “reflected in domestic legislation soon”.
A spokesperson for the Rwandan government said at the time it had a “proven record” of offering a home to refugees, and the new treaty would “re-emphasise, in a binding manner, already existing commitments” on asylum seeker protection.
Asked about the flight, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Stopping the boats is one of our top priorities. The cost of the asylum system could reach up to £11bn a year by 2026, and we make no apologies for pursuing bold solutions like our partnership with Rwanda to stop the boats and save lives.
“All government spend goes through thorough due diligence to ensure best value for money.”
READ MORE: Reform UK sack candidate who said Scotland is a 'turd that won't flush'
The House of Lords inflicted seven defeats on the Government over its Rwanda bill earlier this week.
Peers voted by 271 to 228, majority 43, to press their demand that the legislation has “due regard” for domestic and international law.
On Thursday, former Conservative Cabinet minister Lord Forsyth responded to claims the Lords are responsible for “unnecessary” delay in the legislation.
In the chamber, he asked: “Has the minister seen the reports in the Times and Telegraph, and other newspapers, suggesting that this house has delayed the passage of the Rwanda bill unnecessarily, resulting in people being exposed to the dangers of the Channel?
“Will he take this opportunity to point out that this house was well prepared to pass the legislation back for consideration in the House of Commons before Easter and it is no fault of this house that the legislation has been delayed?
“And that this House has just been doing its job, which is asking the Commons to think again, and is not responsible for delaying the legislation?”
Home Office minister Lord Sharpe said: “I’m happy to reassure him that I have seen those reports and I can also reassure him that I passed that very message back before those newspapers published those reports.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel