JEREMY Hunt has brushed off a "colourful" suggestion by a Tory party deputy chairman that asylum seekers could be held on Orkney if the UK Government's Rwanda plan fails.
Lee Anderson told GB News on Wednesday that asylum seekers should be sent to “some remote Scottish island” instead until their applications are processed.
He claimed Orkney would be "perfect" for people fleeing persecution.
His comments came after the Supreme Court ruled the current plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda is unlawful.
Asked about the remarks, Chancellor Hunt told Sky News on Thursday: “Lee will always have colourful suggestions, as he always does actually in British politics.
“But the fact of the matter is we will do what it takes to stop the boats, and I think we’ve had that clarity from Rishi Sunak.”
READ MORE: Kelly Given: This Tory government showed it does not care about the disabled
Anderson had said: “I know it’s a bit parky up there this time of year. But if people are genuinely escaping war or persecution then a nice Scottish island with a few outbuildings would be suitable.
“This is a beautiful country. Parts of Scotland are a ‘go to’ destination, the remote islands – I’d like to be able to afford a place up there.
“If we can get some accommodation up there, keep these people safe – these people want to be safe, they’re fleeing so-called persecution from these war-torn countries.
“If we can find an island in the Orkneys or up there that’s got no-one on there to start off with, put some decent accommodation on, then it’s job done.”
The comments drew criticism from Orkney and Shetland MP Alistair Carmichael, who said the idea is “not a serious proposition”.
The Liberal Democrat MP said: “I would be astonished if Lee Anderson could even find Orkney – or in his words ‘the Orkneys’ – on a map.
“His remarks show inhumanity towards desperate and vulnerable people – and disdain towards island communities to boot.
“Anderson has form for brainstorming Tory policy live on air. Obviously, this is a novel sort of brainstorming as it does not actually involve the engagement of a brain, but instead looks more like an exercise in corralling as many prejudices as possible into one space and calling it a policy.”
Carmichael added the comments are an attempt to “kick up dust and distract attention from the complete failure of this Government to manage our asylum and immigration system”.
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