The Home Office has set aside £700m for small boat arrivals each year until 2030, suggesting that even Rishi Sunak's Government doesn't have faith that its plan to stop the boats will work
The Government has repeatedly promised to stop the boats entirely
The Home Office has set aside £700m for small boat arrivals each year until 2030, suggesting that even Rishi Sunak's Government doesn't have faith that its plan to stop the boats will work.
Projections published last week by the Home Office, just as the Home Secretary travelled to Rwanda to sign a new migrant deal, show the department expects channel crossings to continue until 2030.
The Government has repeatedly said it plans to "stop the boats" entirely.
But the Home Office issued a tender notice for six to ten year contracts to manage "permanent" small boat reception facilities in Kent.
The notice was issued on December 4, just one day before the UK's new treaty with Rwanda was signed in an attempt to address Supreme Court concerns with the plan.
Asked whether the figures show that the Government doesn't have confidence in its own plan to stop the boats, a Home Office spokesperson said: “This is an ongoing procurement project therefore it would be inappropriate to comment.”
The services would cost £700m over the first six years - with contracts potentially being extended for a further four.
Officials have calculated these services would cost £700m for the first six years - and contracts could be extended by a further four.
If the annual costs remained the same, the government could end up spending £1.16bn over 10 years.
Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said: "This shows even the Home Office doesn't believe Rishi Sunak's Rwanda plan is going to work.
"This is total Tory chaos and it's letting the country down.
"Instead of sending nearly £300m of taxpayers money to Rwanda for a failing scheme, the Prime Minister should be using the money to stop the criminal smuggling gangs who are organising boat crossings in the first place."
The Government has said its new plan to send migrants to Rwanda will serve as a deterrent in order to ultimately stop migrants crossing the Channel.
But lawyers acting on behalf of right-wing Tories warned that the Bill provides a "partial and incomplete solution to the problem of legal chellenges", saying it does not "go far enough to deliver the policy as intended".
Lawyers acted on behalf of five groups of Conservative MPs - the European Research Group, the New Conservatives, the Common Sense Group, the Northern Research Group and the Conservative Growth Group.
The document, which lists 13 "limitations" of the legislation, warns the Bill "contains no restrictions on the bringing of legal challenges against removal to Rwanda based on grounds other than that Rwanda is not a safe country".
It also claims there is "nothing in the Bill which would prevent the UK courts from following or being influenced by a final ruling of the Strasbourg Court on a case where the Bill does not expressly preclude them from doing so".
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
Sunak has been warned that, once in Rwanda, an asylum seeker "will be able to appeal any previous decisions based on new evidence".
But the Government's own legal advice hit back at these concerns, warning that "completely blocking" legal challenges would be a "breach of international law" and "alien to UK's constitutional tradition of liberty and justice".
The guidance also notes that the UK maintained such rights "even in wartime".
