Home secretary vows to ‘fight vexatious modern slavery claims’ to stop deportation flights to France
Interior Minister Shabana Mahmood promised to fight with the asylum seekers who fought with the United Kingdom’s lifting with France within the scope of the “One In, One” agreement with France.
Ms. Mahmood promised that the exiles would still continue this week and called for a court decision to prevent an asylum seeker being “unbearable”.
After the Supreme Court made a last -minute precautionary decision to the 25 -year -old Eritrean man on Tuesday evening, he stopped the abolition of an early flight to Paris on Wednesday.
The worker is under labor pressure to show that he will work after leaving England without immigrants after the scheduled flights on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday.
Mahmood said that last -minute attempts to disappoint a lift are inert and I will fight with them in every step, ve he confirmed that the Ministry of the Interior would object to the temporary block of the Supreme Court.
The judge, who is still in custody, gave 14 days to challenge a home office decision, where he did not qualify for modern slavery support.
Adam said he was a victim of human trafficking in Libya and therefore had the right to help Britain under the national referral mechanism. The Ministry of Interior agreed that he could not follow the claim from France and was given time to challenge his negative decision.
However, Ms. Mahmood said: “The immigrants decided that they were a modern slave on the eve of their sudden abolition, they did not make such a claim before, and they mocked our laws and the generosity of this country”.
“I will fight to end the last minute claims. I will firmly defend the priorities of the British people in any court,” he added.
State Minister Liz Kendall said on Wednesday that “this is a person ve and insisted that“ it will not weaken the basis of this agreement ”.
“This decision is disappointing, but it will not prevent the rest of this agreement from continuing”.
However, workers’ deputy Nadia Whittome condemned the plan as a “a ridiculous policy that will be more at home in a reform manifest.” He said that the plan was “useless, cruel and unfair ..
“You can deport all the immigrants you want, but it will not improve people’s living standards,” he added.
Liverpool Riverside Labor Deputy Kim Johnson compared the scheme with Tories’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda: “Starmer’s ‘an outdoor, an exit’ agreement, morally and practically Rwand Mark Two.
“Worker reform cannot reform and not try,” he warned.
More immigrants would be lifted to France during Wednesday and the week, but the plan is now in danger to give details that the home office could be deported first.
A French Interior Department spokesman is still waiting for the first immigrants to come to France this week, and the first people will be sent to England on Saturday.
In accordance with Calais, new signs are placed on the place of asylum seekers that the new UK-France Treaty is in force.
British and French governments of the British and French governments warn that if you come to the UK by the small boat illegally, you are at risk of deportation and it will not be suitable for re -entering England or staying in France without legal rights ”.
Lachlan Macrae of Calais Food Collective group, which supports immigrants in Northern France with food and water, said: “Many people have certain conditions related to torture and trauma in other countries, which means that they will bring difficulties in court to deport. [messaging] It doesn’t affect people.
“Just like the Rwanda scheme, it causes fear and confusion. Every day people come and ask for the plan, this is a kind of armed uncertainty”.
The Welfare Council of Migrants is organizing a telephone and E -mail campaign against Air France, one of the carriers for exiles. In a briefing about the action, they say that people can communicate with the air and refuse to refuse to fly people who are deported to the company and the pilot.
Sile Reynolds, President of the Freedom of Freedom of Loyalty, said that the deportations of France refused to prove the chance to prove their vulnerability as a decision to delay a row of the elimination of a youth who survived the smuggling of the Supreme Court.
