Battlefield allies fleeing to UK must be exempt from Rwanda plan, ministers told

Migrant Channel crossing incidents

Soldiers from foreign countries who fight for the UK then flee to Britain for protection must be exempt from deportation to Rwanda, ministers have been told.

Lord Stirrup, the former chief of the defence staff, warned that the threat of deportation to Rwanda for those seeking asylum after helping British forces in battle, as has happened following the retreat from Afghanistan, may dissuade future foreign co-operation.

Other peers meanwhile urged ministers to exclude victims of modern slavery and human trafficking, and unaccompanied migrant children, from the remit of the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill.

Ex-armed forces chief Lord Stirrup urged peers to back an amendment to the Bill excluding those who have “put themselves in harm’s way to support His Majesty’s Armed Forces” as well as their families, from the deportation scheme.

The crossbench peer said: “If global Britain is to be effective in the world, it will need to form partnerships with and gain support from people in all sorts of different parts of that world, often in very difficult and dangerous parts of that world.

“In order to garner such support, it will need to be seen as trustworthy. How trustworthy does anybody think we will be seen if we have taken those who have already served us so faithfully in such difficult circumstances and sent them to Rwanda?

“So for those who are not swayed by a sense of moral obligation, I ask you to consider the future effectiveness and safety of the men and women of our armed forces who are sent out to do such difficult and dangerous things in these parts of the world.”

Labour former minister Lord Browne of Ladyton had claimed some who fought with UK forces in Afghanistan had “already been threatened with deportation to Rwanda”, sharing the story of an Afghan pilot who flew in 30 combat missions against the Taliban, but who found it impossible to access a safe route to asylum in the UK.

Lord Browne said: “The pilot’s application for Arap (Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy) originally was rejected, compelling the US department of state to reach out and consider granting asylum after the UK Home Office threatened deportation to Rwanda.

How trustworthy does anybody think (the UK) will be seen if we have taken those who have already served us so faithfully in such difficult circumstances and sent them to Rwanda?

Lord Stirrup

“The embarrassment of that is shocking, that the Americans were reaching out to our allies and those who worked with us to rescue them from what we should be moving to do.”

Former top judge Baroness Butler-Sloss meanwhile told ministers to exempt victims of modern slavery and human trafficking from removal to Rwanda.

Lady Butler-Sloss, the first female Lord Justice of Appeal, told the House of Lords: “The Modern Slavery Act is an outstanding piece of legislation by, for goodness sake, a Conservative government. We were all extremely proud of it, it was copied in Australia and in other countries.”

Noting that modern slavery protections no longer apply to “those trafficked into this country for exploitation here”, the crossbench peer argued this will have “a devastating effect on victims and also on the United Kingdom’s ability to deal with the perpetrators of this heinous crime”.

John Gummer, a Tory former environment secretary who sits in the House of Lords as Lord Deben, meanwhile told peers: “I must say I am a bit tired of having to remind this Government of what it means to be a Conservative. I have had to do that earlier on, on the single market, and I am now doing it on this.

“We have a reputation in the world because of our Modern Slavery Act. It was a brave and important thing to do. It was welcomed across the whole House.

A person who arrives in the UK illegally should not be able to make the UK their home and eventually settle here

Lord Sharpe

“I am proud that it was a Conservative government that did this, I am not proud that there is a Conservative government undermining that when we know that more than three quarters of those who appeal in these circumstances are found to be right in their appeal.”

Elsewhere in the debate, former diplomat and civil servant Lord Kerr of Kinlochard said Rwandans who seek asylum in the UK should not be sent back to Rwanda.

The crossbencher said if this was made possible by the Bill then “we ought to be ashamed of ourselves”.

Home Office minister Lord Sharpe of Epsom said the Government understood its “moral obligation” to help people who had supported the UK armed forces overseas, pointing to legal routes set up to help them, such as Arap.

But he added: “A person who arrives in the UK illegally should not be able to make the UK their home and eventually settle here.

“Regardless of the contribution they have previously made, a person who chooses to come to the UK illegally, particularly if they have a safe and legal route available, should be liable for removal to a safe country.”

From news to politics, travel to sport, culture to climate – The Independent has a host of free newsletters to suit your interests. To find the stories you want to read, and more, in your inbox, click here.