‘Use foreign aid budget to help illegal migrants go back home’

Think-tank claims controversial plan will save cash

THE foreign aid budget should be used to help persuade illegal migrants to return to their countries of origin, a report says today.

Small grants could help them set up in business back home, offering them an incentive to leave the UK voluntarily rather than fight deportation.

A report by the centre-Right think-tank Policy Exchange urges ministers to adopt a ‘carrot and stick’ approach to removing tens of thousands of illegal migrants.

A system of ‘voluntary returns’ already offers payments of up to £2,000 to help them ‘re-integrate’ in their home country.

But today’s report suggests cash from the £14billion overseas aid budget could also be used to provide a greater incentive.

The study notes that voluntary returns are far cheaper than the £11,000 average cost of removing someone against their will.

It says ministers ‘should be doing everything possible to encourage people to leave voluntarily, including offering more money’.

It adds: ‘The Home Office should consider a joint scheme with the department for International development to help returnees set up businesses in their countries of origin.’

The report calls on ministers to use Britain’s departure from the EU to reset the immigration system and get to grips with illegal arrivals.

It suggests the new Id registration system for EU citizens after Brexit should also be rolled out to British citizens to avoid another Windrush scandal. The idea of a national Id system for UK citizens is controversial, with many opposing it on civil liberties grounds.

A £5billion national identity card scheme was introduced by the last labour governwish

‘The wrong signal’

ment in 2006 but a Bill to scrap it was the first legislation introduced by Theresa May when she became home secretary in 2010.

EU citizens already in the UK will have to pay £65 and join a registration scheme if they to stay in the country after the end of the transition period on december 31, 2020.

In the report, Policy Exchange’s david Goodhart suggests that the scheme should be widened to Britons, initially on a voluntary basis.

He said: ‘We strongly recommend reopening the debate about Id management to reassure people that we know who is in the country, for how long and what their entitlements are. A proper national Id system would have prevented the harassment of the Windrush victims.’

In a controversial recommendation, the report also suggests a form of amnesty for thousands of migrants who have been in the country illegally for more than a decade.

Mr Goodhart said: ‘While a general amnesty for the estimated 500,000 illegal residents here would send the wrong signal, some form of regularisation should also be considered for those who have been here for more than ten years, who are now parts of their communities with ties to the UK and often become the focus of grassroots campaigns.’

A Home Office spokesman said: ‘ We are pursuing an ambitious programme of reform at the border.’

Failure to prepare for a no deal Brexit makes Britain look fretful, weak and incompetent, Jacob Rees-Mogg warned last night.

The prominent Eurosceptic said the Government appeared to be trying to frighten voters into accepting further compromises.

His intervention came as ministers faced a backlash over reports that the Army could be put on standby to deal with the fall-out if Britain leaves without a deal.

There was further Eurosceptic anger yesterday after it emerged that 70 technical notices on planning for no deal will be released on a single day at the end of next month, shortly before MPs return to Westminster.

Mr Rees-Mogg, chairman of the European Research Group of Tory MPs, said ministers were using scare tactics to bolster support for the Prime Minister’s Chequers deal.

‘The PM has said for a long time that no deal is better than a bad deal,’ he added. ‘If the Government cannot now show that it can deliver a workable deal based on WTO terms then it is not competent.

‘It is not a good look for the Government to appear fretful, weak and incompetent, but this seems to be the way it is approaching the idea of leaving on WTO terms.’

On the use of the Army, one minister told the Sunday Times that this was common in civil contingency planning, adding: ‘ That’s not frightening the horses, it’s just being utterly realistic.’

But a source familiar with no deal planning at the Department for Exiting the EU said there had never been any discussion about calling in troops, suggesting the briefings came from standard civil contingency plans drawn up over many years by the Cabinet Office.

Ministers had planned to release a series of low-key technical notes over the summer setting out preparations for the possibility the UK could leave the EU without a deal in March next year.

Government sources said the documents were likely to be released together in late August.

Steve Baker, who resigned as a Brexit minister over the Chequers plan, said there appeared to be a deliberate attempt to undermine public confidence in the credibility of a no deal departure. Mr Baker said last night: ‘I am deeply concerned by the Government’s communications strategy around no deal. As I said to the PM I wanted to see the credibility and feasibility of our plans reinforced to the public in order to give reassurance.

‘Instead we seem to be seeing long-standing civil contingencies plans being trotted out in the runup to dumping out a string of technical notices on a single day, shortly before MPs return to Westminster.’

Mrs May’s chief Brexit adviser Oliver Robbins, the architect of the Chequers plan, is accused of trying to kill off the option of leaving without a deal.

Reports claimed he has refused to highlight the substantial impact a no deal Brexit would have on EU economies during discussions with Brussels, despite a Government assessment finding the overall cost to the EU would be far greater than that to the UK. ‘Robbins simply refused to raise it,’ a source said.

A Cabinet source told the Daily Telegraph: ‘It is designed by No 10 to do the opposite of what Brexiteers want. We could have made a strong case for no deal and said we were prepared. The way they are presenting it makes it look like Armageddon.

‘It is a kamikaze approach to no deal. It’s total chaos. They are deliberately trying to make no deal look bad. It’s a fallacy to say it will be a disaster. It won’t. We need to highlight the risk for the EU, the negatives for them.’ One insider told the Daily Mail that the Department for Exiting the EU had drawn up plans for an advertising campaign on the continent highlighting the dangers of a no deal Brexit for key sectors of the European economy such as farming and cars – only to have the idea blocked.

Government sources last night denied there was a deliberate attempt to scare voters into accepting the Chequers plan.

One source said the delay in publishing the technical notices was because they were not yet ready, rather than an attempt to influence MPs as they return to Westminster after the summer.

‘This is not Project fear,’ the source said. ‘Project fear was a series of predictions about things. This is a very pragmatic look at things that need to be done if we arrive at a certain outcome.

‘We remain confident that we will reach a good deal.’

In a boost to the Prime Minister’s chances of reaching a deal, it emerged over the weekend that Brexit has been put on the agenda of an informal EU summit in September. That could allow Mrs May to prepare the ground for an October meeting of EU leaders where the details of the future relationship would be thrashed out.

‘This is not a good look’ ‘A credible and feasible option’