‘Lack of morals in Rwanda scheme’

MP Jonathan Gullis has clearly set out his Conservative approach to immigration (Sentinel, May 2).

His use of questionable statistics and lack of moral perspective is part of a trend used by the present government.

Of all the asylum applications in the EU and UK combined, the UK takes 8 per cent, or the 18th largest intake per head of population.

Under the United Nations convention, to which we are signatories, everybody has a right to seek asylum in another country.

No-one should be considered ‘illegal’: they are entitled to a legal process to determine their refugee status.

‘Economic migrants’ is an inaccurate myth – following investigation, around 2/3 of asylum seekers are accepted as valid refugees.

Clearly, exploitation of these vulnerable people by traffickers needs to be prevented, but if there were legal routes by which asylum seekers could apply, there would be no need for them to risk their lives on the Channel crossing.

It may be impossible to have offices in war zones, but premises in Greece, or France, could enable them to apply for entry.

The fact that such offices don’t exist is the reason why in desperation they risk the open seas.

The morality of sending people, many of whom have already suffered torture or fear killings to Rwanda, a country which has been described as where ‘torture in official and unofficial detention facilities is commonplace,’ as are

‘killings and disappearances’ may have the ‘wholehearted support’ of Gullis, but many of us will not feel this fits with our own sense of justice.

CHRIS CHAMBERS NEWCASTLE