Rwanda scheme critics have exposed their own racism in condemning PM's plan, says Patrick Christys

It exposed a lot of the so-called tolerant left for what they really are: closed-minded, out of touch bigots

Published Last updated

The reaction to Boris Johnson’s new asylum plan was very revealing.

It exposed a lot of the so-called tolerant left for what they really are: closed minded, out of touch bigots.

It also highlighted the fact that huge elements of the British media operate in a tiny Westminster bubble and don’t have their finger on the pulse of the public mood.

There was mass condemnation by the usual types for the Prime Minister’s decision to put the Navy in the Channel and send single men who arrive illegally to Rwanda for processing.

But the vast majority of the people who are outraged about this have never actually been confronted by the problems that our broken asylum system causes.

It’s easy for the EU flag-waving, open borders brigade in South East England to have these grand ideas about throwing our arms open to the world and letting everybody stay while they sit around the fire pit of their landscaped lawn and swill whatever vintage vino they’ve brought up from the wine cellar that evening. Why? Because they’re not affected by the asylum crisis.

Around 42% of asylum seekers are dispersed to the North of England in deprived areas like Rochdale and Middlesborough, while just 6.5% were relocated in the South, excluding London, of course.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

Hugo from Hampstead can have all sorts of grand views, but Barry from Burnley has seen potentially seen his community change, the demographics of his local school shift massively, increased pressure on his local health services, etc…but of course Hugo thinks Barry is a small-minded racist for wanting greater asylum controls and lower immigration in general.

There is of course a national security element to this as well.

According to social policy analyst Dr Rakhib Ehrsan, research shows that since 1998 one quarter of all foreign nationals convicted of Islamist terror offences in Britain either claimed or were granted asylum over here.

The first job of a government it to protect its own citizens, and the Rwanda move is clearly an attempt to do that.

I would just like to make it clear that I remain deeply sceptical about whether or not Boris Johnson’s plan will work or actually be enforced. Time and time again our government has talked tough and then done nothing, so I’m not exactly jumping for joy just yet.

But back to those soppy Southerners. A lot of them have exposed their own bigotry and racism. "We can’t possibly send them to Rwanda!" Why not? "Well it’s in Africa, and that’s full of Africans and they’re all, you know, erm…" Go on, just expand on that Hugo.

It’s interesting, because Tony Blair wanted to establish an asylum seeker camp in Africa in 2004. I wonder how many of the outraged lot would have been fine with the Rwanda deal if Blair had suggested it?

Some of the accommodation that some asylum seekers will reportedly be staying in looks alright.

People were banging on about the cost. Well the initial trial is set to cost around £120million, we’re currently spending £5million-a-day on hotel bills alone for asylum seekers in Britain, even if they arrived illegally. Think of the money we’ll save if this acts as a deterrent.

But just moving on to elements of the media now. I get that loads of people want Boris to resign over Partygate and I understand that the democratic process of scrutiny doesn’t stop just because a big announcement has been made – but I think there was a collective national groan yesterday when the second question, then the fourth question that Boris faced shortly after his announcement were about cake and cheese and wine.

People may disagree with me on this, but I think the vast majority of the British public care more about sorting out illegal immigration than they do about Partygate.