Blob secretly 'self-congratulatory' over Supreme Court Rwanda ruling
Disgruntled civil servant claims Home Office staff are secretly ‘self-congratulatory’ over Supreme Court’s Rwanda migrant policy ruling and accuses colleagues at the Blob of ‘vowing not to work on ”evil” project’
- Civil servant blasted colleagues over alleged refusal to work on Rwanda plan
A disgruntled civil servant has claimed that Home Office staff were secretly ‘self-congratulatory’ following the Supreme Court ruling which blocked the Government’s Rwanda migrant policy.
The anonymous Government worker accused his colleagues in the Blob of ‘vowing they will not work on such an evil project’ when writing on staff message boards.
In a first hand account the civil servant, who has worked for ‘some time’ on immigration policy, said that the mood in 2 Marsham Street – Home Office HQ – was celebratory since Suella Braverman’s sacking as Home Secretary by Rishi Sunak.
They said that despite the change in minister, little to no progress will be made in controlling Britain’s borders, saying that stopping the boats or cutting net migration is not a priority for the Home Office in 2023.
This comes after Rishi Sunak vowed to end the political and legal ‘merry-go-round’ on Rwanda migrant deportation flights after Supreme Court judges dramatically ruled the plan was illegal.
A disgruntled civil servant has claimed that Home Office staff were secretly ‘self-congratulatory’ following the Supreme Court ruling which blocked the Government’s Rwanda migrant policy and the sacking of Suella Braverman (pictured)
Rishi Sunak (pictured) vowed to end the political and legal ‘merry-go-round’ on Rwanda migrant deportation flights tonight after Supreme Court judges ruled the plan was illegal
In a first hand account the civil servant, who has worked for ‘some time’ on immigration policy, said that the mood in Marsham Street, Home Office HQ (pictured), was celebratory since Suella Braverman’s sacking as Home Secretary by Rishi Sunak
READ MORE: Rishi Sunak announces ’emergency legislation’ to deem Rwanda a safe country so that flights filled with asylum seekers WILL go ahead
At a press conference in No10 yesterday, the PM unveiled his response to the judicial block, pledging a new treaty with the East African country and emergency legislation allowing Parliament to declare that it is safe for asylum seekers.
This was after the sacked Home Secretary urged the Government to pass ’emergency legislation’ in the wake of the Supreme Court’s verdict that sending asylum seekers abroad was unlawful.
She said the ruling was ‘no surprise’ and that the justices could not be blamed given the ‘current state of the law’.
The civil servant claimed that Mrs Braverman was ‘cringingly apologetic’ when giving speeches to Home Office staff after they had received criticism in the media.
They said she would encourage staff by saying they were doing a ‘great job’, but was still lambasted by London-based staff who were angry over her refusal to extend safe routes to more nations.
It has become the default view in the Home Office that ‘immigration cannot and should not be controlled’, despite the policies of ministers stating the opposite, the civil servant wrote in The Telegraph.
They said many colleagues saw themselves as a ‘resistance’ to what they considered a ‘radical Right-wing Government’ which was set on ‘punishing migrants’ regardless of the rule of law.
She said the ruling was ‘no surprise’ and that the justices could not be blamed given the ‘current state of the law’ (Braverman pictured during her visit to Rwanda in March)
A group of migrants are brought ashore in Dover after crossing the Channel last month
A stock image of migrants arriving on the Kent coast after crossing the Channel
They said that talk of border controls is often ‘sneered at or ignored’.
And while there is understanding amongst Border Force officers and civil servants that the British asylum system is ‘open to abuse’, suggestions that the rules be made stricter or that asylum seekers should be refused is rejected as ‘cold-hearted evil’.
They wrote that these beliefs were so widespread that colleagues could ‘ring mental health services… to check in on my sanity’ if they were to suggest steps to reduce immigration or immediately deport small boat arrivals or criminals from abroad.
They said suggestions to deal with immigration are dismissed as ‘unreasonable or not legally possible’ through vague references to ‘international law’.
Source: Read Full Article