Amber Rudd is clueless about how many people she’s deported in the Windrush scandal

Amber Rudd Windrush deportation

People who arrived from the Caribbean 50 years or more ago are being denied their rights and threatened with deportation after being identified by the Home Office as living in the UK ‘illegally’. Labour MP David Lammy challenged Home secretary Amber Rudd about the “Windrush generation” in Parliament:

In response, Rudd admitted that she doesn’t know how many people have been deported in error.

Who knows how many citizens the government has deported in error?

It’s worrying that the home secretary doesn’t know the answer to this question. But she’s not alone.

Immigration minister Caroline Nokes admitted in an interview with ITV that some members of the Windrush generation were wrongly deported. But she was unable to provide any numbers.

Though, this wasn’t the first time that Nokes had faced this question. On 9 January, Emma Reynolds MP, in a written parliamentary question, raised it with the Home Office. Nokes responded that providing an answer would have to be done “manually” and that would be too expensive.

Reynolds suggested that a date of birth and country of origin search might tell us. This is what Lammy has done. From the Home Office published data, he found that of the 12,056 deportations in 2015, 901 were over 50 years of age, and 303 were to Jamaica. This might be a good place to start a case review, Lammy suggested:

The Home Office publishes data on returns by destination as part of the quarterly immigration statistics release, but these figures do not include information on date of arrival in the UK. Of the 303 people deported to Jamaica in 2015, they could have arrived in 2014 or 1964. We have no way of knowing.

Even parliamentarians have difficulty finding this out. In response to a parliamentary question about deportations on 12 March, Baroness Williams answered that the Home Office does not hold any records of the date an individual arrived the UK.

Rudd apologised and blamed the Home Office

Rudd apologised for the Home Office’s treatment of these Commonwealth citizens. But she then blamed the Home Office for losing “sight of individuals” and becoming “too concerned with policy”.

Yet, as home secretary, she is responsible for the Home Office – something that Lammy highlighted:

Rudd’s competence has been questioned by peers in the House of Lords.

In response to criticisms, Rudd announced a new team of staff to help people gather the evidence to prove their right to stay in the UK.

Public outrage and disgust

People have responded with disgust and outrage at the treatment of the Windrush generation.

Trevor Philips – former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission – said on BBC Newsnight that this should be “burning a hole” through the prime minister’s conscience:

A petition is calling for an amnesty for anyone who was a minor that arrived in Britain between 1948 to 1971. At the time of writing, it has over 162,000 signatures.

And a YouGov poll published on 16 April found that 78% of people agreed that Commonwealth citizens who came decades ago should have the right to stay.

A hostile environment

Shadow home secretary Diane Abbott points out that this scandal did not fall from the sky:

It is, in fact, the result of policies designed by Theresa May when she was home secretary to create “a hostile environment for illegal immigrants”.

We shall see whether Rudd remains ‘clueless’ as the deportations continue. Or whether she does her job: reviews deportation cases and follows through on her promise to change how the Home Office treats citizens.

Get Involved!

Join The Canary, so we can keep holding the powerful to account.

Featured image via screenshot

We need your help ...

The coronavirus pandemic is changing our world, fast. And we will do all we can to keep bringing you news and analysis throughout. But we are worried about maintaining enough income to pay our staff and minimal overheads.

Now, more than ever, we need a vibrant, independent media that holds the government to account and calls it out when it puts vested economic interests above human lives. We need a media that shows solidarity with the people most affected by the crisis – and one that can help to build a world based on collaboration and compassion.

We have been fighting against an establishment that is trying to shut us down. And like most independent media, we don’t have the deep pockets of investors to call on to bail us out.

Can you help by chipping in a few pounds each month?

The Canary Support us

Comments are closed