Rwanda plans 'inhumane' amid claims it's cheaper to put asylum seekers in Ritz for a YEAR than send them 4,000 miles to Africa

Sending migrants to Rwanda will save Britain money in the “longer term”, a minister has argued. The comments come despite critics describing the costs involved as “eye-watering”.

Under a scheme designed to crack down on migrants landing on British shores after crossing the Channel in small boats, the UK intends to provide those deemed to have arrived unlawfully with a one-way ticket to Rwanda. Tom Pursglove, a minister at the Home Office and Ministry of Justice, said the aim was to allow transferred migrants to embark on “fully prosperous” lives in the central African country while simultaneously crushing the “cruel” business model of human traffickers.

The Conservative MP argued that, while the short-term costs would be “pretty equivalent” to what the UK is paying currently to accommodate those claiming asylum, the Rwandan scheme would eventually save taxpayers money. However, former cabinet minister Andrew Mitchell said it would be cheaper to put those arriving in Britain up at The Ritz hotel in London’s Mayfair for a year.

READ MORE: Boris Johnson unveils plans for asylum seekers to be taken 4,000 miles away to Rwanda despite backlash

The Times reported that each migrant sent to Rwanda is expected to set British taxpayers back between £20,000 and £30,000. The newspaper said this would cover accommodation both before and after the journey, as well as the cost of a seat on the flight itself.

And, in its criticisms, Labour has cited Australian Refugee Council offshoring figures, demonstrating that it had cost Australia more than £5 billion since 2013 to send 3,127 people to Papua New Guinea and Nauru as part of a similar policy. Mr Pursglove, asked on ITV’s Good Morning Britain about the way the bill for Canberra’s