The UK’s leading bishop has criticized Nigel Farage’s proposal to deport all illegal migrants, stating it’s ‘not the Christian way’ and demeaning to the nation as a whole.

Archbishop of York Stephen Cottrell blasted the Reform UK leader’s proposals to ‘send them back’ as ‘not a sensible and compassionate response’. 

This comes as protests grow outside facilities housing asylum seekers, while Labour grapples with significant questions regarding the influx of illegal migrants crossing the channel and residing in accommodations funded by taxpayers.

However, Mr. Cottrell, who ranks just below the Archbishop of Canterbury, asserted that Britain should not ‘shut the door’ on individuals escaping war and oppression.

Downplaying citizens’ worries about the influx of illegal migrant crossings, he encouraged exhibiting Christian values such as ‘compassion and understanding’ instead.

The high-ranking church authority expressed his concerns after Mr. Farage promised on Tuesday to deport 600,000 asylum seekers over the next five years if his party secured victory in the upcoming general election.

He mentioned that, should he become Prime Minister, anyone arriving in Britain through small boats or other illegal methods would be detained and deported, including women and children.

This would involve signing returns deals with countries like Afghanistan and Eritrea and housing migrants in ‘third countries’ such as Rwanda and Albania. 

This is regardless of countries’ human rights records, with Reform promising to hand over up to £2billion of UK taxpayers’ cash in exchange for potential agreements. 

He was sanguine about failed asylum seekers being tortured or murdered if they were deported under his plans after entering the UK illegally. 

The party leader also pledged to leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and scrap the Human Rights Act, which enshrines the convention in UK law. 

Mr Cottrell, who sits in the House of Lords, told the Mirror: ‘It is the Christian way to meet those asking for help with compassion and understanding and it has long been the British way to give shelter where we can to those escaping violence and conflict abroad. 

‘It should remain that way.’ 

He emphasised the need for a ‘fair and functional’ system that works all round, including for those living near hotels and other accommodation housing migrants. 

Mr Farage has previously said Christianity ‘should be recognised by Government at all levels’. 

He also described ‘Judeo-Christian values’ as at the root of ‘everything’ in the UK and called for a ‘muscular defence’ of them.  

But with the Archbishop slamming his plans, it suggests he faces butting heads with the country’s most senior Christians in implementing them. 

In fact, Mr Cottrell is currently the most senior figure in the church, with no one currently serving as Archbishop of Canterbury. 

It comes after previous officeholder Justin Welby resigned in November last year following a damning review of his role in handling a child sex abuse scandal. 

A spokesperson for the Bishop of Chelmsford, Dr Guli Francis-Dehqani, has said she agrees completely with the Archbishop of York’s position.  

Mr Farage was met with outrage when he said he would even be prepared to do a returns deal with Taliban-run Afghanistan. 

The Islamic fundamentalist group recaptured the country in 2021 after 20 years of a US-backed republican government, immediately reinstating brutal laws oppressing women. 

It said it was ‘ready and willing’ to work with the British politician on accepting Afghans deported from Britain. 

Senior Reform figure Zia Yusuf said it was ‘quite reasonable’ for public money to go to the Taliban given Afghanistan already receives millions of pounds in foreign aid.

Mr Farage was asked at his policy launch in Oxfordshire on Tuesday about the risk that many of those sent back to Afghanistan would face torture or execution. 

The Reform leader replied: ‘Does it bother me? It bothers me, but what really bothers me is what is happening on the streets of our country.’

 

In an interview at the weekend, Mr Farage had said: ‘I’m really sorry, but we can’t be responsible for everything that happens in the whole of the world.

‘I can’t be responsible for despotic regimes all over the world.’

Mr Farage also said he was willing to send asylum seekers back to Iran, Sudan, Eritrea and Syria – which also have appalling human rights records. 

The Reform leader was asked this week if it would be hypocritical for him to ignore church bosses given his previous vigorous defence of Christianity in Britain. 

He said: ‘Whoever the Christian leaders are at any given point in time, I think over the last decades quite a few of them have been rather out of touch, perhaps with their own flock.

‘Given the types of people appointed to be the Archbishop of Canterbury, that’s probably the biggest understatement of the day.’ 

In a speech in Oxfordshire on Tuesday morning, Mr Farage unveiled his party’s ‘Operation Restoring Justice’ proposals to tackle the Channel migrant crisis. 

He warned anger among Britons over an ‘invasion’ of the South Coast by small boats represented a ‘genuine threat to public order’. 

Speaking at London Oxford Airport, Mr Farage argued the only way to stop migrants arriving in Britain via dinghies was by ‘detaining and deporting absolutely anyone’.

‘The mood in the country around this issue is a mix between total despair and rising anger,’ he said.

‘And I would say this, that without action, without somehow the contract between the Government and the people being renewed, without some trust coming back, then I fear deeply that that anger will grow.

‘In fact, I think there is now, as a result of this, a genuine threat to public order.’

The Reform leader said his party’s plans to deport asylum seekers en masse would save ‘tens and possibly hundreds of billions of pounds’ for UK taxpayers.

He also claimed ‘the boats will stop coming within days’, if Reform won power at the next general election and implemented their plans.

The Archbishop’s intervention comes after clergymen in the House of Lords marked themselves as some of the harshest critics of the Conservative Party’s Rwanda plan. 

Then-Prime Minister Rishi Sunak had proposed any illegal migrant who came to the UK from a safe country could be sent to Rwanda. 

They would have their asylum claim processed there, not in the UK, and if successful, granted admission to the African country instead of Britain. 

If their claim was unsuccessful, they could apply to remain in Rwanda on other grounds or seek asylum elsewhere. 

No asylum seeker would be allowed to apply to come back to the UK.  

In 2022, when the plan was proposed, all 25 clergy in the Lords said it ‘should shame us as a nation’. 

The bishop’s comments come amid a time of heightened tension around the issue of migration in the UK. 

A wave of protests and counter-protests broke out at the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, which is housing 138 asylum seekers, in recent weeks. 

It came after an asylum seeker housed there was charged with sexually assaulting a teenage girl last month. 

Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu has denied the offence and has been on trial this week.

Another man who was living at the site, Syrian national Mohammed Sharwarq, has separately been charged with seven offences. 

Several other men, meanwhile, have been charged over alleged disorder outside the hotel.

A High Court judge granted a temporary injunction last week ruling asylum seekers could not be housed at the hotel after September 12. 

It followed legal action by Epping Forest District Council, which argued the hotel’s use was in breach of planning legislation.  

But Home Office and hotel lawyers have now called for this ruling to be scrapped. 

They warned forcing the hotel to close risks more protests outside similar asylum accommodation across the country. 

Edward Brown KC, for Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, said it ‘runs the risk of acting as an impetus for further protests, some of which may be disorderly, around other asylum accommodation’.  

Indeed, other councils have since announced they will seek similar legal action against the similar use of hotels in their area.  

Three senior judges are set to rule on the issue this Friday.