Bibby Bargain Barge?

[denso13]

That will cost the tax payer £6bn a year.

How much are hotels and boats costing, which won't be needed if managed properly?

 

[Roy Bloom]

Thats not the objective.

Illegal Migration Act 2023

These documents relate to the Illegal Migration Bill which received Royal Assent on 20 July 2023.

www.gov.uk

So when the politicians give the reason for their poicy as saving lives, they're lying?
They just don't want the refugees?

 

[IT Minion]

Additional safe routes you mean. How many more will come? Shall we assume double? That will cost the tax payer £6bn a year.

It costs £75,000 a year per asylum seeker!?

An extra 80,000 asylum seekers shouldn't cost that much. If it does then we should really spend money on processing their claims faster

 

[motorbiking]

It shouldn't cost that much so we should spend more money? Spoken like a true IT professional.

 

[Roy Bloom]

It shouldn't cost that much so we should spend more money? Spoken like a true IT professional.

The money for asylum processing workers is already being spent. It's just that the process and the speed of processing is ineffective, too slow and inefficient.

 

[IT Minion]

It shouldn't cost that much so we should spend more money? Spoken like a true IT professional.

We should spend money to reduce the backlog rather than complain the backlog is too expensive to maintain.

Also I think your numbers are wrong.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

We should spend money to reduce the backlog rather than complain the backlog is too expensive to maintain.

Also I think your numbers are wrong.

Plus it has the benefit of reducing the attraction to here if claims are processed and actioned. Money well spent, not wasted.

It's not about cost, it's about value.

 

[JP_]

It costs £75,000 a year per asylum seeker!?

An extra 80,000 asylum seekers shouldn't cost that much. If it does then we should really spend money on processing their claims faster

How much it actually costs and how much MPs can get away with spending are two different things.
Rarely does the government spend our money in the most efficient way. They spend it in a way that they will benefit, whether than is by bolstering investments, securing lucrative board member jobs, or giving business to friends and family.

The real cost is as much as it costs to run a reasonably secure prison or barracks.

 

[Notch7]

It shouldn't cost that much so we should spend more money? Spoken like a true IT professional.

How’s that Rwanda plan working out for saving money

 

[motorbiking]

How much it actually costs and how much MPs can get away with spending are two different things.
Rarely does the government spend our money in the most efficient way. They spend it in a way that they will benefit, whether than is by bolstering investments, securing lucrative board member jobs, or giving business to friends and family.

The real cost is as much as it costs to run a reasonably secure prison or barracks.

Exactly, Prisoners cost £40k per year, this had to be stood up quickly. It's in the ball park, not 1.6bn for a 500 person "boat". the source in your OP is BS.

 

[Roy Bloom]

Exactly, Prisoners cost £40k per year, this had to be stood up quickly. It's in the ball park, not 1.6bn for a 500 person "boat". the source in your OP is BS.

It's not being run as a prison. it's being run as a hotel.
No guards to be paid, no secure medical facilities required, no security to be maintained, etc.

 

[motorbiking]

wrong - I suggest you read Annex A.

 

[Notch7]

Exactly, Prisoners cost £40k per year, this had to be stood up quickly. It's in the ball park, not 1.6bn for a 500 person "boat". the source in your OP is BS.

Are you sure

70 people on the barge

costs are somewhere between £22 million and £1.6b ( we don’t know because the contract has been redacted by corrupt Tories)

 

[carmanmemoranda]

£22 million for 500 people, if that is the mini.um figure doesn't sound like a well negotiated contract to me.

If its more, well....

 

[Roy Bloom]

wrong - I suggest you read Annex A.

Meanwhile a study that was published early in July raised questions on the controversial plan's goal to save British taxpayer money.

Housing asylum seekers on a barge will save less than £10 ($12.7) a person a day, according to a report jointly conducted by NGOs Reclaim the Seas and One Life to Live.

It noted that the barge choice could save £4.694 ($5.974) on the daily hotel bill of millions, or 0.08% of the current spend.

Bibby Stockholm: 'Floating prison' or 'cheaper option' to house migrants?

Plan aims to house up to 500 men on barge, while migrants currently staying in hotels wait for results of asylum application - Anadolu Ajansı

www.aa.com.tr

This report was concluded before the Legionella scare, before the Fire Service condemned the inadequate fire safety, and before the death of an asylum seeker.

A more up-to-date article:

The floating accommodation for asylum seekers harboured in Portland port, Dorset, was initially supposed to house about 500 people, but the Home Office has reduced this to a maximum of 425.
The Home Office has repeatedly said that the reason for using the barge is to save money on expensive asylum seeker hotel accommodation. But based on the new figure of a maximum of 425 onboard, the barge could work out at 10% more expensive than hotels.

Bibby Stockholm: number of asylum seekers to be housed on barge reduced

Cost-effectiveness of Home Office scheme to house people on vessel questioned after downsizing of plans

www.theguardian.com

You can quote as many annexes in the contract as you like, but a) government contracts invariably do not go according to plan and b) what is specified in the contract and what gets delivered are two very different things. Ask Baroness Mone and Michael Gove.