The activist lawyers are at it again:
In an individual case that is still pending, submissions were made to the court on Friday on behalf of a 20-year-old Iraqi national who was moved to Penally barracks in September after previously having been housed in various hotels since he arrived to the UK in March 2020.
The man’s lawyers argue that his continued stay at the camp has posed a “real risk” to his health and that there had been “no lawful or reasonable justification for removing him from suitable accommodation to the facility”.
I suppose 'relieving the burden on the poor bloody taxpayer that's paying for your services too' doesn't count, then? No, of course not.
They told the court that conditions at the camp did not allow for social distancing nor for compliance with the six-person rule, and that there was “no indication” that residents had proper access to medical care or masks, unless provided by a charity.
Is there any indication that they don't..?
A Home Office spokesperson said residents were staying in safe, Covid-compliant conditions, in line with the law and social-distancing requirements, and were provided with guidance in relation to self-isolation, social distancing and hygiene.
Paul Turner, barrister at Imperium Chambers, who acted in the case, said the Home Office’s position was “at odds with the reality on the ground”.
Not half as at odds as your position, and that of the other advocates for these illegal immigrants.