UK’S Policing Minister Chris Philp found himself at the centre of criticism following an apparent confusion between Rwanda and Congo during Thursday’s edition of the BBC political programme, Question Time. The incident unfolded during a discussion about a contentious Rwanda bill, drawing sharp reactions from both the audience and fellow panellists.
The moment of confusion arose when an audience member raised a question regarding asylum seekers in the UK originating from Congo potentially being sent to Rwanda. Expressing concern over the neighbouring countries’ ongoing conflict, the audience member highlighted the complexities of the situation.
In response, Minister Philp’s remark, ‘Well Rwanda is a different country from Congo, isn’t it?’ elicited a mixture of gasps and laughter from the audience. The camera captured the bewildered expression of Shadow Secretary for Health and Social Care, Wes Streeting, as Philp’s statement reverberated across the studio.
The discussion further delved into the geopolitical tensions between Rwanda and Congo, with accusations levelled against Rwanda for allegedly supporting violent rebel groups in Congo. Despite denials from the Rwandan government, the issue underscored the intricacies of the region’s political landscape.
During the exchange, the audience member reiterated the geographical proximity between Congo and Rwanda, emphasising the conflict in Goma and the potential implications for asylum seekers. Despite attempts to clarify the situation, Philp’s responses appeared to compound the confusion.
Interrupting the Minister’s explanations, both the audience member and Question Time host Fiona Bruce pointed out the distinction between asylum seekers from Congo and Philp’s reference to Rwanda. Amidst audience reactions of disbelief and amusement, Philp struggled to articulate a coherent response.
Subsequently, Philp attempted to clarify the government’s stance on asylum legislation, citing provisions aimed at preventing individuals from being sent to locations where they might face ‘serious and irreversible harm.’ However, the incident left lingering questions about the minister’s comprehension of geopolitical matters and the implications for policy decisions.