Illegal Immigration

Question

The MP asks for clarification regarding how much funding has been allocated towards implementing a new treaty with Rwanda. He also questions the likelihood of this treaty being implemented in the short term given the Supreme Court’s reservations.

Question

The MP inquires about the immediate steps being taken following the Supreme Court’s ruling, particularly regarding individuals currently held at immigration removal centres awaiting deportation to Rwanda.

Question

The MP seeks confirmation on whether the Government plans to introduce alternative measures if the current policy is deemed legally non-compliant.

Question

Welcomes the new Home Secretary but criticises the government's handling of asylum policy. Questions the total expenditure on the failed Rwanda plan and seeks clarity on future costs for a new treaty with Rwanda. Challenges the government’s commitment to their flagship legislation and asks if they will abandon implementing central clauses of the law due to its ineffectiveness.

Question

Welcomes the new Home Secretary and inquires if the Supreme Court’s judgment was contingent on the European convention on human rights.

Question

The SNP welcomed the Supreme Court's decision that Rwanda is not a safe country for refugees and asylum seekers, emphasising that the principle of non-refoulement applies to international laws beyond just the ECHR. The Home Secretary should focus on fixing his Department's failings rather than chasing fantasies. What will happen now for people in immigration limbo? At least £1.4 million has been spent on legal challenges; when will a system treating refugees with dignity and respect be created?

Question

Welcoming the new Home Secretary, she urged him to take every necessary step and measure to work with Rwanda on practical operational delivery of the migration partnership. This partnership is essential for breaking the people-smuggling business model.

Question

The chief inspector of borders and immigration highlighted the challenges facing the Home Office, particularly on professional integrity and understanding human rights. Does today’s ruling on Rwanda prove or disprove these concerns?

Question

Welcoming the Home Secretary, he noted the statement’s respect for court decisions and asked if it is clear that addressing facts can make the scheme compliant.

Question

Two per cent of asylum seekers are LGBTQI+ people fleeing countries where just being themselves can be a death sentence. Does the Home Secretary agree with his predecessor that they are pretending?

Question

Welcoming the new Home Secretary, he asked why the original Rwanda treaty did not consider non-refoulement and which Law Officer was responsible for giving legal advice.

Question

Welcoming the new Home Secretary, he noted a positive part of his statement about not manufacturing unnecessary rows for political gain. Will the Home Secretary dissociate himself from comments by Lee Anderson, deputy chairman of the Conservative party, who suggested ignoring laws?

Question

Will the Home Secretary explain why people who arrive illegally from a safe country cannot immediately be returned to that country?

Question

Does the Home Secretary believe that people claiming asylum on the basis of their sexuality are lying?

Question

What work is the Home Office doing to help Rwanda build its decision-making capability?

Question

When will the Home Secretary produce a humane asylum policy that complies with international treaties?

Question

Does the Home Secretary plan to ask the Attorney General to address the wider implications of the judgment?

Question

When will the Home Office begin processing asylum claims of individuals like a trafficking victim stuck in an asylum hotel since May 2022?

Question

When will the UK resort to using a 'notwithstanding' clause if efforts to recondition the Rwanda agreement into treaty form fail?

Question

The Home Secretary and the Government are right to prioritise ending illegal migration. However, his plans seem chaotic like Baldrick’s in 'Blackadder'. Will the Home Secretary commit to taking action against the European Court of Human Rights if they continue to be a barrier?

Question

Does my right hon. Friend agree that Governments have to obey the law in the same way as individual citizens and corporations do? Is there a simple lever to pull for this complex issue?

Question

I welcome the Home Secretary to his position, but one fifth of my constituency casework is related to his Department, and it causes human misery. Will he get a grip, stop 'magical thinking' and fix his Department?

Question

My constituents are disappointed by the judgment but will be heartened by the Government’s commitment to stop the boats. How long will it take to upgrade the treaty with Rwanda, could it face legal challenges, and if so how long could they take?

Question

Welcome to his position and the court judgment. Why people risk their lives for asylum? Should all Governments address poverty, wars, human rights abuses as causes of migration?

Question

General welcome to my right hon. Friend. Has he made an assessment of whether legislation will be necessary to remedy problems identified by the judgment? When does he anticipate being in a position to introduce that legislation?

Question

Welcomes his new role as former pupil at Colfe’s School. Urges him to resist calls from people on his own Benches to remove us from the European convention on human rights, citing concerns about extradition of serious criminals or those suspected of terrorism.

Question

How long will the Rwanda treaty take? How long will it take for court cases and judgments, human rights lawyer reviews? Once Scampton’s court case is decided, will he meet to work together on levelling up at £300 million?

Question

Welcomed the Home Secretary to his new role, questioned whether the policy is compatible with facts and law, inquired about the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and its compatibility with the Good Friday agreement.

Question

Discussed the importance of parliamentary sovereignty in relation to rule of law, proposed a 'notwithstanding' provision for addressing issues related to illegal immigration.

Question

Criticised the Rwanda scheme as callous, inhumane, and ineffective, questioned its ethical dimension following a recent court ruling.

Question

Welcomed the tone of the statement, inquired about reinforcing work with France.

Question

Asked for a meeting for Glasgow MPs to discuss successful refugees and rehousing discussions with local authorities.

Question

Welcomed the Home Secretary's comments on illegal immigration fairness and discussed Supreme Court ruling implications.

Question

Proposed alternative use of Rwanda plan funds for improving application process and establishing safe routes.

Question

Welcomed Home Secretary to his role, noted reduction in small boat arrivals by a third, requested data on long-standing asylum applications.

Question

Asked about revisiting international relationships including ECHR and its implications on human rights and treaties.

Question

Welcomed Home Secretary, criticised Opposition for lack of ideas and willingness to tackle issues.

Question

Inquired about recognition of implications if UK renounces ECHR, particularly around human rights and agreements.

Question

Asked for Prime Minister's statement about revisiting domestic legal frameworks to be sharpened.

Question

Inquired about knowing when treaties and changes give the Court certainty, asked if proactive ruling requests will be made.

Question

In addition to voting against the Government 70 times on stopping the boats, the Opposition speak about natural dispersal when dealing with economic migrants. This means they often end up in Doncaster, where property is cheaper, rather than in the leafy suburbs of the liberal elites, but Doncaster is full. So will the Home Secretary do everything he can to put through the Rwanda treaty as soon as possible?

Question

This morning I met a British Palestinian woman called Wafia, who told me that 30 members of her family have died in the last month in Gaza. She told me about her cousins, who so far have survived but are utterly traumatised and completely terrified. Should those cousins and their children somehow make it to these shores, albeit on the only route given to them by this Government—in other words, the dangerous small boats crossings—is the Home Secretary seriously telling me that he could look them in the eye and tell them not only that they will they not be joining Wafia, but that they will be going to Rwanda, which is his eventual plan, and will never be reunited with what remains of their family?

Question

The people of Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and Talke want to know clearly and simply whether the Home Secretary, as well as looking at our legal framework here in the United Kingdom, will be willing to disapply international treaties and conventions such as the ECHR and the refugee convention in order to take back control of our borders—yes or no?

Question

According to the Home Office’s own figures, it will cost £63,000 more to transport a vulnerable human being to Rwanda than to let them stay in the UK. So if the Government wanted to scrap this unlawful, inhumane and cruel policy, how much money would it save taxpayers?

Question

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is classic Labour double standards when Labour Members appear to support the United Nations sending people to Rwanda but do not support the British Government doing the same?

Question

The Home Secretary is clearly under a lot of pressure from his Back Benchers on this, but may I remind him that the ECHR is entwined throughout many years of devolved Parliament legislation, and indeed Scottish case law? What assurances can he give that his Government will not attempt to weaken or change the ECHR without consent from the devolved Administrations?

Question

I very much welcome my right hon. Friend to his new post, and the clear determination he has shown to stopping the boats. However, speed is the metric by which our constituents will judge us. Once the dust has settled on the judgment and it is clear whether we need a “notwithstanding” provision or other legislation, will he bring that to this House with the same speed that we brought through things such as the Coronavirus Act 2020, so that we can shut down the evil trade of people smuggling?

Question

What the Home Secretary is ultimately arguing for is a system whereby rich western countries get to pack off asylum seekers and refugees to poorer countries that already bear a vastly disproportionate share of responsibility for sheltering refugees around the world. There is zero evidence that that will work, and an abundance of evidence of the harm it does to the individuals caught up in it. Is it not the case that this is not just illegal, but immoral and impracticable?

Question

I first raised this issue in this place on 18 May 2020. The Rwanda scheme was stuck in the courts for 18 months. Enough is enough. Does the Home Secretary agree that one of the tools in his basket needs to be a deterrent that is robust, and that timescales matter? I have had enough, and all of my constituents have had enough. This is a matter of critical importance.

Question

I very much hope that the measures my right hon. Friend has set out will allow us to deliver the Rwanda plan as soon as possible. Will he also look—I have asked for this on a number of occasions—at other third countries that we could form partnerships with, to deliver more processing overseas in a number of those locations?

Question

I warmly welcome my fellow Essex colleague to his place and wish him every success. I welcome his commitment to a tough but fair policy on immigration. The people of Southend are particularly concerned that if we do not resolve the issue of illegal migration, we are preventing people who have served our country from coming here legally to safety. Does he agree?

Question

I welcome the Home Secretary to his place and thank him for the outstanding job he did in his previous brief. Rwanda is a country that we do business with, a country with a thriving economy, and a country that the Leader of the Opposition’s football team even promotes as a tourist destination. Bearing that in mind, will the Government consider whether it may be appropriate to add Rwanda to the list of safe countries?

Question

Although I welcome the steady progress being made to close asylum hotels, I am extremely disappointed that the Metropole in Blackpool is yet to be vacated. That hotel is located in the poorest ward in the entire country bar none, and the pressure on my local community and public services is immense. Is the Home Secretary able to assure me that in the next batch of hotel closures, socio-economic conditions will be taken into account, and that the Metropole will finally be closed?