← Back to House of Commons Debates

Immigration Policy

09 March 2026

Lead MP

Alex Norris

Debate Type

Ministerial Statement

At a Glance

Alex Norris raised concerns about immigration policy in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.

How the Debate Unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:

Government Statement

Alex Norris

ImmigrationAsylum & RefugeesMigrants & BordersBrexitForeign Affairs

Government Statement

The minister announced sweeping reforms to the UK's immigration system, including a review of refugee status every 30 months and the introduction of visa brakes for nationals of Afghanistan, Cameroon, Myanmar, and Sudan to prevent abuse of the asylum system. From 26 March, applications for specific visa routes from these nationalities will be refused if there is evidence of high numbers of visa-linked asylum claims. Visit visa requirements and direct airside transit visa requirements have also been introduced for Nicaragua and St Lucia. The minister also mentioned legislative changes to revoke the legal duty to provide support to asylum seekers and amend existing conditions of support legislation. A consultation has been started on the approach to family returns. These reforms aim to restore order to the immigration system and provide confidence to the British public.

Chris Philp Con

Croydon South

Question

Critiqued the government's failure to control illegal immigration, noting a 45% increase since the election and the lack of progress in intercepting boats and returning illegal immigrants. Proposed leaving the European convention on human rights for rapid deportation and offered support for ILR changes if the government passes emergency legislation.

Minister reply

Defended the government's record, highlighting interventions against gangs, prevented crossings, and returns of illegal immigrants. Emphasised that tearing up international agreements would not solve the issue and would set back return efforts. Stated that ILR changes related to the consultation on earned settlement and would be laid in the usual way in the weeks and months ahead.

Meg Hillier Lab Co-op

Hackney South and Shoreditch

Question

Asked for an update on discussions regarding individuals who arrived in the UK pursuing leave for a set period and are now approaching the end of that period, expressing concern about their position under the new process.

Minister reply

Explained that earned settlement conditions are based on the immigration rules at the point of application. The government consulted on transition protections, which closed last month. Highlighted the challenge of unprecedented levels of migration through legal means in the first five years of the decade, affecting public services and taxpayers. Reaffirmed that the government will respond to the consultation in the usual way.

Will Forster Lib Dem

Woking

Question

The hon. Member questions the lack of explanation for the changes to the asylum system, expressing concerns about the cost of reviewing refugee status every 2.5 years and the potential for an increased asylum backlog. He also asks about the Government's plan to end the processing through faster claims, such as Nightingale processing centres, and inquires about lifting the ban on asylum seekers working.

Minister reply

The minister responds by referencing a statement made in November and clarifies the system's operation, stating that if people are not taking part in British life, their claims will be assessed every 30 months. However, they will be offered the chance to move to a protected work and study route. He also points out the significant demand issues and states that the process changes would be overwhelmed if not addressed.

John Martin McDonnell Lab

Hayes and Harlington

Question

The hon. Member asks about the Government's assessment of where asylum seekers are working and the impact on the care sector, especially for those who have been in the UK for over three years.

Minister reply

The minister confirms that the Government knows where the people are working because they came on work visas and states that the recent consultation ended with over 200,000 responses, indicating the strength of feeling. The Government is reviewing the assessment in the usual manner and will come back with plans after that.

Edward Leigh Con

Gainsborough

Question

The right hon. Member quotes his neighbour, the hon. Member for Bassetlaw, and asks about the argument that if people arrive in the UK illegally, they should not be able to claim asylum and could be detained and deported.

Minister reply

The minister agrees with the hon. Member for Bassetlaw and acknowledges the importance of safe and legal routes. He states that the third chapter of the November statement is about such routes, and the Home Secretary has talked about the study route to provide options for people to seek sanctuary from outside the country.

Imran Hussain Lab

Bradford East

Question

The hon. Member speaks about a constituent who came to the UK to work in the NHS, but whose future is now uncertain due to the Government’s policies, and expresses concern about the impact on his children’s education.

Minister reply

The minister acknowledges the important role people from outside the UK have played in the NHS and states that his proposals set out that working in the NHS and other public services is one proposed way to earn a route to settlement. He understands the concern and is looking at the consultation closely.

Karen Bradley Con

Staffordshire Moorlands

Question

The right hon. Member asks about the Home Office’s assessment of the number of people affected and the amount saved by moving from a statutory duty to support asylum seekers to a discretionary power.

Minister reply

The minister explains that the overall supported population is 107,000 and that approximately half of those people can access work in many cases. The Government is considering all those people individually to see who could work and therefore pay towards their own support costs, reducing the burden on taxpayers.

Ruth Cadbury Lab

Brentford and Isleworth

Question

The hon. Member asks about the Minister's assurance that the reforms will not lead to the UK becoming like European countries with poor records on integration.

Minister reply

The minister reassures the hon. Member that all reforms seek to promote integration and mentions the importance of illegal migration, with people seeking refuge and having their claim accepted, entering work or study and learning the language for integration. He also mentions important work on social cohesion across Government.

Roger Gale Con

Herne Bay and Sandwich

Question

The right hon. Member asks about the situation of Ukrainians in the UK who are effectively stateless and need a proper settled status.

Minister reply

The minister explains that the Homes for Ukraine scheme was never intended as a settlement scheme but has extended the period of protection for longer, in line with the challenges people are facing. The Government wants those people to live fully while they are here and acknowledges the challenges described.

Andy McDonald Lab

Middlesbrough and Thornaby East

Question

The hon. Member thanks the Minister and asks about the abuses of the work visa scheme and the potential damage to public services if the thresholds are unobtainable for key workers, especially in the health service.

Minister reply

The minister acknowledges the characterisation offered by the hon. Member and confirms that the Government is working with trade unions to avoid such abuse in a future model, ensuring that people are not precariously reliant on one employer and that the employer does not have excessive control over their lives.

Wendy Chamberlain Lib Dem

North East Fife

Question

In Afghanistan, women and girls are being persecuted on grounds of their gender. They cannot work, study, and their husbands can punish them however they see fit. The Home Office closed safe and legal routes for Afghan women to come to the UK, and last week it closed the door for both professionals and students. What hope is there for others to complete their studies and support the maternal healthcare crisis in Afghanistan?

Minister reply

We take our obligations and commitment to Afghans very seriously; since 2021, over 37,000 have come here via resettlement schemes. The change last week is because we have a student visa system that is being used as a de facto immigration system. Of the 3,730 visas issued to students from Afghanistan, there were 3,454 claims for asylum. The new system must be a much better way, so that we as a Government accountable to Parliament know who is coming, what their protection need is, what their institution is and what they are learning while they are here.

Afzal Khan Lab

Manchester Rusholme

Question

The Baobab Centre for Young Survivors in Exile has found that restrictive policies have had an insignificant effect on the number of unaccompanied children seeking asylum in Denmark. Instead, the discrimination and constant uncertainty make it harder for young refugees to learn, build relationships or plan for their futures. Will the Minister commit to keeping permanently the five years’ leave for unaccompanied children, to create stability for the most vulnerable asylum seekers?

Minister reply

I can give my hon. Friend succour in that regard. Our 30-month protection announcement last week does not include unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, and we take our responsibilities to children very seriously. I have optimism in our new system. We need those children to study and then get into work, as well as to learn the language, as they have the most to benefit so that, so the protected work and study route will be particularly important for them.

Simon Hoare Con

North Dorset

Question

The Minister and the Government are to be commended for trying to wrestle with this issue, and where there can be cross-party consensus, let us build on and foster it. Lots of groups of people who come to this country generate complaints, but one group that does not are those who come from New Zealand and Australia to help our sheep farmers at shearing time. May I urge the Minister to rethink the measure in this regard, as not a single rural Member of Parliament is calling for it? Those people should be allowed in. This is an animal welfare issue, and it is important for our food security and agricultural sector.

Minister reply

The announcements about illegal migration that we made in November were the most sweeping since the second world war, and they were unpacked last week as well, but they were not so sweeping or broad as to include sheep shearing, although I know that that has become a pertinent point for some. The Minister for Migration and Citizenship and I are having conversations with rural MPs, and we have heard clearly the hon. Gentleman’s words.

Alex Sobel Lab Co-op

Leeds Central and Headingley

Question

In response to the urgent question, the Minister did not mention the announcement last week that people from four countries—Sudan, Afghanistan, Myanmar and Cameroon—will no longer be able to apply for a student visa. Many students who applied for such visas and came to study here subsequently found that the situation in their country had materially changed, so they then applied for asylum. I am very concerned that when things materially change, we will change the policy on student applications. We should take it in good faith that people who come here to study do so—that they study and contribute, and that they can go back to their countries to contribute there when things have settled.

Minister reply

I hate to correct my hon. Friend, but I did mention those countries. No matter what reforms we announced in November and the impact of any element, everybody will have their claim individually assessed on the basis of their own individual circumstances. If someone has come here for a three-year course, I accept totally that the circumstances at home could have materially changed during that period. When that is happening, in virtually every case, those systems cease to be merely a study route and become a de facto asylum route, and it is better that these routes are organised and co-ordinated by the Government rather than academic institutions.

Kirsty Blackman SNP

Aberdeen North

Question

The Minister is unhappy that we are conflating two different announcements, but the issue is that the Home Secretary has not actually made an announcement about this matter—she has not come to the Chamber, set out the position and made an announcement. The Government are planning to make these changes without parliamentary approval, because the changes will not come before the House for debate. Will the Minister commit to ensuring that all hon. Members can have a voice, that the changes are not made through a negative statutory instrument, and that MPs from across the House will be able to make our points clear in order to ensure that the goalposts will not be moved after refugees have arrived here?

Minister reply

I hate to disagree with the hon. Lady, but I am not unhappy at all. The way I look at it, I get to give the answers, and right hon. Members and hon. Members get to ask the questions—I do not get to do both—so colleagues can raise whatever issues they wish to raise. On her point about scrutiny of the policies, as she will be aware, there has been a public consultation that with very good participation. There were two statements in November, one relating to restoring order and control—our asylum policy statement—and one relating to earned settlement, and colleagues had the opportunity for debate then. She will know that there has subsequently been at least one debate in Westminster Hall; I am sure there will be more.

Melanie Onn Lab

Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes

Question

On the issue of indefinite leave to remain, the Minister said from the Dispatch Box that there will be “close consideration” of the public consultation that concluded last month, and yet last week the Home Secretary said that she is determined to push ahead with those changes to retrospective indefinite leave to remain. Which is true? This is about people who are working here and people who are contributing in many ways, not just financially.

Minister reply

At the outset of the consultation, we were very clear that there were certain non-negotiable elements that we had decided prior to the consultation, including moving to a system with a default 10 years that could be reduced to five on the basis of the people’s contribution to their community and in relation to speaking English. Within the consultation, there were also questions about transitional protections. We are looking at all those issues in the round and I do not see an inconsistency in the two positions.

Desmond Swayne Con

New Forest West

Question

Where will we send an illegal entrant with no right to remain but whose country of origin is unsafe?

Minister reply

The right hon. Gentleman will know that this Government have removed 60,000 people with no right to be in this country—a 31% increase on our predecessors. It is not possible to effect return in every case; everybody knows that. There are certain countries to which we are unable to do so. In those cases, we are not effecting returns, but we have to have a system that has a backstop of removal. I think that is an accepted principle.

Tony Vaughan Lab

Folkestone and Hythe

Question

I acknowledge the considerable challenge that the Government have in winning back public confidence in the asylum system. The Home Office published a report last year concluding that there was insufficient evidence that restrictive asylum policies reduce claims, so will the Home Office publish evidence to show that cutting refugee leave from five years down to 30 months will deter claims in the UK? Does the Minister accept that a substantial settlement pathway of 20 years-plus is also unlikely to deter those claims?

Minister reply

My hon. and learned Friend knows that we bring forward our impact assessments alongside the policies as we publish them, and as we seek to debate or implement them. He knows about the case that we made in our document in November as well. With regard to whether these policies work, I would gently say that Germany and Denmark have a similar period of time for protection, and both are seeing reductions in asylum claims. In the UK, there have been over 80,000 asylum claims for the last two years; for the previous decade, claims averaged 27,500. I do not think we can say that no change is an option.

Claire Young Lib Dem

Thornbury and Yate

Question

My constituent is a hard-working taxpayer, but his wife and daughter remain in Iran because the family reunion route has effectively been closed since September. Does the Minister accept that failing to provide controlled, safe and legal routes not only lets down families like this one, but fuels the use of dangerous routes?

Minister reply

That route is paused for now. The hon. Lady will know that over the last four or five years, we have seen a huge increase—fivefold, I think—in the use of that route. Given the significant changes, it is right that the Government ensure that the system is effective. We are looking at it closely and we appreciate the importance of family reunion. She will have heard what I said about safe and legal means.

Gareth Snell Lab Co-op

Stoke-on-Trent Central

Question

Given the changes, what changes to the national referral mechanism in relation to modern slavery does the Minister expect to see? What does the switch from a duty to a power for housing people waiting for asylum mean for the national dispersal method, including for places that have routinely had more people than was agreed, such as Stoke-on-Trent—and, if there are no changes, will he look at funding integration work in those places?

Minister reply

My hon. Friend will know about my work on modern slavery over my years in this place. We know that is a constantly moving picture. We want to make sure that the protections for victims of slavery are robust—I think there is a consensus here on that—and that the system is being used properly. I also take his point on dispersal. The Department’s view is that there should be full dispersal, meaning that communities share the challenge across their means. With regard to payments, we pay £1,200 per head to help that integration work.

Lewis Cocking Con

Broxbourne

Question

Paying illegal asylum seekers £40,000 to leave the United Kingdom is a kick in the teeth for my hard-working constituents. Why are we not using that money to build a detention centre so that we can detain and immediately deport those who arrive in this country illegally?

Minister reply

See, this is funny, Mr Speaker: when the hon. Gentleman was in my office saying he wanted the hotel in his constituency closed, he was saying, “Make sure we get a grip and get them closed”, but then when he sees the proposals to do so, he does not want them. He cannot have those two things together.

Damien Egan Lab

Bristol North East

Question

We see reports of armed criminal gangs operating with confidence along the northern coastline of France. My constituents ask what the French authorities are actually doing to deal with the issue. Can the Minister give an update on the ongoing discussions that he is having with his French counterparts? What will change on the back of these reforms?

Minister reply

This is an important point. The gangs are well embedded; they had a head start of a good six-plus years on this Government. It is not easy for the French authorities, which we work very closely with. Through the Sandhurst agreement, we have seen 40,000 preventions, but we are in active negotiations about where we go next to tackle that pernicious threat.

Carla Denyer Green

Bristol Central

Question

Aside from the cruelty of asking people who have fled war and persecution to re-justify their already-recognised refugee status every 30 months, how does the Minister plan to pay for this huge additional administrative burden? As we have heard, the Refugee Council has estimated that it will cost £725 million over 10 years, but he contests that estimate. Perhaps he can tell us how much he thinks it will cost, and why—when our NHS and schools are crying out for funding—he is spending taxpayers’ money on scapegoating migrants instead.

Minister reply

I gently say to the hon. Lady that we will not be asking those who come to this country, have a protection need, enter into work and study, learn the language and do not commit crimes to re-justify their protection need. I think that strikes the right balance between the taxpayer and the individual, and I do not recognise or accept the figures that she cites. Turning to the issue of cost, we must recognise that we in this country support a significantly bigger supported population than we have traditionally. That number needs to reduce —we need to break that attractiveness—which is why we have proposed these reforms.

Neil Duncan-Jordan Lab

Poole

Question

Last week, the Home Secretary mentioned that our immigration policy needed to be based on the idea of fairness. Is it fair to change the rules on indefinite leave to remain for those who are already making a contribution to our society and came here under the old rules? Will the Minister give those individuals some assurance that they will get some transitional protection?

Minister reply

I am grateful for that question. On fairness, the applicable rules have always been those in force at the point of application, rather than at the point of entry, so I do not accept that that in itself represents a lack of fairness. Nevertheless, I have heard the point that my hon. Friend and other colleagues have made, which is why we carried out the consultation in the way we did.

Julian Lewis Con

New Forest East

Question

There have often been occasions on which somebody has leaked in advance the contents of a statement that they are going to make to the House of Commons, or part of its contents, but this is the first time I have seen a total revelation in the press of something that the Government had no intention of making a statement about to the House of Commons. Why is that, and what will these measures do to deter people from breaking into this country illegally, with it then being impossible to deport them?

Minister reply

On the deterrence point, as I have said, we are receiving applications at an unprecedented level, and at a time when our European Union counterparts are seeing fewer applications. There is an attractiveness to this country, which is why we are changing the protection package and carrying out record levels of enforcement against illegal working. Those are the changes we are making to break those pull factors to this country. Turning to announcements, we would of course mean no discourtesy to the House, and the right hon. Gentleman will have heard the apology I made at the outset. However, we stated our policy in November, and what we are now doing is building it out.

Ben Goldsborough Lab

South Norfolk

Question

South Norfolk expects our immigration system to be fair, open and transparent. The one problem we have come across, unfortunately, is that there is a lot of confusion online, as has been expertly shown by the shadow Home Secretary today. Can the Minister clarify that the process we are looking at will save the taxpayer £20 million, instead of spending money to keep open asylum hotels?

Minister reply

My hon. Friend is exactly right. With regard to family returns, I hear from Conservative Members that they would rather pay a family with no prospect of staying in the country an average of £158,000 to stay in a hotel, rather than pay that £40,000. There are 150 families in the pilot; if we were to be successful with all of them, that would save the British taxpayer £20 million. I think we would be doing right by them in doing so.

Liz Saville-Roberts PC

Dwyfor Meirionnydd

Question

Yesterday we marked International Women’s Day with the statistic that women hold fewer than two thirds of the rights enjoyed by men globally. Afghan women are already barred from secondary and higher education, and they now face further violence and discrimination under the Taliban’s new criminal regulations. What is the Secretary of State doing? She is stopping them from applying to study at our universities. Does the Minister not agree that the aim of ending violence against women and girls extends beyond borders, and that his Government have a moral duty to help women fulfil their potential in safety?

Minister reply

I totally agree, which is why we have offered sanctuary to over 37,000 Afghans via resettlement schemes since 2021, as well as those who have come via the asylum system. I do not think that the point of difference between the right hon. Lady and me is about the substance; it is about whether those sorts of routes to provide sanctuary to people who want to study and have their protection needs met should be run by universities on our behalf, without the scrutiny of Parliament, or by the Government themselves. I cannot agree with her on that.

Matt Bishop Lab

Forest of Dean

Question

I thank the Minister for his updates. The Home Secretary was absolutely right last week that the public expect a controlled and orderly immigration system. I fully support her plans, but can the Minister say more about how quickly the measures announced will be implemented, and how the Home Office will ensure that they are properly enforced in practice?

Minister reply

I know that the public are eager to see change. We were able to make some immediate changes in November when we announced the policies, and last Thursday we tabled statutory instruments that we hope will effect further changes. Similarly, we made changes to the immigration rules last week, and we will do so at future opportunities when the need arises. Of course, where there is the need for primary legislation—particularly on important appeals reform—that will come in front of the House in the usual way.

Kieran Mullan Con

Bexhill and Battle

Question

The only country that has successfully tackled illegal boat crossings similar to ours is Australia, and it did so not by paying people £40,000 per family to leave, but by sending them to a safe third country. I noticed that the Minister completely failed to answer the question from my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne). Does the Minister accept the reality that the only way to tackle this problem will be to get on with having a safe third country to deport these people to?

Minister reply

I follow the hon. Gentleman’s work. He always says no to large sites and no to hotels, and then proposes fantastical third countries that he is not capable of naming. Ultimately, this is the choice: do people want fantasy, more empty rhetoric and argument, or do they want change and action with this Government? I know what I choose.

Lewis Atkinson Lab

Sunderland Central

Question

Along with Home Affairs Committee colleagues, I spent time in northern France last year seeing the challenges of intercepting small boats. The French maritime doctrine has clearly been an obstacle to adopting the more assertive tactics that my constituents wish and expect to see. Can the Minister outline the progress in getting the French to change their tactics, and will he make the continuation of Sandhurst funding dependent on that?

Minister reply

From my perspective, with regards to action in northern France, what works is what works. It is a matter of record that we have enthusiasm about maritime doctrine-type tactics, but there are other things prior to that which need to work as well, particularly our work with the French to disrupt organised crime, which is having a significant impact. My hon. Friend mentions Sandhurst, which we are in the process of negotiating. I can absolutely assure him that all of that will be seen through the prism of bringing forward effective action.

Manuela Perteghella Lib Dem

Stratford-on-Avon

Question

If the Government are serious about stopping dangerous small boats crossings and smashing the gangs, there must be safe routes for those fleeing war and persecution. I remind the House that bombs are falling right now in the Gulf and in the middle east. What progress has the Home Secretary made in establishing safe and legal routes for refugees, so that people do not risk their lives crossing the channel?

Minister reply

The hon. Lady will know from our announcements in November that we believe in safe and legal alternatives. She will know that the “one in, one out” work with France is itself a safe and legal route. She will also know of the announcements we have made about a refugee study route. We are getting on with those things, alongside the difficult decisions we have made in front of Parliament in relation to the balance in disrupting that model and changing those behaviours from irregular and dangerous to safe and legal.

Adam Thompson Lab

Erewash

Question

Like many towns, Long Eaton is home to an asylum seeker hotel. It was gifted to us by the last Tory Government, but I know the Minister is doing everything in his power to close it as soon as possible. A secondary effect of the Tories’ hotels, however, is illegal work associated with the exploitation of local asylum seekers. Can the Minister elaborate on how measures announced recently will help to end illegal work in Erewash?

Minister reply

We know from the materials of the traffickers that illegal working is one of those advertising features used to suggest to people that they should try to come to the UK. The impact of that is then felt in communities such as Long Eaton, and it means that we have got hotels open, but we are changing that equation. We have extended the powers around illegal working to the gig economy in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025, which is now coming into force. The message is clear: people will not be able to employ people illegally, and people will not be able to work illegally.

Andrew Murrison Con

South West Wiltshire

Question

We learn from the press, if not from the Minister, that up to £40,000 of taxpayers’ money will be used to reward illegal activity. Does that not make a mockery of the law? Would it not be far better to withdraw from the European convention on human rights, so that we can deport people who have no basis to be here?

Minister reply

It is tricky, because the right hon. Gentleman talks with power and vigour that was lacking from his colleagues in their 14 years in government. Indeed, he may well know, as colleagues on the Opposition Front Bench certainly know, that they paid people to leave the country, because it is in the taxpayers’ interest. There are choices between measures that work and measures such as leaving the ECHR, which are fantastical and would just lead to years and years of arguing, disruption and no impact.

Tom Hayes Lab

Bournemouth East

Question

Some say that this Government are controlling our borders in spite of our progressive values, but no, we are securing our borders because it is in line with our Labour values. In my constituency, residents want to feel safe, and they do not feel safe with our borders not yet controlled. In wanting to tackle illegal ads, will the Minister set out what this Government are doing to stop illegal working, particularly within Deliveroo, Just Eat and Uber Eats?

Minister reply

My hon. Friend is right, and I make exactly the same assessment of the position in Nottingham that I make of the position in Bournemouth. Those are people who leant into the Afghan scheme, the Syrian scheme, the Hong Kong British national overseas scheme and the Homes for Ukraine scheme, but who are rightly fed up about the three hotels in Bournemouth and the impact on their community. My hon. Friend’s vigour in working for the closure of those hotels is well known. As for the question of illegal workers, to prevent them from using those facilities we have introduced new punishments. People who work in the gig economy and are using the substitution of labour to circumvent legal working rules will be caught and punished, and we are doing that at record levels.

Seamus Logan SNP

Aberdeenshire North and Moray East

Question

At lunch time today I chaired a meeting of the all-party parliamentary group on fisheries, during which we heard about existential threats to the fishing industry across these islands. Will the Minister agree to attend a meeting of the APPG so that he can hear at first hand about some of the threats posed by his party’s immigration policies?

Minister reply

I am sure that the subject of that meeting was not how to help people to work illegally in the fishing industry, which, as the hon. Gentleman knows, we are discussing today, but of course I am always open to meetings with colleagues to hear about their important work and what they want to see from the Government.

Shaun Davies Lab

Telford

Question

I welcome the Government’s focus on closing the hotels, and I am delighted that the last remaining hotel in my constituency that was opened by the Conservatives will be closing in the coming weeks, but will the Minister recommit the efforts of the Home Office to recovering the excess profits made by the providers of the contracts that were so badly negotiated by the last Government?

Minister reply

My hon. Friend has timed his question perfectly, enabling me to say, just as the Chancellor joins me, that we have recouped tens of millions of pounds from those contracts, not to mention reduction amounting to hundreds of millions as a result of our improvement in relation to hotels. Nevertheless, all those hotels will be closed—opened by the Tories, closed by Labour.

Luke Evans Con

Hinckley and Bosworth

Question

Raising that point was useful, because many of the migrants are going into houses in multiple occupation, which is a real problem in my constituency. Along with my Liberal Democrat-run council, I have raised concerns not only about the impact on our community, but about where people are being placed. Those concerns have been raised with Serco, which is ignoring them. Will the Minister meet me so that I can discuss them with him? Those in my community are extremely concerned.

Minister reply

Of course I will. I want to see equitable dispersal, and I am desperately trying to close the gap between the Home Office and local government so that there is better information sharing. Local authorities should not be surprised: there should be an early conversation about possible sites in their communities, not because they will have a veto but because they may have a better way of doing things.

Christopher Vince Lab Co-op

Harlow

Question

I know that the Minister will agree that it is important for us to have a working and fair immigration system, but that, sadly, is not what we inherited. Constituents of mine in Harlow are rightly concerned that people who come to settle here should be law-abiding. Does the Minister agree that if they are not law-abiding, they will not be settling here?

Minister reply

I totally agree. My hon. Friend can assure people in Harlow that every element of our system will incentivise people to come here and follow the rules, and if they do not, that will be a bar to citizenship. It will bar them from getting what they want from our settlement system. That is the right balance for the British people to ensure that our generosity is not abused.

Ayoub Khan Ind

Birmingham Perry Barr

Question

I am very perplexed, and indeed I suspect that most Brits will be perplexed. We have more than 650,000 job vacancies, of which more than 165,000 are for unskilled workers. Why are we not dealing with the refugees—processing their applications, giving them training, putting them into jobs and enabling them to earn some money, rather than paying their hotel costs?

Minister reply

The hon. Gentleman will have heard earlier that we in the Home Office are making decisions faster than ever without affecting the grant rate. We are making those quick decisions so that those who need protection can build their lives in this country. The hon. Gentleman may well have heard Question Time earlier today, when we were talking about the number of young people in Britain who are out of work. I cannot accept that so many young people in Britain can be out of work and the Government can have no aspiration for them to fill roles.

Bradley Thomas Con

Bromsgrove

Question

My constituents want the Government to get off their back and get on their side, rather than using their hard-earned taxpayers’ money to spend up to £40,000 on removing illegal asylum seekers. Will the Minister rule that out?

Minister reply

The hon. Gentleman has heard what I have said to his colleagues: the choice is between paying £158,000 for those families to live in hotels and paying £40,000 for them to leave the country. I do not know whether he needs a calculator, but I think that is a good equation.

Christine Jardine Lib Dem

Edinburgh West

Question

Can the Minister tell us what modelling those in the Home Office have done in respect of whether these visa bans will actually affect the backlog of refugee and asylum seekers? Have they looked at the impact on local services in constituencies such as mine? People running care homes have told me that they are losing vital workforce members and may not be able to stay open.

Minister reply

Of course we take a lens on reform. The hon. Lady will know that those seeking asylum cannot work in such environments, so they would not be germane to that conversation. We look very closely at the impacts of our policies and publish reviews at the appropriate moments.

Greg Smith Con

Mid Buckinghamshire

Question

The concept of paying someone who has come here illegally £40,000 to leave will stick in the throats of all taxpayers in this country. Notwithstanding the arguments that the Minister has put forward, what assessment has he made that making an offer of 40 grand will not act as a huge pull factor and cause more people to come here to collect our cash?

Minister reply

First of all, I can offer the hon. Gentleman some degree of comfort: this is a targeted pilot at this stage. It cannot act as a pull factor, because people will not be eligible for it. Other countries that offer money, including Denmark, are seeing their numbers go down, which can also give him a degree of comfort.

Ben Spencer Con

Runnymede and Weybridge

Question

The Minister failed to answer the questions from my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne) and my hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle (Dr Mullan). In the absence of a third-country scheme, to where do we remove people when their countries are not safe or there are no returns agreements?

Minister reply

As I have said to the hon. Gentleman’s colleagues, the Rwanda scheme would not have removed those people; it would have removed a tiny proportion, at an eye-watering cost. We are ramping up removals of those who have no right to be here. If the hon. Gentleman is really saying that he wants to rip up the ECHR because he wants to send people back to countries that are not safe, he should name which ones.

Vikki Slade Lib Dem

Mid Dorset and North Poole

Question

Alongside last week’s announcements was the most welcome announcement that BNO passport holders will not be required to hold B2 language qualifications, but Hongkongers resident in Wimborne are really concerned about the income threshold. Can the Minister confirm whether that is also being exempted?

Minister reply

As I have said to other colleagues, I can confirm that the income threshold, and particularly how it is resolved at a family unit level, was part of the consultation. We have had more than 200,000 replies, and we are looking at them closely.

Shockat Adam Ind

Leicester South

Question

Over 330,000 people have signed a petition urging the Government to scrap the plan to increase the ILR period from five years to 10 years, especially the retrospective nature of it. This will have a detrimental effect on the core of our society, especially the NHS, and will exploit workers, who will be vulnerable to exploitative bosses. Does the Minister agree with many of his Back Benchers that the Government must stop this cruel proposal taking effect?

Minister reply

As the hon. Gentleman knows, and as I have said previously, the governing criteria for settlement have always applied at the point of application, rather than at the point of entry. He will also have heard from me that one in 30 people in this country came during the last three or four years, so a significant problem must be resolved in terms of pressure on public services and fairness to the British taxpayer. That is why we are looking at this issue so closely.

Jim Shannon DUP

Strangford

Question

Some time ago, there was a debate on fisheries in this Chamber. The Minister who replied for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said that she would meet those of us who represent fishing villages. There is a need for visas for fishing crews, and it will not cost this country any money to have them here, as they contribute to it. Will the Minister please agree to a meeting?

Minister reply

Whether it is with me or the Minister for Migration and Citizenship, I will ensure that a meeting on fisheries takes place.

Adnan Hussain Ind

Blackburn

Question

My constituents are deeply alarmed that retrospective changes to ILR could leave long-term residents living in fear of deportation. Does the Minister accept that leaving families across this country in a state of profound uncertainty risks undermining the very sense of security and fairness that our immigration system is supposed to uphold?

Minister reply

I cannot accept that. The hon. Gentleman will have seen that we were very clear in our settlement consultation that coming here, working hard, contributing, paying taxes, learning the language, taking part in the community and not committing crimes will get someone the best route to settlement. I think that gives people the security they need.

Shadow Comment

Chris Philp

Shadow Comment

The shadow minister criticised the government for not voluntarily announcing their policies and for failing to control illegal immigration. He noted that 67,000 people entered the UK illegally since the election, with a 45% increase compared to before the election. He also mentioned serious crimes committed by illegal immigrants and the failure to intercept boats near the shores. Philp suggested leaving the European convention on human rights to enable rapid deportation of illegal immigrants. He also expressed support for the government's proposal on indefinite leave to remain (ILR) changes, but questioned whether these changes would be made via primary legislation or emergency legislation.

▸ Assessment & feedback

Summary accuracy

Feedback type

Comment (optional)

About House of Commons Debates

House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.

Commons Sense

Immigration Policy

Lead MP

Debate Type

Tags

At a Glance

How the Debate Unfolded

Government Statement

Contributors (48)

Shadow Comment

About House of Commons Debates