Rwanda Asylum and Immigration 2024-05-14
2024-05-14
TAGS
Response quality
Questions & Answers
Q1
Partial Answer
▸
Context
The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024 has raised concerns about its impact on the criminal justice system.
If he will issue guidance to lawyers on the potential implications for the criminal justice process of the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024.
To be clear, that Act relates to immigration and potentially administrative law. It does not substantially impact on the criminal law, and accordingly no specific guidance is required.
▸
Assessment & feedback
The response did not provide a direct answer about issuing guidance to lawyers but clarified the act's scope.
Response accuracy
Q2
Partial Answer
▸
Context
The questioner praises the quick response from solicitors in Glasgow regarding Rwanda removals but raises concerns about legal aid access and MPs' ability to intervene.
May I praise the quick response from solicitors and the community in Glasgow to Rwanda removals, very much in the spirit of the Glasgow Girls and the Glasgow Grannies and Kenmure Street three years ago? Is there a deliberate policy to remove people from Scotland to England to prevent them from accessing legal aid, as they would be able and fully entitled to do in Scotland? What guidance has been issued to lawyers in this respect? Lastly, what right do MPs have to intervene in cases of removal, because I have been told that MPs have been asked for wet signatures from people who have been taken to immigration removal centres in England.
There are several questions in there but the answer to the first question is no, that is not correct. The point about legal advice is very important: people should get legal advice so that they can make their points. That is why we are investing heavily: when the Illegal Migration Act 2023 comes into force there will be a 15% uplift; we have invested £1.5 million to reaccredit senior caseworkers; and we are also paying for travel time.
▸
Assessment & feedback
The response did not address the specific ask about policy to remove individuals from Scotland or guidance issued to lawyers, focusing instead on funding and legal support.
Response accuracy
Q3
Partial Answer
▸
Context
Constituents have been removed from Scotland to England, leading to concerns about access to legal aid and MP intervention.
My hon. Friends the Members for Glasgow Central (Alison Thewliss) and for Glasgow North East (Anne McLaughlin) and I have constituents who have been removed from Scotland to England and threatened with deportation. Can the Secretary of State answer this question: why are MPs being denied access to their constituents? It seems outrageous. Does he not agree that this is unacceptable and that lawyers and their elected representatives should not be impeded by arbitrary barriers when accessing constituents who are threatened with deportation?
I would be more than happy to discuss that point with the hon. Gentleman. Of course MPs should have access in appropriate circumstances, but the critical point is for individuals to get legal support—I say that with no discourtesy to him as a constituency MP. That legal support is important. As I have said, when the IMA comes into effect we will increase funding by 15%, pay for travel time and ensure the reaccreditation of senior caseworkers.
▸
Assessment & feedback
The response did not provide a direct answer about MPs' access to constituents but focused on legal support and funding.
Response accuracy