Small Boat Channel Crossings 2022-01-17
2022-01-17
TAGS
Response quality
Questions & Answers
Q1
Partial Answer
▸
Context
MP questions progress on reducing illegal channel crossings which are deemed unfair, unacceptable and lethally dangerous.
What progress has been made to reduce the number of illegal small boats crossing in the Channel? The crossings are considered unfair, unacceptable, and lethal. They are unnecessary as France and other EU member states have safe asylum systems.
Paid tribute to late Member for Birmingham, Erdington before addressing the illegal small boat crossings. Stressed need for whole machinery of government cooperation and deployment of resources including MOD naval assets since 2020.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Did not provide specific details on progress made or actions taken to reduce illegal channel crossings.
Paid Tribute
Stressed Need For Cooperation
Response accuracy
Q2
Partial Answer
▸
Context
MP thanks Home Secretary for response on illegal channel crossings, reiterates request for MOD assistance.
Thanks Home Secretary for her reply. Requests growing cooperation between Home Office and MOD to shut down routes used by people smugglers and protect lives at sea using all available resources and tools.
Home Secretary confirms request for MOD naval assets since 2020. Emphasizes need to work collectively across government machinery and highlights the new immigration plan.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Did not provide specifics on current or planned actions with MOD beyond confirming a prior request.
Confirmed Prior Request
Emphasized Collective Action
Response accuracy
Q3
Partial Answer
▸
Context
MP echoes Home Secretary's remarks on illegal channel crossings, highlights public anger over the issue and respect for legal asylum seekers.
Echos Home Secretary's comments about illegal channel crossings. Notes public anger due to illegal migration issues while acknowledging respect for those seeking asylum legally.
Home Secretary agrees with sentiment, highlights new plan for immigration including Nationality and Borders Bill to address dysfunctional system and genuine help for persecuted individuals.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Did not provide specific details on addressing public anger or policy changes beyond reiterating existing plans.
Agreed With Sentiment
Highlighted New Immigration Plan
Response accuracy
Q4
Direct Answer
▸
Context
MP questions quick action to stop illegal boat crossings in the Channel, suggests turning back and escorting boats into French waters.
Asks if time has come to turn around and escort boats back into French waters on humanitarian grounds and to protect UK borders from illegal immigration.
Home Secretary confirms this is Government's policy. Border Force has been commissioned with MOD support for pushing back boats, routes tested, technology deployed, and plan well-tested.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Response accuracy
Q5
Partial Answer
▸
Context
MP expresses public desire for decisive action on illegal boat crossings, criticizes opposition's stance against supporting Government measures.
Expresses disappointment that Opposition refused to support Government's measures to end vexatious and unmerited claims in favour of illegal entry.
Home Secretary disagrees with opposition stance. Government's new immigration plan aims to reform dysfunctional asylum system and tackle root causes of illegal migration, published in March 2021. Criticizes Opposition for not supporting these measures.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Did not provide details on public support or specific actions against unmerited claims beyond criticism of opposition stance.
Disagrees With Opposition
Criticizes Opposition
Response accuracy
Q6
Partial Answer
▸
Context
MP questions reports about Government wanting to process asylum seekers offshore, asks if any country has agreed.
Questions reports on offshore processing in countries like Gambia. Asks if such a country has agreed and acknowledges that distant processing might meet the letter but not spirit of obligations.
Home Secretary disagrees with question. Government considers all options including outsourcing processing to remove those with no legal basis in the UK. Criticizes Labour's record on removals over decades as a mass failure.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Did not confirm or deny reports, instead focused on criticizing Labour's approach to illegal immigration.
Disagrees With Question
Criticizes Labour
Response accuracy
Q7
Partial Answer
▸
Context
In 2019, the Government brought in the Navy to patrol the channel, but those patrols ended after just six weeks without intercepting a single boat and at a cost of £780,000. The Home Secretary is proposing to take responsibility for ending dangerous crossings from the Home Office and hand it over to the MOD.
We very much look forward to the tributes later this month. Especially today, at Home Office questions, we very much miss his kindness, his passion and his wit alongside us on the Front Bench. We hear that responsibility for ending dangerous crossings of the channel is to be taken away from the Home Office and handed to the MOD, but we have been here before. In 2019 the Government brought in the Navy to patrol the channel, and those patrols ended after just six weeks, having cost £780,000 and without a single boat having been intercepted. Can the Home Secretary explain how today's proposal will be any different from 2019 and prevent lives from being lost at sea?
Of course I can. I restate what I have said in the House many times about the hybrid approach we need: no one Department can solve this issue in the channel on its own. Let us be crystal clear about this. I originally commissioned the military aid to the civil authorities request that went to the Ministry of Defence very early on, back in 2020. Of course my decision to bring in the MOD is vindication of our need to strengthen our defences in the channel. This is about a number of things—people are dying in the channel and in the Mediterranean. All aspects of pushbacks and turn-backs—of the approach we take in the channel—are operational. The MOD, maritime policing and Border Force originally came together, and they will continue to work together.
▸
Assessment & feedback
The Home Secretary did not provide a concrete explanation on how today's proposal would differ from 2019 patrols without intercepting boats and ending after six weeks at £780,000 cost.
We Are Committed To
Under Review
Response accuracy
Q8
Partial Answer
▸
Context
The Court of Appeal recently reminded the Home Secretary that arriving in the UK to claim asylum is not unlawful, yet her Bill will see Afghans, Syrians, and Uyghurs arrested, prosecuted, and imprisoned for up to four years.
I wholeheartedly endorse the Home Secretary's comments about the hon. Member for Birmingham, Erdington. The Home Secretary should have pointed out that, unlike the endless Downing Street parties, arriving in the UK to claim asylum is not unlawful, as the Court of Appeal reminded her just last month. It is only her atrocious anti-refugee Bill that will see Afghans, Syrians and Uyghurs arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned for up to four years. Why does she see relentless flouting of lockdown rules as forgivable for the Prime Minister but seeking safety here from Assad, the Taliban or genocide as worth four years in prison?
I always enjoy the hon. Gentleman's contributions. As we saw on Report and Third Reading of the Nationality and Borders Bill, the Scottish National party choose to deploy political gimmicks—I am being kind to the SNP—to frustrate the will of the public when it comes to reforming asylum and illegal migration. It is fair to say that the Conservative party in government, through the Nationality and Borders Bill and the new plan for immigration, will do everything possible to tackle the unscrupulous exploitation of people who cross illegally and will provide sanctuary to those who need our help and support—those fleeing persecution who need refuge.
▸
Assessment & feedback
The Home Secretary did not address why she sees arriving in the UK to claim asylum as unlawful under her Bill when it is not illegal according to the Court of Appeal.
Change Subject
Response accuracy
Q9
Partial Answer
▸
Context
The Home Secretary's proposals leaked over the weekend have nothing to do with saving lives and everything to do with saving the Prime Minister's career and her political career. The proposal includes sending in the Royal Navy against small boats full of refugees and asylum seekers, which is seen as inhumane.
That answer was about as convincing as the Prime Minister's apology. The Home Secretary has quite a nerve to talk about political gimmicks, given that she is the first person to be sent out to the Dispatch Box to further Operation Red Meat; the proposals leaked out over the weekend have absolutely nothing to do with saving lives and everything to do with saving the Prime Minister's career and her political career. The Home Secretary sending in the Royal Navy against small boats full of refugees and asylum seekers is pathetic, inhumane and an abuse of the Royal Navy, and her grubby shopping around for places to offshore asylum seekers to is an outrageous and dangerous big white elephant. Instead of ripping up the refugee convention and locking up refugees, why does the Home Office not start working with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and others to live up to our humanitarian obligations?
The hon. Gentleman needs to understand global migration challenges and the international exploitation of human lives and human beings that takes place, because clearly he has no recommendations or answers. His local authorities across Scotland refuse to house people who have come to our country. Frankly, I will take no lectures from him.
▸
Assessment & feedback
The Home Secretary did not address why she sees sending in the Royal Navy against small boats full of refugees and asylum seekers as an appropriate response when it is seen as inhumane.
Attacking Questioner
Response accuracy