← Back to Westminster Hall Debates

Nationality and Borders Bill: LGBTQ+ People

02 February 2022

Lead MP

Olivia Blake
Sheffield Hallam
Lab

Responding Minister

Tom Pursglove

Tags

Asylum & RefugeesMigrants & BordersForeign AffairsWomen & Equalities
Word Count: 9204
Other Contributors: 9

At a Glance

Olivia Blake raised concerns about nationality and borders bill: lgbtq+ people in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key Requests to Government:

The Government should address the 'culture of disbelief' that undermines LGBTQ+ asylum seekers' claims and should work on righting these wrongs instead of increasing the burden of proof. The Minister needs to provide a proper response to the concerns raised by LGBTQ+ organisations and the equality impact assessment.

How the Debate Unfolded

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

Lead Contributor

Sheffield Hallam
Opened the debate
The Nationality and Borders Bill will have a devastating impact on LGBTQ+ asylum seekers and refugees. Currently, one in three applications from LGBTQ+ asylum seekers across Europe is refused because officials do not believe the applicant's story. In the UK, around 2,000 people flee persecution due to their sexual orientation each year, with only about a quarter of those applications granted by the Home Office. The Bill increases the burden of proof for asylum applications and forces applicants to produce relevant evidence by a fixed date, which is often impossible for LGBTQ+ individuals who face trauma and language barriers.

Government Response

Tom Pursglove
Government Response
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Sharma. I begin by thanking the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Olivia Blake) for securing this debate on what is undoubtedly an extremely important topic. Many of the reforms in the Nationality and Borders Bill are being introduced against the backdrop of these terrible crossings of the English channel. People are putting their lives in the hands of evil criminal smuggling gangs who treat people as cargo with no regard for human life. I acknowledge this House's interest in the issue. We will change current practices by introducing a new form of temporary refugee permission to stay, meant for individuals meeting the requirements of refugee status in the UK but not having claimed asylum directly or without delay due to fear of presenting to authorities as an LGBT+ person. Decision makers will work on a case-by-case basis, taking into account relevant factors including delays due to fear of discrimination. The Government believes all measures are compliant with international obligations. Accommodation centres will ensure individuals have simple, safe and secure accommodation while their claims are processed; cases should be considered more quickly, and those requiring sanctuary should receive support as soon as possible. Individuals will also have opportunities to disclose information supporting evidence for why they should not be housed in accommodation centres, which could include reasons linked to sexuality. Accommodation centres are not detention; people are free to come and go as they please with various safeguards built into the arrangements. Tomorrow's visit to Napier is exactly the same arrangement as when I visited Napier a few weeks ago, and I welcome the opportunity for Members to speak to people there. We will also make it easier to move asylum seekers from the UK to a safe country while their claim is pending; we only work with countries compliant with the refugee convention and any obligations under relevant human rights law. On the one-stop process, late evidence and damage to credibility, the Bill introduces a new and expanded one-stop process ensuring that asylum, human rights claims, and other protection matters are considered at the earliest opportunity. Where evidence is provided late without good reason, it should be taken into account by the decision maker as damaging to a claimant's credibility; but where there is good reason, there will be no damage. This is not a new concept: it has underpinned existing immigration legislation under previous Governments.
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy

About Westminster Hall Debates

Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.