House of Commons · Westminster Hall
15 May 2024 · 3 other contributors · 3,975 words
Opened by Beth Winter Lab Cynon Valley
Responding minister: Tom Pursglove
Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.
Beth Winter raised concerns about no recourse to public funds in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key points
Key requests to Government
The UK Government should facilitate access to devolved schemes of assistance, extend legal aid scope, reduce immigration application fees, shorten long settlement routes to a maximum of five years, exempt key benefits from public funds, and enable councils to provide discretionary cost of living support. The policy of no recourse to public funds is part of a discriminatory migration policy that punishes vulnerable people.
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.
Opened the debate
The policy of no recourse to public funds is inhumane and cruel, causing poverty and hardship for vulnerable individuals. An estimated 2.6 million people are subject to these conditions, increasing their risk of living in destitution and putting significant pressure on local authority services. The cost of providing accommodation and financial support has risen by 22% from £64 million to £78 million at the end of 2021-22.
Mr. Ian Byrne expresses disappointment at the Government's delay in consulting on permanently extending the Healthy Start scheme to households with no recourse to public funds, calling for urgent action and citing support from organisations like Feeding Liverpool, the Food Foundation, and Sustain. Asked why the Government does not give people seeking asylum the right to work so that they can contribute to the tax system and society, challenging the Minister's framing of the debate as making no sense.
Mr. Jim Shannon congratulates the hon. Member for Cynon Valley and stresses the importance of ensuring that anyone with a right to be in the country has access to food and medical care, regardless of their immigration status.
The hon. Member for Halifax has highlighted the detrimental impact of no recourse to public funds on individuals and communities, particularly in cost-of-living crises.
Government Response
Tom PursgloveThe Government's policy on no recourse to public funds is grounded in the principle that migrants should not impose an unreasonable burden on the welfare system. The minister noted that those seeking to establish a life in the UK must do so without relying heavily on taxpayer support, promoting integration and preventing exploitation by criminal gangs. He emphasized the importance of legal migration routes over perilous small boat crossings and highlighted the Government's commitment to providing sanctuary through established visa routes for asylum seekers, with safeguards in place to lift NRPF conditions for those at risk of destitution or facing exceptional circumstances. The minister acknowledged that 71% of change of conditions applications were granted, indicating the system's effectiveness. Additional support measures include access to free school meals and early years education for two-year-olds, subject to income thresholds. He also mentioned ongoing engagement with other departments and devolved administrations on NRPF issues.