Migration: Settlement Pathway

Debate between Lord Bishop of Winchester and Lord Hanson of Flint

Tuesday 25th November 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to the noble Baroness. She knows that we have had a lot of discussion around EU settled status. I can confirm to her that the EU settlement scheme is out of scope, as is the Windrush scheme. For British overseas nationals—those from Hong Kong—their visas will receive a five-year reduction, effectively maintaining their five-year route to settlement. Those with settled status will be able to keep it without any change. These are reasonable responses to the many European Union citizens, those of the Windrush generation and those from Hong Kong who have come to this country to live, work and integrate. We are looking to put down some basic discussion points for consultation on how we manage settled status when we have potentially 1.3 million to 2.2 million people coming to settled status between 2026 and 2030, on current estimates. That figure will only grow unless we take the action we are trying to take today.

The noble Baroness mentioned a number of points; they are all up for consultation. The high salary issue means that an individual who is a higher taxpayer or employed in specific public roles would also result in a reduction in the additional time required. That is an important recognition of the contribution that people make to the United Kingdom. All of those points are up for discussion in the consultation. Given that the time is relatively limited, I want to make sure we can take other questions, so I will answer the right reverend Prelate’s next.

[The Lord Bishop of Winchester]

My Lords, I will keep my question brief because I want to give time to the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett. One of the most encouraging developments in foreign policy in this country in recent years has been the growing recognition of the evil of the denial of freedom of religion or belief across the world, leading to widespread persecution of faith communities, Christians not least among them, as we have tragically seen in these last days in Nigeria. The UK has become a recognised global leader in advocacy for this oft-overlooked right.

Does the Minister accept that denial of freedom of religion or belief is a significant driver of migration? It is certainly so in the case of a significant number who arrive illegally, who, according to the Statement,

“could see settlement take up to 30 years”.

Does the Minister agree that we need consistency in the development of foreign and domestic policy, especially in this area but also in upstream causes and drivers of migration, to ensure that very vulnerable individuals are afforded the protection and assistance they so badly need?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to the right reverend Prelate for giving me the opportunity to say to the House that there is a real difference between asylum, refugee status and immigration. This Statement concerns the transition of citizens who have come here through an immigration route to work to having earned settled status.

Last week, we discussed another Statement on asylum claims. Persecution for religious faith would be a ground to seek asylum. We have also had a policy statement on how individuals can claim asylum. Some people will come here illegally, which is why I said to the noble Lord, Lord Davies, that that is not an automatic barrier. However, it is certainly a significant barrier and how that person has arrived can be examined. For those asylum claims, we will meet our obligations under the international refugee convention and our human rights obligations, and those claims will be based on an individual’s personal circumstances.

The key point of the Statement we made earlier in the week is that, instead of five years, it would now be a two and a half year period. If the circumstances of the individual are reassessed after two and a half years, the persecution in the native country may not be what it was two and a half years ago. It may be, in which case the asylum claim would still be processed.

The key to asylum claims is to process them quickly to determine whether an asylum claim is genuine. If so, we allow status. If that happens, they will fall under the routes of this particular Statement. If it is not a proper asylum claim, they will face removal from the country. That is a two-stage operation. This is not just around people who are coming on small boats; these are people who are coming on work visas who wish to have long-term settled status. Here, we are just putting some more guard-rails around that settled status so that we can ensure that individuals have contributed and, on the four key issues, are citizens that deserve the right and privilege of being British citizens as part of their consideration.

Asylum Seekers: Wethersfield

Debate between Lord Bishop of Winchester and Lord Hanson of Flint

Thursday 28th November 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

We will continue to keep it under review. As I have said, the proposal is to reduce reliance on accommodation in due course. The noble Lord will know that we have already closed the “Bibby Stockholm” and decommissioned Scampton in Lincolnshire. It is a process; as numbers fall, we will continue to review this on an ongoing basis.

[The Lord Bishop of Winchester]

My Lords, reports by Doctors of the World and Médecins Sans Frontières speak of the high levels of psychological distress experienced by many of the residents who are accommodated at Wethersfield, and this is corroborated by those from the diocese of Chelmsford volunteering on site. Can the Minister say what access there is to therapeutic mental health support on site, especially for those suffering from complex conditions such as PTSD?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to the right reverend Prelate for the question. We are cognisant of the pressures on individuals at the site. There is a regular meeting between the police, agencies, local councils and others to assess the needs on site, and we had some external reports which the Government have responded to positively. I take on board his points; the Government’s position is to try to resolve those. Individuals spend a maximum of nine months at the centre before being dispersed, and I hope that will help with the issues raised by the right reverend Prelate.