Debates between Alex Chalk and Amber Rudd during the 2017-2019 Parliament

Home Office Removal Targets

Debate between Alex Chalk and Amber Rudd
Thursday 26th April 2018

(6 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Amber Rudd Portrait Amber Rudd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I hope the hon. Gentleman was able to resolve the situation for his constituent. I have had nothing but praise from MPs about the MPs, hotline, which works well for people—[Interruption.] Clearly there are a few exceptions on the SNP Benches, but most colleagues across the House have said that it works well, and I hope it was able to be of assistance.

Alex Chalk Portrait Alex Chalk (Cheltenham) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Illegal immigration is wrong because it creates unfairness for legal migrants, like the Windrush generation, who do the right thing and play by the rules. Is it not vital to keep that distinction and not allow the Labour party cynically to conflate the two issues for political purposes?

Amber Rudd Portrait Amber Rudd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend is right: it is a completely different situation. Everybody in the House wants to welcome the Windrush cohort and ensure that they are properly looked after and that a compensation scheme is put in place, which is the right thing to do, but we all have a different view about illegal migrants.

Terror Attacks

Debate between Alex Chalk and Amber Rudd
Thursday 22nd June 2017

(6 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Amber Rudd Portrait Amber Rudd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I welcome the hon. Gentleman back to the House. We have protected the police budget from 2015 to 2020. We will be conducting the review to find out what else we could do better to combat terrorism. The security services are leading on the review, looking at what has happened in the past. We will have an open mind as to what is needed, depending on what that review reveals.

Alex Chalk Portrait Alex Chalk (Cheltenham) (Con)
- Hansard - -

At present, a person who pleads guilty to possessing a well-known extremist publication, which includes instructions for making home-made bombs, will typically be sentenced to just 14 months. So they will be out in seven months, and will still be radicalised and a danger. Does the Home Secretary agree that the time has come to toughen up sentences under sections 57 and 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000?

Amber Rudd Portrait Amber Rudd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is fair to say that that is exactly the sort of instance I was referring to in my comments earlier. We must look at tougher sentencing, as Max Hill has suggested, in those sort of instances.