Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill

Angela Eagle Excerpts

Report stage
Monday 12th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Border Security and Asylum (Dame Angela Eagle)]

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

Government new clause 6—Timeframe for determination of appeal brought by appellant receiving accommodation support.

Government new clause 7—Timeframe for determination of certain appeals brought by non-detained appellants liable to deportation.

Government new clause 8—Refugee Convention: particularly serious crime.

New clause 1—Duty to report and publish data on deaths in the asylum system and small boat crossings—

“(1) The Secretary of State must, on a quarterly basis, publish and lay before Parliament a report that includes the number of deaths that have occurred in relation to the UK asylum system in the three months preceding the date specified in that report.

(2) The specified date under subsection (1) must be no more than six months prior to the date of publication.

(3) A report under subsection (1) must include―

(a) The total number of deaths occurring, during the specified period, of persons who were, at the time of death―

(i) in receipt of accommodation under sections 4, 95 or 98 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999; or

(ii) awaiting the outcome of a claim for asylum while residing in other forms of accommodation or at no fixed abode; or

(iii) undertaking an unauthorised crossing of the English Channel;

(b) the cause of death for each person reported, if known; and

(c) the locations in which each death occurred, if known.

(4) The first report under this section must be made published no later than one year after the passing of this Act.

(5) For the purposes of this section―

(a) A “claim for asylum” is defined in accordance with section 167 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999; and

(b) an “unauthorised crossing” is a sea crossing made by an individual without leave to enter the United Kingdom, made from dry land in France, Belgium or the Netherlands for the purpose of reaching dry land in the United Kingdom.”

This new clause would require the Home Office to publish quarterly statistics and information on deaths in the asylum system and in small boat channel crossings.

New clause 2—Reports on restrictions on asylum seekers engaging in employment—

“(1) The Secretary of State must publish a report explaining what progress has been made towards providing asylum applicants with the right to take up employment whilst their application is being determined.

(2) A report under subsection (1) must be published—

(a) by 31 December 2025, or

(b) within three months of the passing of this Act, whichever is earliest

(3) The Secretary of State must make a further report under subsection (1) at least every twelve calendar month after the publication of the first report, until the restrictions on asylum seekers engaging in employment are removed.

(4) Any report under subsection (1) must include a review of—

(a) the current 12 month waiting period attached to the permission to work, and

(b) the restriction of roles to the Immigration Salary List.

(5) The Secretary of State must make arrangements for—

(a) a copy of any report published under subsection (1) to be laid before both Houses of Parliament before the end of the day on which it is published, or the next sitting day if it is published on a non-sitting day;

(b) the House of Commons to debate a motion, made by a Minister of the Crown, to the effect that the House of Commons has considered the report; and

(c) the House of Lords to debate a motion, made by a Minister of the Crown, to the effect that the House of Lords has considered the report.

(6) The debates required under subsections (5)(b) and (c) must take place within 25 sitting days of the day on which the report is laid before Parliament.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to report back to Parliament annually on the Government's working rights policies for people in the asylum system, and for both Houses of Parliament to debate a motion on the report.

New clause 3—Duty to publish a strategy on safe and managed routes—

“(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passing of this Act, publish a strategy on the Government’s efforts to establish additional safe and legal routes for persons to seek asylum in the United Kingdom.

(2) A report under subsection (1) must be laid before Parliament.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to publish and lay before Parliament a strategy on the development of safe and managed routes for people to seek asylum in the UK.

New clause 4—Repeal of certain provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022—

“The following provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 are repealed—

(a) sections 58 to 65, and

(b) sections 68 and 69.”

This new clause would repeal specified provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022, relating to modern slavery victims.

New clause 9—Humanitarian Assistance—

“A person (“P”) does not commit an offence under section 13 (supplying articles for use in immigration crime), section 14 (handling articles for use in immigration crime), or section 16 (collecting information for use in immigration crime) if P’s action was for the purposes of providing humanitarian assistance.”

This new clause would ensure that individuals who provide humanitarian assistance would not be considered as having committed the new criminal offences created by clauses 13, 14 and 16 of this Bill.

New clause 10—Functions of the Commander in relation to sea crossings to United Kingdom—

“(1) In exercising the Commander’s functions in relation to sea crossings to the United Kingdom, the Commander must have regard to the objectives of—

(a) preventing the boarding of vessels, with the aim of entering the United Kingdom, by persons who require leave to enter the United Kingdom but are seeking to enter the United Kingdom—

(i) without leave to enter, or

(ii) with leave to enter that was obtained by means which included deception by any person;

(b) ensuring that a decision is taken on a claim by a person under subsection (1)(a) within six months of the person’s arrival in the United Kingdom; and

(c) making arrangements with a safe third country for the removal of a person who enters the United Kingdom without leave, or with leave that was obtained by deception.

(2) The Commander must include, in the strategic priority document issued under section 3(2), an assessment of—

(a) the most effective methods for deterring illegal entry into the United Kingdom;

(b) the most effective methods for reducing the number of sea crossings made by individuals without leave to enter the United Kingdom; and

(c) the most effective methods for arranging the removal, to the person’s own country or a safe third country, of a person who enters the United Kingdom illegally.

(3) For the purposes of this section—

(a) “sea crossings” are journeys from dry land in France, Belgium or the Netherlands for the purpose of reaching dry land in the United Kingdom; and

(b) illegal entry to the United Kingdom is defined in accordance with section 24 of the Immigration Act 1971 (illegal entry and similar offences).”

This new clause sets out objectives and strategic priorities for the Border Security Commander in relation to sea crossings and arrangements with a safe third country for the removal of people who enter the UK illegally.

New clause 11—Qualification period for Indefinite Leave to Remain in the United Kingdom—

“(1) The minimum qualification period for applications for indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom is a period of ten years.

(2) The qualification period in subsection (1) applies to a person who has—

(a) a tier 2, T2, International Sportsperson or Skilled Worker visa,

(b) a Scale-up Worker visa,

(c) a Global Talent, Tier 1 Entrepreneur or Investor visa,

(d) an Innovator Founder visa,

(e) a UK Ancestry visa, or

(f) a partner holding UK citizenship.

(3) A person who has lived in the United Kingdom for ten years or more but does not meet the criteria in subsection (2) cannot apply for indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom.”

This new clause would extend the qualification period for applying for Indefinite Leave to Remain in the UK to ten years and abolish the long-stay route, through which a person can apply for Indefinite Leave to Remain based on having lived in the UK for ten years or more.

New clause 12—Age assessments: use of scientific methods—

“The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passing of this Act, lay before Parliament—

(a) a statutory instrument containing regulations under section 52 of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 specifying scientific methods that may be used for the purposes of age assessments, and

(b) a statutory instrument containing regulations under section 58 of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 making provision about refusal to consent to scientific methods for age assessments.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to make regulations to specify scientific methods for assessing a person’s age and to disapply the requirement for consent for scientific methods to be used.

New clause 13—Revocation of indefinite leave to remain in certain circumstances—

“(1) Indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom is revoked with respect to a person (“P”) if any of the following conditions apply.

(2) Condition 1 is that P is defined as a “foreign criminal” under section 32 of the UK Borders Act 2007.

(3) Condition 2 is that P was granted indefinite leave to remain after the coming into force of this Act, but would not be eligible for indefinite leave under the requirements of section [Qualification period for Indefinite Leave to Remain in the United Kingdom].

(4) Condition 3 is that P, or any dependents of P, have been in receipt of any form of “social protection” (including housing) from HM Government or a local authority, where “social protection” is defined according to the Treasury’s Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses, subject to any further definition by immigration rules.

(5) Condition 4 is that P’s annual income has fallen below £38,700 for six months or more in aggregate during the relevant qualification period, or subsequent to receiving indefinite leave to remain.

(6) A person who has entered the United Kingdom—

(a) under the Ukraine visa schemes;

(b) under the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme;

(c) under the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy; or

(d) on a British National Overseas visa,

is exempt from the requirements of Condition 2, Condition 3, and Condition 4.

(7) For the purposes of subsection (5)—

(a) the condition applies only to earnings that have been lawfully reported to, or subject to withholding tax by, HM Revenue and Customs; and

(b) the relevant sum of annual income must be adjusted annually by the Secretary of State through immigration rules to reflect inflation.

(8) The Secretary of State may by immigration rules vary the conditions set out in this section.”

This new clause would revoke indefinite leave where a person is a foreign criminal, has been in receipt of benefits, earns below the national median income, or (for those granted indefinite leave after the coming into force of this Act) would not meet the requirements sought to be imposed by NC11.

New clause 14—Borders legislation: Human Rights Act—

“(1) This section applies to any provision made by or by virtue of this Act, the Illegal Migration Act 2023, the Immigration Acts, and any legislation relating to immigration, deportation, or asylum, including the Immigration Rules within the meaning of the Immigration Act 1971.

(2) The legislation identified in subsection (1), including in relation to the enforcement of immigration policy, deportation, the granting, removal, revocation or alteration of immigration status, or asylum, or other entitlements, must be read and given effect to disregarding the Human Rights Act 1998.

(3) In the Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993, omit section 2.

(4) In the Immigration Act 1971—

(a) in section 8AA—

(i) in subsection (2), omit “Subject to subsections (3) to (5)”; and

(ii) omit subsections (2)(a)(ii) and subsections (3) to (6);

(b) in section 8B, omit subsection (5A).

(5) In section 84 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002—

(a) in subsection (1), after “must” insert “not”;

(b) in subsection (2), after “must” insert “not”;

(c) in subsection (2), for “section 6” substitute “any section”; and

(d) in subsection (3) after “must” insert “not”.

(6) Where the European Court of Human Rights indicates an interim measure relating to the exercise of any function under the legislation identified in subsection (1)—

(a) it is only for a Minister of the Crown to decide whether the United Kingdom will comply with the interim measure under this section; and

(b) an immigration officer or court or tribunal must not have regard to the interim measure.”

This new clause would disapply the Human Rights Act and interim measures of the European Court of Human Rights in relation to this Bill and to other legislation about borders, asylum and immigration.

New clause 15—Offences and deportation—

“(1) The UK Borders Act 2007 is amended as follows.

(2) In section 32—

(a) in subsection (1)(a), at the end insert “and”;

(b) in subsection (1)(b) leave out "and” and insert “or”; and

(c) leave out subsection (1)(c) and substitute—

“(c) who has been charged with or convicted of an offence under section 24 of the Immigration Act 1971”

(d) leave out subsections (2) and (3).

(3) In section 33, leave out subsections (1), (2), (3) and (6A).

(4) The Illegal Migration Act 2023 is amended as follows.

(5) Leave out subsection (5) of section 1 and insert—

“(5) The Human Rights Act does not apply to provision made by or by virtue of this Act or to—

(a) the Immigration Act 1971,

(b) the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999,

(c) the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002,

(d) the Nationality and Borders Act 2022, or

(e) the Immigration Act 2016.”

(6) In section 6 of the Illegal Migration Act 2023, leave out subsections (4) and (5).

(7) In section 24 of the Immigration Act 1971, leave out all instances of “knowingly”.”

This new clause would prevent a foreign national who is convicted of any offence from remaining in the UK, as well as anyone who has been charged with or convicted with an immigration offence under section 24 of the Immigration Act 1971.

New clause 16—Restrictions on visas for spouses and civil partners—

“(1) The Secretary of State must make regulations specifying the maximum number of persons who may enter the United Kingdom annually as a spouse or civil partner of another (the sponsor).

(2) Before making regulations under subsection (1), the Secretary of State must consult—

(a) in England and Wales and Scotland, such representatives of local authorities as the Secretary of State considers appropriate;

(b) the Executive Office in Northern Ireland; and

(c) any such other persons or bodies as the Secretary of State considers appropriate.

(3) But the duty to consult under subsection (2) does not apply where the Secretary of State considers that the maximum number under subsection (1) needs to be changed as a matter of urgency.

(4) The Secretary of State must commence the consultation under subsection (2) in relation to the first regulations to be made under this section before the end of the period of three months beginning with the day on which this Act is passed.

(5) The regulations must specify that the number of persons from any one country who enter as a spouse or civil partner of a sponsor cannot exceed 7% of the maximum number specified in the regulations under subsection (1).

(6) If, in any year, the number of persons who enter the United Kingdom as a spouse or civil partner of a sponsor exceeds the number specified in regulations under this section, the Secretary of State must lay a statement before Parliament—

(a) setting out the number of persons who have, in that year, entered the United Kingdom as a spouse or civil partner of a sponsor; and

(b) explaining why the number exceeds that specified in the regulations.

(7) The statement under subsection (6) must be laid before Parliament before the end of the period of six months beginning with the day after the last day of the year to which the statement relates.

(8) Within six months of the passing of this Act, the Secretary of State must by immigration rules make the changes set out in subsections (9) to (11).

(9) The requirements to be met by a person seeking leave to enter the United Kingdom with a view to settlement as the spouse or civil partner of a person present and settled in the United Kingdom or who is on the same occasion being admitted for settlement includes that—

(a) the applicant is married to, or the civil partner of, a person who has a right of abode in the United Kingdom or indefinite leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom and is, on the same occasion, seeking admission to the United Kingdom for the purposes of settlement;

(b) the applicant provides evidence that the parties under subsection (9)(a) were married or formed a civil partnership at least two years prior to the application;

(c) each of the parties intends to live permanently with the other as spouses or civil partners and the marriage or civil partnership is subsisting;

(d) the salary of the person who has a right to abode in the United Kingdom or indefinite leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom equals or exceeds £38,700 per year; and

(e) the applicant and the person who has a right of abode in the United Kingdom are both at least 23 years old.

(10) Leave to enter the United Kingdom as a spouse or civil partner under subsection (9) is to be refused if the parties concerned are first cousins.

(11) For the purposes of this section, “local authority” means—

(a) in England and Wales, a county council, a county borough council, a district council, a London borough council, the Common Council of the City of London or the Council of the Isles of Scilly, and

(b) in Scotland, a council constituted under section 2 of the Local Government etc (Scotland) Act 1994.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to specify a cap on the number of spouses or civil partners who may enter the UK, and on the number that may enter from any one country. It would also amend the immigration rules to set a salary threshold.

New clause 17—Restrictions on visas and grants of indefinite leave to remain—

“(1) Within six months of the passing of this Act, the Secretary of State must by immigration rules provide for all visa grants, including spousal visas, to be conditional on the following—

(a) the requirement that the applicant or their dependents will not apply for any form of “social protection” (including housing) from the UK Government or a local authority, where “social protection” is defined according to the Treasury’s Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses, subject to any further definition by immigration rules; and

(b) the requirement that the applicant’s annual income must not fall below £38,700 for six months or more in aggregate during the relevant qualification period.

(2) Immigration Rules made under subsection (1) must ensure that any breach of the conditions set out in that subsection will render void any visa previously granted.

(3) The Secretary of State is not permitted to grant leave outside the immigration rules or immigration acts.

(4) A person is not eligible to apply for indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom if any of the following conditions apply.

(5) Condition 1 is that a person is a “foreign criminal” under section 32 of the UK Borders Act 2007.

(6) Condition 2 is that a person, or any of their dependents, has been in receipt of any form of “social protection” (including housing) from the UK Government or a local authority, where “social protection” is defined according to the Treasury’s Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses, subject to any further definition by immigration rules.

(7) Condition 3 is that a person’s annual income has fallen below £38,700 for six months or more in aggregate during the relevant qualification period.

(8) A person who has entered the United Kingdom—

(a) under the Ukraine visa schemes;

(b) under the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme;

(c) under the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy; or

(d) on a British National Overseas visa,

is exempt from the requirements of Condition 2 and Condition 3.

(9) For the purposes of subsections (1)(b) and (7)—

(a) the condition applies only to earnings that have been lawfully reported to, or subject to withholding tax by, HM Revenue and Customs; and

(b) the relevant sum of annual income must be adjusted annually by the Secretary of State through immigration rules to reflect inflation.

(10) The Secretary of State may by immigration rules make further provision varying these conditions, including by way of transitional provisions.”

This new clause would place certain restrictions on the granting of visas or indefinite leave to remain. It would require migrants to be self-sufficient and not to require state benefits, and would deny indefinite leave to remain to foreign criminals.

New clause 18—Cap on the number of entrants—

“(1) Within six months of the passing of this Act, the Secretary of State must make regulations specifying the total maximum number of persons who may enter the United Kingdom annually across all non-visitor visa routes, with such regulations subject to approval by both Houses.

(2) The Secretary of State may by regulations also specify a maximum number of entrants for individual visa routes, subject to the overall total.

(3) No visas may be issued in excess of the total maximum number specified in subsection (1).

(4) Any visas issued in excess of the number specified in subsection (1) must be revoked.”

This new clause would provide a mechanism for a binding annual cap on the number of non-visitor visas issued by the UK.

New clause 19—Removals from the United Kingdom: visa penalties for uncooperative countries—

“(1) The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 is amended as follows.

(2) In section 70, omit subsections (4) and (5).

(3) In section 72—

(a) subsection (1), after “A country”, for “may” substitute “must”.

(b) In subsection (1)(a) omit “and” and insert “or, (ab) is not cooperating in relation to the verification of identity or status of individuals who are likely to be nationals or citizens of the country, and”

(c) in subsection (1)(b), after “citizens of the country” insert “or individuals who are likely to be nationals or citizens of the country”,

(d) omit subsections (2) and (3), and

(e) in subsection (4), omit from “70” to after “subsection (1)(a)”.

(4) Omit section 74.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to use a visa penalty provision if a country is not cooperating in the removal of any of its nationals or citizens from the UK, or in relation to the verification of their identity or status.

New clause 20—Exemptions from the UK GDPR: illegal migration and foreign criminals—

“(1) The Data Protection Act 2018 is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (2)(b) of section 15 (Exemptions etc), at end insert “, and makes provision about the exemption from all GDPR provisions of persons who entered the United Kingdom illegally and foreign criminals;

(3) In paragraph (2) of Schedule 2, after sub-paragraph (1) insert—

“(1A) GDPR provisions do not apply if the data subject entered the United Kingdom illegally or is a foreign criminal.

(1B) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (1A)—

(a) a person “entered the United Kingdom illegally” if they entered the United Kingdom—

(i) without leave to enter, or

(ii) with leave to enter that was obtained by means which included deception by any person; and

(b) “foreign criminal” is defined in accordance with section 32 of the UK Borders Act 2007.””

This new clause would disapply data protection laws from data on people who have entered the UK illegally or are Foreign National Offenders.

New clause 21—Removal of restrictions on asylum seekers engaging in employment—

“The Secretary of State must, within three months of the date on which this Act is passed, lay before Parliament a statement of changes in the rules (the “immigration rules”) under section 3(2) of the Immigration Act 1971 (general provisions for regulation and control) to make provision for asylum applicants to take up employment whilst their application is being determined, if it has been over three months since the application was made, with no decision made.”

This new clause would remove the restriction on working for asylum seekers, if it has been over three months since they applied.

New clause 22—Additional safe and legal routes—

“The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passage of this Act, make regulations specifying safe and legal routes through which refugees and other individuals requiring international protection can enter the UK lawfully.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to make regulations specifying additional safe and legal routes, under which refugees and others in need of international protection can come to the UK lawfully from abroad.

New clause 23—Duty to meet the director of Europol—

“The Border Commander must meet the director of Europol, or their delegate, no less than once every three months.”

This new clause would require the Border Commander to meet with the Executive Director of Europol every three months.

New clause 24—Duty to establish a joint taskforce with Europol—

“(1) The Secretary of State must seek to establish a joint taskforce with Europol for the purposes of cooperation on the matters set out under subsection (3).

(2) The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passage of this Act, make a report to Parliament on progress made to date on establishing a joint taskforce under subsection (1).

(3) Any joint taskforce established pursuant to the Secretary of State’s activities under subsection (1) has a duty to promote cooperation on—

(a) the disruption of trafficking operations;

(b) the enhancement of law enforcement capabilities;

(c) the provision of specialised training for officials involved in border security and immigration enforcement; and

(d) any other matters which the Secretary of State or Director of Europol deem appropriate.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to seek a joint taskforce with Europol for the purposes of disrupting trafficking operations, enhancing law enforcement capabilities, and providing specialised training to officials involved in border security and immigration enforcement.

New clause 25—Participation in Europol’s anti-trafficking operations—

“(1) The Secretary of State must provide adequate resources to law enforcement agencies for the purpose of enhancing their participation in Europol’s anti-trafficking operations.

(2) The resources provided under subsection (1) must include technology for conducting improved surveillance on, and detection of, smuggling networks.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (1), “law enforcement agencies” include—

(a) the National Crime Agency

(b) police forces in England and Wales; and

(c) the British Transport Police.”

This new clause would require the Government to allocate adequate resources to law enforcement agencies to enhance their participation in Europol’s anti-trafficking operations, including through technological tools for better surveillance and detection of smuggling networks.

New clause 26—Requirement to produce an annual report on cooperation with Europol—

“(1) The Secretary of State must, within one year of the passage of this Act, lay before Parliament an annual report on cooperation between UK law enforcement agencies and Europol.

(2) A further report must be published and laid before Parliament at least once per year.

(3) An annual report under this section must include—

(a) actions taken during the previous year to cooperate with Europol;

(b) progress in reducing people smuggling and human trafficking; and

(c) planned activities for improving future cooperation with Europol.”

This new clause would require the Government to provide an annual report to Parliament detailing the UK’s efforts to cooperate with Europol, its progress in reducing levels of people smuggling and human trafficking, and its plans to improve future cooperation.

New clause 27—Reuniting unaccompanied child refugees with family members—

“(1) Within six months of the passing of this Act, the Secretary of State must by immigration rules make the changes set out in subsections (2) to (6).

(2) The requirements to be met by a person seeking leave to enter the United Kingdom as a child relative of a person or persons given limited leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, as a refugee or beneficiary of humanitarian protection, are that the applicant—

(a) is the child, grandchild, sister, brother, nephew or niece of a person or persons granted limited leave to enter or remain as a refugee or beneficiary of humanitarian protection granted as such under the immigration rules; and

(b) is under the age of 18; and

(c) can, and will, be accommodated adequately by the person or persons the child is seeking to join without recourse to public funds in accommodation which the person or persons the child is seeking to join, own or occupy exclusively; and

(d) can, and will, be maintained adequately by the person or persons the child is seeking to join, without recourse to public funds; and

(e) if seeking leave to enter, holds a valid United Kingdom entry clearance for entry in this capacity.

(3) The requirements to be met by a person seeking leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom as the close relative of a child with limited leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom as a refugee or beneficiary of humanitarian protection are that the applicant is—

(a) a parent, grandparent, sister, brother, aunt or uncle of a child with limited leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom as a refugee or beneficiary of humanitarian protection; and

(b) joining a refugee or beneficiary of humanitarian protection with limited leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom who is under the age of 18 and not living with a parent or grandparent; and

(c) can, and will, be accommodated adequately, together with any dependants, without recourse to public funds.

(4) Limited leave to enter the United Kingdom as an applicant under subsection (2) or (3) may be granted for five years provided that, on arrival, a valid passport or other identity document is produced to the Immigration Officer and the applicant has entry clearance for entry in this capacity. Limited leave to remain in the United Kingdom as an applicant under subsections (2) or (3) may be granted provided the Secretary of State is satisfied that each of the requirements of subsections (2) or (3) is met.

(5) Limited leave to enter the United Kingdom as an applicant under subsection (2) or (3) is to be refused if, on arrival, a valid passport or other identity document is not produced to the Immigration Officer and the applicant does not have entry clearance for entry in this capacity. Limited leave to remain in the United Kingdom as an applicant under subsection (2) or (3) is to be refused if the Secretary of State is not satisfied that each of the requirements of subsections (2) or (3) is met.

(6) Civil legal services are to be provided to an applicant under subsections (2) or (3) in relation to rights to enter, and to remain in, the United Kingdom pursuant to schedule 1, subsection 30(1) of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.”

This new clause would require changes to the immigration rules to extend the family members that could apply to join an unaccompanied child refugee in the UK, to include parents, grandparents, sisters, brothers, uncles and aunts, and to allow unaccompanied child refugees to sponsor close adult family members to join them in the UK. It also provides for legal aid to be available in such cases.

New clause 28—Good character requirement: illegal entry—

“The Secretary of State must, within three months of the passing of this Act, ensure that illegal entry to the UK is disregarded as a factor for the purposes of assessing whether a person applying for British citizenship meets the good character requirement.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to change current Home Office guidance stating that individuals who enters the UK illegally, regardless of how long ago, will "normally be refused" citizenship (if they applied after 10 February 2025).

New clause 29—Report on impact of carers’ minimum wage on net migration—

“The Secretary of State must, within 12 months of the passage of this Act, lay before Parliament a report on the impact of introducing a minimum wage for carers on levels of net migration.”

This new clause would require the Government to publish a report on how implementing a carers’ minimum wage would impact on levels of net migration.

New clause 30—A three-month service standard for asylum casework—

“(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passage of this Act, implement a three month service standard for asylum casework.

(2) The service standard must specify that 98% of initial decisions on all asylum claims should be made before the end of three months after the date of claim.”

This new clause would require UK Visas and Immigration to reintroduce a three month service standard for decisions on asylum cases.

New clause 31—Exemption of NHS workers from immigration skills charge—

“The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passing of this Act, implement an exemption for National Health Service workers from the immigration skills charge for sponsoring a Skilled Worker or a Senior or Specialist worker.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to apply an exception to the NHS as an employer from having to pay the immigration skills charge when sponsoring skilled employees.

New clause 32—Repeal of certain provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 (No. 2)—

“(1) The following provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 are repealed—

(a) sections 12 to 65; and

(b) sections 68 and 69.”

This new clause would repeal specified provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022.

New clause 33—Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings—

“The Secretary of State must—

(a) within six months of the passing of this Act, introduce legislation to ensure the United Kingdom’s full compliance with the 2009 Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings; and

(b) within 18 months of the passing of this Act, lay before Parliament a report on how the Government is ensuring full compliance with the Convention under this section.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to introduce legislation which incorporates the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings into UK law and report on compliance with the Convention.

New clause 34—Victims of slavery or human trafficking: protection from immigration offences—

“(1) The Modern Slavery Act 2015 is amended as follows.

(2) In section 52 (Duty to notify Secretary of State about suspected victims of slavery or human trafficking), after subsection (2), insert—

“(2A) The Secretary of State must make such arrangements as the Secretary of State considers reasonable to ensure that notification under this section does not include the supply of information to relevant persons or authorities that might indicate that—

(a) the victim has committed an offence under sections 24 to 26 of the Immigration Act 1971, or

(b) the victim might otherwise meet the requirements for removal from the United Kingdom or for investigation pending removal.

(2B) For the purposes of subsection (2A), “relevant persons or authorities” include—

(a) a Minister of the Crown or a government department;

(b) an immigration officer;

(c) a customs official;

(d) a law enforcement officer;

(e) the Director of Border Revenue;

(f) the Border Security Commander;

(g) a UK authorised person; and

(h) the government of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom.””

This new clause would prevent a public authority, when determining whether a person is a victim of slavery or human trafficking, from sharing information with immigration authorities and other public authorities that might result in deportation or prosecution for an immigration offence.

New clause 35—Humanitarian travel permit—

“(1) On an application by a person (“P”) to the appropriate decision-maker for entry clearance, the appropriate decision-maker must grant P entry clearance if satisfied that P is a relevant person.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), P is a relevant person if—

(a) P intends to make a protection claim in the United Kingdom;

(b) P’s protection claim, if made in the United Kingdom, would have a realistic prospect of success; and

(c) there are serious and compelling reasons why P’s protection claim should be considered in the United Kingdom.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (2)(c), in deciding whether there are such reasons why P’s protection claim should be considered in the United Kingdom, the appropriate decision-maker must take into account—

(a) the extent of the risk that P will suffer persecution or serious harm if entry clearance is not granted;

(b) the strength of P’s family and other ties to the United Kingdom;

(c) P’s mental and physical health and any particular vulnerabilities that P has; and

(d) any other matter that the decision-maker thinks relevant.

(4) For the purposes of an application under subsection (1), the appropriate decision-maker must waive any of the requirements in subsection (5) if satisfied that P cannot reasonably be expected to comply with them.

(5) The requirements are—

(a) any requirement prescribed (whether by immigration rules or otherwise) under section 50 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006; and

(b) any requirement prescribed by regulations made under section 5, 6, 7 or 8 of the UK Borders Act 2007 (biometric registration).

(6) No fee may be charged for the making of an application under subsection (1).

(7) An entry clearance granted pursuant to subsection (1) has effect as leave to enter for such period, being not less than six months, and on such conditions as the Secretary of State may prescribe by order.

(8) Upon a person entering the United Kingdom (within the meaning of section 11 of the Immigration Act 1971) pursuant to leave to enter given under subsection (7), that person is deemed to have made a protection claim in the United Kingdom.

(9) For the purposes of this section—

(a) “appropriate decision-maker” means a person authorised by the Secretary of State by rules made under section 3 of the Immigration Act 1971 to grant an entry clearance under paragraph(1);

(b) “entry clearance” has the same meaning as in section 33(1) of the Immigration Act 1971;

(c) “protection claim”, in relation to a person, means a claim that to remove them from or require them to leave the United Kingdom would be inconsistent with the United Kingdom’s obligations—

(i) under the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees done at Geneva on 28th July 1951 and the Protocol to that Convention (“the Refugee Convention”);

(ii) in relation to persons entitled to a grant of humanitarian protection; or

(iii) under Article 2 or 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms agreed by the Council of Europe at Rome on 4th November 1950 (“the European Convention on Human Rights”);

(d) “persecution” is defined in accordance with the Refugee Convention; and

(e) “serious harm” means treatment that, if it occurred within the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom, would be contrary to the United Kingdom's obligations under Article 2 or 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (irrespective of where it will actually occur).”

This new clause would create a new “humanitarian travel permit”.

New clause 36—Refugee family reunion—

“(1) The Secretary of State must, within 6 months of the date on which this Act is passed, lay before Parliament a statement of changes in the rules (the “immigration rules”) under section 3(2) of the Immigration Act 1971 (general provisions for regulation and control) to make provision for refugee family reunion, in accordance with this section, to come into effect after 21 days.

(2) Before a statement of changes is laid under subsection (1), the Secretary of State must consult with persons as the Secretary of State deems appropriate.

(3) The statement laid under subsection (1) must set out rules providing for leave to enter and remain in the United Kingdom for family members of a person granted refugee status or humanitarian protection.

(4) In this section, “refugee status” and “humanitarian protection” have the same meaning as in the immigration rules.

(5) In this section, “family members” include—

(a) a person's parent, including adoptive parent;

(b) a person's spouse, civil partner or unmarried partner;

(c) a person's child, including adopted child, who is either—

(i) under the age of 18, or

(ii) under the age of 25 but was either under the age of 18 or unmarried at the time the person granted asylum left their country of residence to seek asylum;

(d) a person's sibling, including adoptive sibling, who is either—

(i) under the age of 18, or

(ii) under the age of 25, but was either under the age of 18 or unmarried at the time the person granted asylum left their country of residence to seek asylum; and

(e) such other persons as the Secretary of State may determine, having regard to—

(i) the importance of maintaining family unity,

(ii) the best interests of a child,

(iii) the physical, emotional, psychological or financial dependency between a person granted refugee status or humanitarian protection and another person,

(iv) any risk to the physical, emotional or psychological well being of a person who was granted refugee status or humanitarian protection, including from the circumstances in which the person is living in the United Kingdom, or

(v) such other matters as the Secretary of State considers appropriate.

(6) For the purpose of subsection (5)—

(a) “adopted” and “adoptive” refer to a relationship resulting from adoption, including de facto adoption, as set out in the immigration rules, and

(b) “best interests” of a child must be read in accordance with Article 3 of the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.”

This new clause would make provision for leave to enter or remain in the UK to be granted to the family members of refugees and of people granted humanitarian protection.

New clause 37—Children born in the UK: British citizenship—

“(1) The British Nationality Act 1981 is amended as follows.

(2) After section 1(3A) insert—

“(3B) A person (“P”) born in the United Kingdom on or after the relevant day who is not a British citizen by virtue of subsection (1), (1A) or (2) or section 10A shall be entitled to be registered as a British citizen if, when P was born, P’s father or mother—

(a) had previously entered the UK whilst holding leave to enter the UK; and

(b) was subsequently, and at the time of P’s birth, subject to UK immigration control.”

(3) The Immigration and Nationality (Fees) Regulations 2018 are amended as follows.

(4) In Schedule 1, Table 20A, insert—

“No fee is payable in respect of an application for registration as a British citizen under the 1981 Act where the application is made under section 1(3B) of that Act.””

This new clause would ensure citizenship for children born in the UK whose parents had leave to enter the UK but were not British citizens or had settled status at the time of their child's birth, and for fees for that registration to be waived.

New clause 38—Repeal of certain provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 (No. 3)—

“(1) The following provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 are repealed—

(a) section 12,

(b) section 16,

(c) sections 30 to 38, and

(d) section 40.”

This new clause would repeal provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 concerning: the creation of two separate groups of refugees, subject to differential treatment; the inadmissibility of asylum claims by persons with a connection to a safe third State; the interpretation of the Refugee Convention; and the creation of offences relating and similar to illegal entry to the UK.

New clause 39—Duty to deport in accordance with the Refugee Convention—

“(1) The Secretary of State must seek to remove anyone who, based on Article 1F and Article 33(2) of the Refugee Convention, does not have the benefit of the non-refoulement provisions of the Refugee Convention.

(2) This duty does not apply in relation to persons who would face a real risk of capital punishment or extra-judicial killing or whose removal would contravene the United Kingdom’s obligation under Article 3 of the United Nations Convention against Torture.

(3) If a domestic court or tribunal has ruled that a person’s removal would not contravene subsection (1) and (2), the court or tribunal may—

(a) Consider whether removal would be contrary to the Human Rights Act 1998,

(b) But if it considers that removal would be contrary to the Human Rights Act 1998, the Secretary of State may seek the removal of that person, notwithstanding the Act.

(4) The Secretary of State may delay the removal of an individual where subsection (3)(b) applies, until the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has ruled on the compatibility of that removal.

(5) The Secretary of State must argue before the European Court of Human Rights that the European Convention on Human Rights cannot be interpreted as preventing the removal of an individual if such removal is compatible with the Refugee Convention and the United Nations Convention against Torture.

(6) If the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights rules that the European Convention on Human Rights takes precedence over the Refugee Convention and United Nations Convention against Torture, the Secretary of State may decide to comply with that Grand Chamber decision.

(7) If the Secretary of State decides to comply with a ruling of the Grand Chamber, they must publish a quarterly report setting out the anonymised details of those individuals who could be deported subject to subsections (1) and (2) but have not been deported because of a decision by the Secretary of State to comply with a decision of the Grand Chamber of the European Court on Human Rights.”

New clause 40—Detention of illegal migrants—

“(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passing of this Act, set out plans to detain illegal migrants in secure accommodation.

(2) Detention under subsection (1)—

(a) must occur immediately upon a person’s arrival into the UK without leave to enter the UK;

(b) must be in accommodation with requisite security, not including hotels or residential accommodation; and

(c) must be for no more than 24 hours, during which any asylum claim must be assessed and decided.

(3) Any person whose asylum claim under this section is refused must be deported within 24 hours of refusal.

(4) A plan under subsection (1) must be—

(a) laid before Parliament, and

(b) implemented within twelve months of the passing of this Act.”

This new clause would require the Government to set up secure accommodation to detain illegal migrants as soon as they arrive in the UK, assess any asylum claim with 24 hours of detention, and deport any failed applicants.

New clause 41—Impact of European Convention on Human Rights on border security—

“(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passing of this Act, publish an assessment of the impact of the UK’s commitment to the European Convention on Human Rights on the UK’s border security.

(2) An assessment under this section must be laid before Parliament and must include—

(a) the number of additional persons likely to be deported from the United Kingdom annually if the UK were to depart from the European Convention on Human Rights, and

(b) of those, the number of foreign criminals likely to be deported annually.”

This new clause would require the Government to assess the impact of the ECHR on the UK’s border security.

New clause 42—Transparency in age dispute decision-making—

“(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passing of this Act, and on a quarterly basis thereafter—

(a) prepare and publish a report on age assessments conducted for the purposes of immigration control, and

(b) lay a copy of the report before Parliament.

(2) The report must include—

(a) the total number of age disputes raised during the reporting period,

(b) the number of individuals who were initially treated as adults but were subsequently assessed to be under the age of 18,

(c) the number of individuals who were initially treated as children but were subsequently assessed to be 18 or over,

(d) the number and percentage of individuals referred for a formal Merton-compliant age assessment,

(e) the number of safeguarding referrals made as a result of age misclassification, and

(f) the number of legal challenges brought in relation to age assessments, and the outcome of those challenges.

(3) The report must also include an assessment of the impact of age dispute procedures on unaccompanied children, with particular regard to—

(a) the duration of time spent in adult accommodation, detention, or prison,

(b) any effect on access to education, healthcare, and social care services,

(c) any risks to mental and physical health arising from misclassification, and

(d) any referrals to or findings made by safeguarding professionals or regulatory bodies in relation to such cases.

(4) In this section—

“child” means a person who is under the age of 18,

“Merton-compliant” means compliant with the principles established in R (B) v Merton LBC [2003] EWHC 1689 (Admin),

“age dispute” means any case in which the claimed age of an individual for immigration purposes is challenged or reassessed by the Home Office or a relevant authority.”

This new clause would require the Home Office to publish a detailed analysis which includes the outcomes on age assessments. It aims to increase transparency in the current process and to support policy reform that better safeguards children at risk of being misclassified as adults. Its aim is to ensure a more transparent, and accountable approach to age disputes.

New clause 43—Management of immigration removal centres and asylum accommodation—

“(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passing of this Act, make by regulations a register of prohibited providers of immigration removal centres and other forms of asylum accommodation.

(2) The register under subsection (1) must include all companies or persons—

(a) found guilty of or fined for—

(i) gross misconduct,

(ii) abuse,

(iii) overcharging, or

(iv) fraud

in relation to their operation of immigration removal centres and other forms of asylum accommodation, or

(b) who have not, following inspection by the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration (ICIBI), met the recommendations of the subsequent report within 6 months.

(3) The Secretary of State or department must not enter into further contracts or renewal of contracts with any prohibited provider.”

This new clause would require the Home Office to make a register of prohibited providers of immigration removal centres and other forms of asylum accommodation who have been convicted of gross misconduct, abuse, overcharging or fraud, or have not met the recommendations of an inspection report. The Home Office cannot renew or enter into further contracts with prohibited providers on the register.

New clause 44—National Referral Mechanism: duty to create a new visa scheme—

“(1) The Secretary of State must, by immigration rules, create a new visa scheme for persons who—

(a) are regarded by a first responder organisation as eligible for referral into the National Referral Mechanism for modern slavery; and

(b) are in receipt of an Overseas Domestic Worker visa under the terms of the Immigration Rules Appendix Overseas Domestic Worker; or

(c) have been in receipt of such a visa within the six months prior to a referral under paragraph (a).

(2) Immigration rules under subsection (1)—

(a) must be laid before Parliament within six months of the passing of this Act; and

(b) must be commenced within six months of being laid before Parliament.

(3) Immigration rules under subsection (1) must—

(a) enable an eligible person to remain in the UK until the later of—

(i) the date on which a conclusive grounds decision is made; or

(ii) the date on which any reconsideration or judicial review of a conclusive grounds decision has concluded; or

(iii) for persons recognised as a victim of modern slavery through a positive conclusive grounds decision, the date on which the person is granted either Discretionary Leave under the Immigration Act 1971 or Temporary Permission to Stay under section 65 of the Nationality and Borders and 2022; and

(b) enable the eligible person to work as a domestic worker for any eligible employer during the period specified by this subsection.

(4) For the purposes of this section—

“first responder organisation” is to be defined by immigration rules under this section;

“National Referral Mechanism” means the national framework for identifying and referring potential victims of modern slavery and ensuring they receive appropriate support;

“conclusive grounds decision” means a decision by a competent authority as to whether a person is a victim of slavery or human trafficking.”

This new clause would require the Secretary of State to introduce a new visa scheme for victims of modern slavery who have been granted an Overseas Domestic Worker visa, to avoid visa concerns acting as a deterrent against referral for support under the National Referral Mechanism.

New clause 45—Good character requirement—

“(1) The British Nationality Act 1981 is amended as follows.

(2) In section 41A, (Registration: requirement to be of good character), after subsection (4), insert—

“(4A) The good character requirement under this section must not be applied in a manner contrary to the United Kingdom’s obligations under any international agreement to which the United Kingdom is a party.

(4B) The Secretary of State must ensure any guidance issued regarding the good character requirement reflects the following—

(a) any assessment of good character may only take into account the illegal entry, arrival or presence of a person (P) in the United Kingdom if at the time of P's entry to or arrival in the UK—

(i) P was aged 18 years or over,

(ii) P would have been given leave to enter under the immigration rules, if P had sought it, and

(iii) the assessment of P's good character is made on the basis of guidance, which was published.

(b) It is for the Secretary of State to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that—

(i) P would have been given leave to enter under the immigration rules, if P had sought it; and

(ii) it would have been reasonable to expect P to have sought and obtained such leave to enter.

(4C) In this section—

“the good character requirement” refers to the provision regarding a person being of good character in section 41A (Registration: requirement to be of good character), section 4L (Acquisition by registration: special circumstances), and paragraphs 1 and 5 of Schedule 1 to the British Nationality Act 1981.

“immigration rules” means rules under section 3(2) of the Immigration Act 1971.’

This new clause would ensure the good character requirement is not applied contrary to the UK’s international legal obligations. It also ensures that guidance would only take into account a person’s illegal entry, arrival or presence, if they arrived as an adult, when there was a safe route under the Immigration Rules available to them, and it would have been reasonable to expect them to have used that route.

Amendment 1, clause 3, page 2, line 28, after “such threats”, insert—

“including the threats posed to UK biosecurity by illegal meat imports,”.

This amendment requires the Border Security Commander (“the Commander”), to have regard to the threats posed to UK biosecurity by illegal meat imports.

Amendment 31, page 2, line 36, at end insert—

“(2A) The strategic priority document issued under subsection (2) must support the Home Office’s UK Border Strategy.”

This amendment would require that the Border Security Commander’s strategic priority document supports the UK Border Strategy.

Amendment 2, page 3, line 2, after “borders”, insert “, including biosecurity”.

This amendment is consequential on Amendment 1, and clarifies that UK biosecurity is an element of border security.

Amendment 4, page 7, line 12, at end insert—

“(1A) For the purposes of subsection (1), P cannot commit an offence if P is—

(a) an individual forced or coerced into criminal activities,

(b) a parent, family member or guardian accompanying minors,

(c) a victim of human trafficking or modern slavery,

(d) a survivor of torture, gender-based violence or severe trauma,

(e) an unaccompanied child,

(f) a person at risk of persecution,

(g) a pregnant woman, or

(h) a person holding refugee status.”

This amendment would specify that the offence created by clause 13 (supplying articles for use in immigration crime) cannot be applied to certain categories of individual.

Amendment 36, in clause 14, page 8, line 21, at end insert—

“or,

(c) their action was—

(i) solely as part of their own journey, and

(ii) they did not gain financially from the action.”

This amendment seeks to ensure that the new criminal offence is targeted at people smugglers rather than those seeking asylum by amending the statutory defence.

Amendment 30, page 8, line 26, at end insert—

“(6) For the purposes of subsection (1), P cannot commit an offence if P is—

(a) an individual forced or coerced into criminal activities,

(b) a parent, family member or guardian accompanying minors,

(c) a victim of human trafficking or modern slavery,

(d) a survivor of torture, gender-based violence or severe trauma,

(e) an unaccompanied child,

(f) a person at risk of persecution,

(g) a pregnant woman, or

(h) a person holding refugee status.”

This amendment would specify that the offence created by clause 14 (Handling articles for use in immigration crime) cannot be applied to certain categories of individual.

Amendment 37, in clause 15, page 9, line 2, at end insert—

“(i) a telephonic device

(j) means for charging a telephonic device”

This amendment adds to the list of articles that aren’t included as relevant articles for the purposes of the new criminal offences of supplying or handling items to be used by people making a dangerous journey.

Amendment 38, in clause 16, page 9, line 38, leave out from “journey” to end of line 39 and insert—

“that they would not benefit from financially.”

This amendment seeks to ensure that the new criminal offence is targeted at people smugglers rather than those seeking asylum by amending the statutory defence.

Amendment 5, in clause 18, page 11, line 36, at end insert—

“(E1C) For the purposes of subsections (E1A) and (E1B) a person cannot commit an offence if the person is—

(a) an individual forced or coerced into criminal activities,

(b) a parent, family member or guardian accompanying minors,

(c) a victim of human trafficking or modern slavery,

(d) a survivor of torture, gender-based violence or severe trauma,

(e) an unaccompanied child,

(f) a person at risk of persecution,

(g) a pregnant woman, or

(h) a person holding refugee status.”

This amendment would specify that the offence created by clause 18 (Endangering another during sea crossing to United Kingdom) cannot be applied to certain categories of individual.

Government amendments 6 to 12.

Amendment 32, page 30, line 29, leave out clause 37.

This amendment would remove the clause relating to the repeal of the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024.

Amendment 33, page 30, line 31, leave out clause 38.

This amendment would remove the clause relating to the repeal of immigration legislation.

Amendment 35, in clause 38, page 30, line 34, leave out “11” and insert “12”.

This amendment would add section 12, concerning the Secretary of State’s powers to detain people under the Immigration Act 1972, to the list of sections of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 to be repealed.

Amendment 34, page 31, line 1, leave out “28” and insert “29”.

This amendment would repeal Section 29 of the Illegal Immigration Act 2024, which requires the Secretary of State to remove people who have sought to use modern slavery protections in “bad faith”.

Amendment 3, page 31, line 5, at end insert—

“(i) sections 29 and 59.”

This amendment would add sections 29 and 59 to the list of sections of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 to be repealed.

Government amendments 13 to 29.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dame Angela Eagle]

Before I speak about the key Government amendments tabled on Report, I would like to recall why the Government have brought forward the Bill. We are working to take the necessary actions to secure our borders, bring order to the chaotic immigration and asylum system we inherited, and go after the dangerous criminal gangs that undermine our border security. This legislation is part of that plan for change.

For six years, the organised gangs behind small boat crossings have been allowed to take hold, so we are strengthening international partnerships, enhancing enforcement operations nationally and internationally, and equipping ourselves with the tools we need to identify, disrupt and dismantle criminal gangs, while strengthening the security of our borders. The organised immigration crime summit hosted by the Government in London last month mobilised over 40 countries and organisations to launch an unprecedented global fight against the ruthless people-smuggling gangs. The new landmark measures in the Bill will provide law enforcement agencies working across the border security system with stronger powers to pursue, disrupt and deter organised immigration crime.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for giving way. I have asked questions in this Chamber—to be fair to the Minister, she has answered in a positive fashion—on border security in Northern Ireland; people can come from the Republic of Ireland into Northern Ireland and can then cross into the UK. It is so important that the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland is closed. What in-depth discussions have taken place between the Garda Síochána, the Police Service of Northern Ireland and the security forces to ensure that that avenue of illegal immigration is closed for good?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

As I have before, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the border security force in this country works very closely with the PSNI and the Garda Síochána to deal with all potential threats in the common travel area. I assure him that we keep a very close eye on what is going on there to ensure that the hon. Gentleman’s worries are properly addressed.

The Bill strengthens the immigration and asylum system. We are repealing the costly and unworkable legislation introduced by the previous Government, and are introducing new provisions to address shortcomings, tackle harm, and build a more efficient and robust system. The Bill is about making changes to enable a properly functioning immigration and asylum system that ensures that those with a genuine right to be here are properly supported, while those who have no legal right to remain in the UK do not abuse the system and undermine the protections the UK has a history of providing for those in need.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank the Minister for giving way; she is giving a really important speech on a very important subject. Does she agree that part of the issue with the asylum system is the backlog created by the previous Government, who wrongly decided that the best way to deal with the issue was to make the process take longer, as some sort of deterrent? That meant there was a huge backlog, which this Government have to tackle.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dame Angela Eagle]

My hon. Friend is right. We inherited a system in total chaos; asylum decision making had all but ground to a halt. Many, many tens of thousands of people were left having claimed asylum, as the law allowed them to, but unable to be processed because the previous Government passed a law that made it illegal for them to be processed. They were left in limbo. The cases were just piling up and costing the taxpayer a fortune. We have had to untangle the situation.

[Lee Anderson (Ashfield) (Reform)]

I thank the Minister for giving way; she is being most generous with her time. She will be aware that more than 600 illegal migrants have entered this country today. They could get up to all sorts of mischief, and commit crimes and maybe even acts of terrorism. Does she agree that these young men crossing the channel should be immediately detained and deported, along with the right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn)?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

I certainly hope that that kind of comment might be a joke. I wonder whether that kind of arbitrary treatment of people who are in this country would become the norm for Reform, if we came out of the European convention on human rights, as the hon. Member wants. We are a law-abiding Government. The right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn) has a complete right to his opinions and a complete right to express them, from whichever side of the House he sits. I have personally worked with him and have a great deal of respect for him, so I am shocked that the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson) thinks that an appropriate thing to say in this place.

[Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)]

On a slightly more constructive point, does the Minister agree that calls for the process to allow asylum seekers to work after they have been in the country for three months would allow them to integrate more closely with their communities and to earn money to support themselves? A measure to change the arrangement from 12 months to three months would make a massive difference to asylum seekers, reduce the bill for hotels and allow people to contribute to the communities they want to be a part of.

[Dame Angela Eagle]

We will come to these debates when we get on to debating the new clauses to which the hon. Gentleman is referring. We have been clear from the Government Benches about the balance between respecting work visas, which people have to apply for if they are coming to work here, and allowing asylum seekers who have not applied for work to come and work at that sort of length. The change that he suggests would risk undermining the system. We have a disagreement about timing. The answer to his question is that at the moment an asylum seeker can work if their case has not been heard after 12 months, if that is through no fault of their own. We are talking about time here, and the balance between not undermining our work visa system and having a pull factor for more people to come across illegally.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

I thank the Minister for the remarks she just made. Would she accept that people who make an incredibly dangerous journey and are exploited in doing so are often totally desperate, are victims of human rights abuse and war, and have been through horrendous journeys to get there? One day, they will find somewhere where they will be able to live their lives and make a contribution to our society. As a world, do we not need to look at the plight of refugees as a whole and do much more to try to bring an end to the conditions that force people to seek these desperate journeys in the first place?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

I agree that we in this place have to always think about the humanity involved and not try to label everybody who comes into our country when they are claiming asylum as some kind of threat or, even worse, as a terrorist or something, as was done by the hon. Member for Ashfield. We have to treat every case on its merits, and we have to treat every person as an individual human being, but we also have to recognise—the right hon. Member for Islington North needs to recognise this too—that not everybody who comes across on a boat is the kind of person he describes; some are the people running the people-smuggling gangs. A variety of humanity comes across on the boats, just as one can discover a variety of humanity if one comes across a pool of human beings anywhere.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Dame Angela Eagle]

I wish to get on with discussing the amendments, but because I served with him on the Intelligence and Security Committee, I will give way to the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) .

[Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) (Con)]

Is not the truth of the matter that showing humanity means recognising, as the Minister has implied, that some people are coming, perfectly understandably, for entirely economic reasons? If you thought you could get a better deal in Britain for you and your family, you would turn up and say you were claiming asylum on all kinds of grounds. That is the real truth of it. The system is being gamed and it has to stop being gamed.

[Dame Angela Eagle]

Yes in some circumstances, but no in others, because some people who come over are genuine asylum seekers. Even under the right hon. Gentleman’s Government—when he, too, was in the Home Office—such people were granted asylum. As always, there are many different circumstances and each case has to be looked at and judged on its merits.

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

rose—

[Dame Angela Eagle]

I am sorry, but I need to get on, because we do not have a lot of time and I think I have been generous.

The Government have tabled further amendments, to which I now wish to turn, to strengthen the Bill. First, new clause 5 extends right-to-work checks. Preventing illegal working forms a critical part of the Government’s plan to strengthen the immigration system and restore tough enforcement of the rules, undermining the proposition sold by unscrupulous criminal gangs that individuals can work in the UK. In reality, such work is illegal and puts individuals in a vulnerable position and at risk of exploitation. Legitimate businesses are undercut and the wages of lawful workers are negatively impacted, with links to other labour market abuse such as tax evasion, breach of the national minimum wage and exploitative working conditions.

Those working illegally in the UK are exploiting a loophole in the existing right-to-work scheme, whereby only those organisations that engage individuals under a contract of employment are required to carry out right-to-work checks. Government new clause 5 means that those who engage individuals to work as casual or temporary workers under a worker’s contract, individual subcontractors, and online matching services that provide details of service providers to carry out work or services for potential clients or customers for remuneration, will be legally required to check a person’s right to work. Individuals who are self-employed in the traditional sense, and who contract directly with clients, will not be in scope of new clause 5, ensuring that a member of the public directly engaging a tradesperson or business will not have to carry out a right-to-work check. That is a long overdue extension of right-to-work checks to include sectors that were previously out of scope and to crack down on the unscrupulous exploitation of employment law loopholes.

I note new clause 2 tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) and new clause 21 in the name of the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) on the Government’s policy on the right to work for asylum seekers, but it is important, as I said earlier, to distinguish between those who need protection and those seeking to come here to work. Although pull factors to the UK are complex, the perception of easy access to the labour market is among the reasons that people undertake dangerous journeys to the UK.

I turn to Government new clauses 6 and 7. First, asylum appeals in the first-tier tribunal of the immigration and asylum chamber currently take an average of nearly 50 weeks, according to the latest published statistics. That is because of the huge backlogs we inherited when we came into government. Government new clauses 6 and 7 seek to set a 24-week statutory timeframe, requiring the first-tier tribunal of the immigration and asylum chamber to decide supported accommodation cases and non-detained foreign national offender cases within 24 weeks from the date the appeal is lodged, as far as is reasonably practicable.

There are no easy or perfect choices here, but the Government have to take action, and we are focusing in the first instance on measures that will allow us to get people out of costly hotels and to facilitate the swift deportation of non-detained foreign national offenders, where that is in the public interest. While implementing the 24-week timeframe for supported asylum appeals and appeals from non-detained foreign national offenders, it is our expectation that the judiciary will continue to prioritise appeals lodged by detained foreign national offenders and the most vulnerable. We are working at pace in the Home Office and with the Ministry of Justice and His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service to look at all possible improvements to the end-to-end immigration and appeals system and to the speed and efficiency of decision making and appeals, while continuing to guarantee access to justice. We will set out further reforms to the asylum system later this summer.

[Jim Shannon]

The Minister will know that I chair the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief. An important thing for us is those of a Christian faith and other faiths who come here. The Government have been incredibly generous in giving them the opportunity of asylum and positions here; schemes of both the previous Government and this Government are to be commended, and I thank them. Can the Minister today assure this House, the people I represent here in this United Kingdom and those from overseas that there will still be the opportunity for those who are persecuted because of their faith to come here and claim asylum?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

None of the changes that I have talked about in the new clauses will impinge at all on the criteria currently used to determine whether somebody has a need for protection under the refugee convention. Clearly, in certain circumstances that includes the reality of religious persecution in the homeland. I hope that reassures the hon. Gentleman.

Government new clause 8 redefines how the UK interprets the phrase “a particularly serious crime” for the purpose of excluding refugees from the protection against refoulement. Under existing arrangements, anyone convicted of any offence that attracts a custodial sentence of 12 months or more will have committed a particularly serious crime for these purposes. Those arrangements remain unchanged, but new clause 8 goes further and will mean that a particularly serious crime will now include individuals who have received a conviction for a sexual offence listed in schedule 3 to the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Importantly for these cases, the fact that a particularly serious crime has been committed will be a presumption that can, obviously, be rebutted by the individual in question so that they get a fair hearing.

Schedule 3 to the 2003 Act lists the offences that automatically make an offender subject to notification requirements, meaning that they have to notify the police of personal details annually, or whenever their details change. Failure to do so is a criminal offence and the system is sometimes known as the sex offenders register. The Government recognise the devastating impact of sexual violence on victims in our communities and are fully committed to tackling sexual offences and halving violence against women and girls in a decade. To achieve that, a broad set of the right powers must be available for authorities to tackle sexual crimes, bring perpetrators to justice and manage sex offenders.

[Sir Christopher Chope (Christchurch) (Con)]

I accept the wisdom behind this new clause, but will the Minister go further and comment on new clause 39, in the name of my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh)? That new clause is designed to put an end to another mischief affecting the non-refoulement rules; it would ensure that primacy was given to the torture convention and the refugee convention, and that it was not possible for the European Court of Human Rights to interpret the European convention on human rights in such a way as to exclude those provisions.

[Dame Angela Eagle]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for his creativity in asking that question when I am talking about this particular Government new clause. I think we had a debate in Committee on the amendment in the name of the Father of the House, and I certainly intend to come on to it later in our proceedings—hopefully, when he is here.

As part of our efforts to halve violence against women and girls, it is important that the small number of asylum seekers and refugees who have been convicted of particularly serious crimes do not benefit from protection status. Not only have they failed to respect the laws of the UK by committing sexual crimes, but they have undermined public confidence in the system. New clause 8 changes the law to deny refugee status to those convicted of the abhorrent crimes listed in schedule 3 to the Sexual Offences Act 2003, treating them with the seriousness they deserve and supporting our wider mission to halve violence against women and girls in a decade.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

The Minister is being very generous in giving way. The trouble is that, when the judiciary get hold of this and there is an appeal, they very often cite exceptional circumstances, which are cited in the original legislation but have been interpreted over the years in a very liberal way—so much so as to be almost meaningless. Will the Minister define more clearly what exceptional circumstances are, so that there can be no doubt in the minds of lawyers about who might be eligible for appeal against decisions made by the Home Office, and who is not?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

Certainly we will come into the detail of how this works once it is on the statute book, in the guidance that is issued, but I am making it very clear to the House tonight that the Government wish those few people—the very small number of asylum seekers and refugees who have been convicted of serious sexual offences such that they have been put on the sex offenders register—to be denied refugee status. We will also deny refugee status where we are able to show that an individual has been convicted in a foreign court for a crime that would have fallen under schedule 3 to the 2003 Act if they had been convicted in the UK. Those convicted and made subject to the notification requirements have committed the most serious of sexual offences, which should be included in the definition of a particularly serious crime.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mike Martin (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)]

Does the Minister find it strange that in a debate on a Bill so important to Reform UK—indeed, it is the party’s raison d’être—80% of Reform UK MPs have left the Chamber and are, presumably, in the pub?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

I think they probably call that campaigning, but it is up to them to justify how long they spend in the pub, or indeed in this Chamber.

Moving to serious crime prevention orders and interim serious crime prevention orders, Government amendments 14 to 19 will remove Scotland and Northern Ireland from clause 48, which allows electronic monitoring as a condition of serious crime prevention orders and interim serious crime prevention orders in terrorism-related cases. The amendments will ensure that the devolved Governments retain full legislative competence over their existing electronic monitoring regimes.

For now, I commend all the Government amendments to the House and look forward to contributions from other right hon. and hon. Members on the gargantuan group of amendments we are dealing with tonight.

[Chris Philp (Croydon South) (Con)]

I rise to speak to new clauses 14 and 18, and to various other new clauses and amendments that stand in my name and those of my right hon. and hon. Friends. Let me start by paying tribute to my hon. Friends the Members for Weald of Kent (Katie Lam) and for Stockton West (Matt Vickers), who are sitting beside me. They toiled with enormous fortitude and patience through 12 Committee sittings. They did extremely diligent and good work, and I put on record my thanks to them both.

The new clauses and amendments that we have tabled are made necessary by the Government’s abject and appalling failure, since they came to office last July, to control small boat crossings of the English channel. They came to office saying that they would “smash the gangs”, a claim that is now in tatters. Let us take a look at what they have done since 4 July last year. Since the election, 35,048 people have illegally crossed the English channel. That is a 29% increase on the same period the previous year.

This year—2025—how is smashing the gangs going so far? Well, 11,806 people have crossed, which is the worst start to a year in history. That is an appalling and abject failure, for which this Government are responsible. Yesterday alone, 232 people crossed, and we understand that today, as we stand here, several hundred more people have made that illegal crossing. There is no control over who they are. There are suggestions that some of the suspects in the recent Iranian terror case were living in asylum accommodation and may therefore have crossed by small boat. I certainly recall that some people crossing the channel had very serious prior convictions. The Government have no idea who these people are, and they certainly have no control.

The people crossing are almost entirely young men. They have pushed themselves to the front of the queue by paying people smugglers. I do not see them as victims; they are committing a criminal offence by entering the United Kingdom in this way. It is a criminal offence contrary to section 24 of the Immigration Act 1971, as I am sure everybody knows.

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Philp]

I certainly agree that the hon. Gentleman has had long enough, and his constituents may well agree in a few years’ time. I gave the figures very clearly: since the election, 35,000 people have crossed the channel. That is a 29% increase on the same period a year before. So far, this year has been the worst year on record—the worst year in history—for illegal channel crossings. The claims to smash the gangs lie in tatters.

[Dame Angela Eagle]

We missed the right hon. Gentleman in the Committee. Given the sophistication of the organised immigration crime threat to the country, will he explain why he plans on voting against the Bill tonight when it provides counter-terrorism style powers that the National Crime Agency and our security services have told us they want to be able to bring to bear on this serious question?

[Chris Philp]

I missed being in Committee as well, and I missed the prospect of spending hours and hours in the hon. Lady’s company. Perhaps on some other occasion an opportunity will present itself.

The hon. Lady invites me to comment on a Third Reading matter, but since she asked the question, when we vote on a Bill at Third Reading—a yes or no vote—we are voting on it in its totality. While the counter-terror measures may have a very marginal benefit—it will be no more than marginal, as she should know—the Bill will also do some extremely damaging things that will make it a lot harder to control our borders. For example, clause 38 repeals pretty much the entirety of the Illegal Migration Act 2023.

--- Later in debate ---

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

We have no more speakers, so we will go straight to the Minister. Forgive me, I thought we had another person bobbing, but they no longer seem to be in the Chamber. Minister Eagle, you get the lucky extra few minutes for the winding-up.

[Dame Angela Eagle]

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is a pleasure to rise after what has been a very full debate, with people having to fit in quite complex points in short amounts of time. I congratulate everybody on the points they made. I will try, as much as possible, to deal with some of them in the time I have left.

I thank all those on the Labour Benches who made contributions: my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Riverside (Kim Johnson), my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan), my hon. Friends the Members for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy), for Sheffield Hallam (Olivia Blake), for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh (Chris Murray), for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy), for Bassetlaw (Jo White), for Nottingham East (Nadia Whittome), for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) and for Leigh and Atherton (Jo Platt).

Liberal Democrat Members concentrated on safe and legal routes, and the ability to work. I was worried that the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) had had such a difficult time in Committee. I thought we were having quite a reasonable time, but he was extremely downbeat about it. I must try more on another occasion.

I welcome the maiden speech from the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby (Sarah Pochin), which we all listened to in traditional silence. I congratulate her on it, welcome her to the House and wonder if Reform is practising the principle of one in, one out—or perhaps one out, one in. It is a pleasure to welcome her to the House.

The shadow Home Secretary produced a flurry of amendments and new clauses demanding that we do a whole range of things that not only did he not do when he had the chance as a Home Office Minister, but his party did not do when they had the chance over 14 years. I have to keep saying this, but we inherited a system in the most incredibly difficult mess, with huge backlogs. He says we have made it worse, but by beginning to process claims, that by definition creates a backlog of those who have been refused. By trying to get the system working again, we get a backlog of appeals, because people who are refused asylum generally appeal, and the backlog—as he knows from his time in the Home Office—therefore reappears in the appeals system. That is why we have the new clauses to attempt to get a timeline for dealing with those cases.

I will concentrate on some of the things that I know there will be votes on tonight. First, I will deal with safe and legal routes and new clause 3. Our approach is to resettle refugees identified by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees who would benefit most from resettlement to the UK. Alongside that, we have bespoke routes to sanctuary for those from Ukraine, Afghanistan and Hong Kong. It is important that safe and legal routes are sustainable, well managed and in line with the UK’s capacity to welcome, accommodate and integrate refugees. Part of the difficulty we have at the moment is the legacy we received from the Conservatives of a huge quadrupling of net migration and the issues with having to assimilate all those people in the huge, unplanned way in which they delivered that.

New clause 37 was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy). We recognise her campaigning on this issue over the past five years. We also recognise that there has been an unfair burden for some families with rights to citizenship under the system as it is. I can confirm that the work referenced on page 76 of the White Paper—it is right at the end—will look at tackling the financial barriers that she highlighted in her speech. I urge her to work with us on how we move forward and to not press her new clause.

The Opposition tabled new clause 14. Let me be clear that this Government are fully committed to the protection of human rights at home and abroad. As the Prime Minister has made clear, the United Kingdom is unequivocally committed to the European convention on human rights, and it is worth noting that many of the legal obligations provided for in the European convention are also found in other international agreements to which the UK is a party.

[Steve Barclay]

Will the Minister give way?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

Very quickly, because I have a lot of points and not much time.

[Steve Barclay]

The Minister has just set out once again, as the Prime Minister did earlier today, her steadfast commitment to the ECHR. Does she not accept that that means that the legislation is not watertight and that those who have committed serious criminality will continue to be able to stay in the United Kingdom, because of the ECHR?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

New clause 8 will deny refugee status to those who commit sexual offences. We also have the work being announced on narrowing article 8, which will allow Parliament to give more direction to judges about how the rules ought to be interpreted. The immigration rules reflect the requirements of the ECHR generally, including the qualified nature of article 8, setting requirements that properly balance the individual right to respect for family and private life with the public interest in safeguarding the economic wellbeing of the UK by controlling immigration.

[Chris Philp]

The Minister mentioned the provision to prevent certain sex offenders from claiming asylum. While that is a welcome step, what will happen in practice is that the sex offender will simply make a claim under article 3 of the ECHR instead. I have seen dozens and dozens of cases like that, and that is precisely why we need to disapply the Human Rights Act 1998 from all immigration matters. Otherwise, there will just be a huge loophole, as my right hon. Friend the Member for North East Cambridgeshire (Steve Barclay) pointed out.

[Dame Angela Eagle]

If we disapplied the Human Rights Act, people would just go to the ECHR anyway, and a lot of these cases would end up in Strasbourg, which would take even longer. Disapplying the Human Rights Act would also mean that other countries that we have to work and collaborate with to deal with cross-border people smuggling would not work with us. The Conservatives had many huge rows with people and went around the world making it look as though they did not believe in the rule of law. This Government do believe in the rule of law and we will carry on upholding the rule of law; we regard that as an important part of the value system we have in this country.

On new clause 18 and the cap on non-visitor visas, as always the Conservatives talk a good talk now that they are safely in opposition, having not delivered when they were in government. They promised time after time to reduce net migration down to the tens of thousands—they did it in their manifestos and in the many different manifestations of Conservative Governments that we saw plough through the House, especially in the past four years—and what did they do? They quadrupled net migration. We do not need a cap; we need to get migration down, fundamentally lower than it is now, to make the system fair and effective. In order to do that, we have published a White Paper today and introduced further measures in this Bill. We will come back to this issue to ensure that we can deliver—unlike the Conservative party.

[Bell Ribeiro-Addy]

I thank the Minister for her mention of my new clause and her commitment to ending the financial burden on young children and their families who have a right to citizenship. What further work will be done to consult campaigns such as Citizens UK, Lambeth Citizens and the Project for the Registration of Children as British Citizens that have been working on this issue? I know that the White Paper covers a range of issues, but I want to understand what consultation will be done with those organisations to ensure that we get to where we need to be: a situation where children are not priced out of citizenship.

[Dame Angela Eagle]

The Minister for Citizenship and Migration, my hon. Friend the Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra), has just made it clear to me from the Front Bench that she is very happy to consult and meet all those groups. We want people to contribute to the consultation so that we get this right. I hope that in the light of that, my hon. Friend the Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill will not press new clause 37.

I want to deal with the right to work in the brief time I have left, because those on the Lib Dem Benches talked about that in particular. It is an issue of balance: we know at the moment that, if someone’s asylum claim is delayed for 12 months, they have the right to work in particular shortage areas. Our way of dealing with this is to get the system to work more quickly, so that we do not have people languishing for many years in limbo. That is what we are aiming to do.

We are worried that if the right to work came in after three months, it would be too much of a pull factor and get around some of the issues with work visas. We have to have a system that people apply to properly, rather than one that they can get around by coming in by irregular routes. That is the issue. I appreciate what Lib Dem Members are trying to achieve; we have a slight difference of approach on that, but clearly we will carry on having these debates.

Question put and agreed to.

New clause 5 accordingly read a Second time, and added to the Bill.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dame Angela Eagle]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

This Bill restores order to an asylum system that was left in chaos by the Conservatives. It puts an end to the failed gimmicks and unworkable mess that they bequeathed us. It repeals in full the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024, and it repeals most of the unworkable Illegal Migration Act 2023, which trapped asylum seekers in limbo as asylum backlogs soared and the taxpayer picked up a spiralling bill.

This Government are clearing up the mess that the Conservative party left us, and the Bill before the House will help us to succeed. It will assist in securing our borders by dealing with the soaring backlogs. It gives counter-terror style powers to law enforcement agencies, equipping them to go after the people-smuggling gangs that are making millions of pounds out of exploiting people’s misery. The Bill introduces new powers to seize electronic devices and disrupt the activities of people smugglers; new offences against gangs selling or handling small boat parts for use in the channel; new powers on serious crime prevention orders to target individuals involved in organised immigration crime; a new law to protect lives at sea by making it an offence to endanger another life during small boat crossings; a new statutory footing for the Border Security Commander; and new and improved data sharing between Government agencies, such as HMRC and DVLA, and law enforcement to detect organised immigration crime.

The Bill introduces a statutory timeline for appeals decisions and a major modernisation of the powers of the Immigration Services Commissioner. It ensures that those who commit certain sexual offences will be denied protection under the refugee convention, and contains a long-overdue extension of the right-to-work checks for casual and temporary workers in the gig economy, so why on earth is the Conservative party going to vote against it tonight?

People smuggling is a complex and multifaceted problem, and there are no quick or easy solutions to prevent it. Anyone who claims that there are easy answers is a snake oil salesman, but it is possible to identify, disrupt and dismantle the criminal gangs and strengthen the security of our borders through international diplomacy and operational co-operation. This Bill will help us do just that, and I commend it to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Home Secretary, who has a minute or two.