Here is my "Personally Speaking" column in today's Sentinel (Stoke-on-Trent Live), in which I discuss the actions the Government are taking to stop the boats. I have reproduced the article below.
=====================================================================================================================================
On Monday, I voted for the Government’s new Illegal Migration Bill, to tackle the issue of migrants crossing the English Channel. The Prime Minister has made stopping the boats one of his top five priorities this year, and I am 100% behind him on that.
There has been a great deal of public comment about the Bill so I wanted to set out in my column not only what our Bill will do, but why I believe this is the right and moral approach to the issue.
Contrary to some claims, the UK is a very tolerant and open society. Indeed that is precisely why so many economic migrants are seeking to come here rather than stay in France.
And the British public have stepped up again and again to host and help settle refugees from international conflicts such as those in Ukraine, Afghanistan and Syria. We have also done the right thing by Hong Kongers in the wake of the Chinese state’s crackdown on human rights and refusal to honour the terms of the 1997 handover.
The people-smuggling trade across the Channel is wicked. More than 300 men, women and children have died making this journey in the last 20 years, through tragedies both on the open sea and in the backs of lorries.
If we do not break the business model of the people-smugglers, by making clear to their customers that arriving illegally will mean you cannot stay, then more migrants will surely die in the years ahead.
The numbers crossing the Channel – 45,000 last year – not only puts immense pressure on our public services and on the hotels where they are being housed, but also eliminates our capacity to provide refuge and asylum to those affected by war – where we can help those most in need, such as women and children, rather than reward those who have the physical strength to travel across Europe and the money to pay the people-smugglers.
The only way to break the evil business model – to change the incentives for the migrants – is to make absolutely clear that those crossing the Channel will be detained and removed. No ifs, no buts.
Many of those crossing the Channel can be returned to their home country, if it is a safe country such as Albania. 12,000 of last year’s Channel-crossers were from Albania, and we have now signed a new returns agreement with the Albanian government. Deportations are already proceeding.
For those who cannot be returned to their home country, we will send them to a safe third country, such as Rwanda. Importantly, any appeals against removal will be heard remotely.
Once the Bill is passed and these removals start happening, then I believe we would see a rapid drop in the numbers of those putting to sea. This is precisely what happened in Australia when they introduced a similar policy.
The Labour Party do not seem to have a plan on this issue, and voted against our Bill. They call for “safe and legal routes” from abroad, without acknowledging that can only work if you shut down the unsafe illegal route first – and they have no strategy for doing that.
Unless safe and legal routes are completely unlimited in number (which does seem to be the position of a number of Labour MPs, judging by the debate in the Commons) then those who do not qualify will still try to jump the queue by crossing the Channel.
According to the UN, there are literally tens of millions of potential asylum seekers around the world, without even counting those living under repressive regimes. No country could possibly open themselves up to unlimited claims.
But our Bill, in addition to tackling the illegal migration across the Channel, will also provide for an annual quota of safe and legal routes to asylum in the UK. The number would be set by Parliament and would obviously have to depend on our capacity.
I believe this would not only meet our moral obligations, but also be democratically acceptable to the majority of the British public. The current situation is neither moral nor does it have democratic consent, which I why I fully support Rishi Sunak’s plan to tackle illegal migration and stop the boats.
I would welcome all feedback from Newcastle residents on this topic, on both sides of the argument. Please do email me with yours.
Finally, it is great for the town that Question Time is coming to Newcastle-under-Lyme next Thursday. A big thank you to Craig Hodgson and everyone at Newcastle College for making this happen.