Stopping the small boats

I reproduce below the Home Secretary’s letter to all MPs about the small boats legislation



The Illegal Migration Bill will have its remaining Commons stages next Wednesday. The Bill will, with the other measures we are taking, deliver on our commitment to stop the boats. The Bill will send an unambiguous message as to our intent, that if you come to this country illegally you will not be able to stay, instead you will be detained and swiftly removed to your home country if safe, or another safe third country such as Rwanda.


Given the sensitivity and complexity of policy in this area, as reflected in our decision to introduce the Bill with various marker clauses, it was always our intention to draft iteratively with the benefit of ongoing legal, policy, and operational advice. Having completed further work and reflected on the debates in Committee, the Government has now tabled and supported amendments that we believe are necessary for the Bill to function as intended. I wanted to take this opportunity ahead of next Wednesday’s debate to explain the key proposed changes.


Safe and legal routes for those needing protection


The UK has a proud history of providing protection for those who need it through safe and legal routes. Since 2015, we have offered a safe and legal route to the UK for close to half a million people from all over the world via our global routes and our country-specific routes.  This includes around 50,000 who have come to the UK on routes open to people from any country in the world, 25,000 on our country-specific routes for Afghanistan and 20,000 from Syria, over 100,000 Hong Kongers, and close to 200,000 from Ukraine.


Clause 53 enables Parliament to set the number of individuals admitted to the UK each year via safe and legal routes with regard to the capacity of local authorities and other local services to provide the necessary accommodation and support.


Having listened to the debate in Committee, I know many colleagues are keen for both greater clarity on our existing safe and legal routes and for quick progress toward the establishment of the regime envisaged by Clause 53.

The Government is therefore happy to support the amendments tabled by Tim Loughton MP which requires the Home Office to launch, within three months of Royal Assent, the consultation on the regulations to be made under clause 53(1) setting the maximum number of persons to be admitted each year using safe and legal routes. In addition, these amendments will require the Home Secretary to lay a report before Parliament within six months of Royal Assent setting out current and any proposed additional safe and legal routes for those in need of protection, to be implemented as soon as practicable and, in any event, by the end of 2024.


Unaccompanied children


Under the provisions of the Bill, the duty to make arrangements for removal does not apply to unaccompanied children who arrive illegally from safe countries until they reach adulthood, but there is a power to remove them. In line with current policy and existing legal powers, we have been clear that we only intend to exercise this power in very limited circumstances, principally for the purposes of family reunion or removal to a safe country of origin. I have tabled an amendment to make this clear by listing those circumstances on the face of the Bill. We need to be alert to the people smugglers changing their tactics to circumvent the Bill. Therefore, the amendments also provide a power, by regulations, to extend the circumstances in which it would be possible, on a case-by-case basis, to remove an unaccompanied child. Such regulations will be subject to the affirmative procedure so would need to be debated and approved by both Houses.


I recognise that at Committee stage there were particular concerns from colleagues about the application of the Bill’s detention powers to unaccompanied children. While the power to detain children already exists in legislation, this amendment therefore also provides that unaccompanied children may only be detained for purposes prescribed in regulations made by the Secretary of State subject to the negative procedure, such as for the purposes of  removal to effect a family reunion (as is currently the case) or for the purposes of age assessment. It also allows the Secretary of State to make regulations specifying time limits to be placed on the detention of unaccompanied children for the purpose of removal if required.


Age assessments 


Given that unaccompanied children will be treated differently to adults under the Bill, and the obvious safeguarding risks of adults purporting to be children being placed with children in the care system, it is important that we do not create an incentive for adults to make spurious claims that they are children so as to delay their removal. Between 2016 and September 2022, there were around 8000 asylum cases where age was disputed and an age assessment was conducted, with around half assessed to be adults.


Our age assessment process seeks to mitigate against the risk that adults are accommodated alongside children and ensure that genuine children can swiftly access the appropriate support. Where there are reasons to doubt age, immigration officers make an initial decision to determine whether an individual is significantly over 18. The threshold is set deliberately high in recognition of the difficulty in assessing age based on appearance and demeanour.  Where there remains any doubt they are referred for a comprehensive assessment, and until this assessment is completed they will be accommodated as a child with all the appropriate safeguards. The comprehensive assessment includes social worker led interviews, which must adhere to standards that have been set out by the court.  The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 provides powers to use scientific methods to broaden the evidence base available to social workers and for the decision maker to take a refusal to consent to scientific methods as damaging to that person’s credibility.


A new clause will introduce a regulation-making power which would, in certain circumstances, enable (contingent on a robust scientific justification) an automatic assumption of adulthood where an individual refuses to undergo scientific age assessment. For context, we understand that similar policies, are applied by some ECHR signatory countries including the Netherlands, Luxembourg and the Czech Republic.

Our amendment will also disapply the right of appeal for age assessments established in section 54 of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 for those subject to the Bill’s removal duty. Instead, those wishing to challenge a decision on age assessment will be able to judicially review the decision, but this challenge will be ‘non-suspensive’, which means it will be able to continue after the individual has been removed.


Restricting interim relief


One of the core aims of the Bill is to prevent late and repeated legal challenges to removal. The Bill does this by providing for two kinds of suspensive claims – factual suspensive claims and serious harm suspensive claims – and by making it clear that all other legal challenges to removal, including by way of judicial review, are non-suspensive. Given this approach, courts would be unable to grant interim relief temporarily blocking removal pending a judgment on the substantive judicial review.


As Sir William Cash, Danny Kruger and others indicated in Committee, this intention could be made clearer on the face of the Bill. We are therefore pleased to support the new clause tabled by Danny Kruger which makes it clear that interim relief, including injunctions, is not available and the only way of preventing removal is by making a “suspensive claim” as defined in the Bill itself.


We have also tabled an amendment regarding interim measures of the European Court of Human Rights including under Rule 39 of its Rules of Court. Interim measures  blocked the Government from removing individuals to Rwanda last summer. The Government is currently engaged in constructive dialogue with the Strasbourg Court on possible reforms to the process by which it considers requests for interim measures. The new clause will create a discretion for a Minister of the Crown to suspend the duty to remove a person where an interim measure has been indicated. That discretion must be exercised personally by a Minister of the Crown. This means the Minister may suspend removal in response to a Rule 39 interim measure but is not required to as a matter of UK law. The clause provides a broad discretion for the Minister to have regard to any factors when considering whether to disapply the duty. The clause provides a non-exhaustive list of considerations that the Minister may have regard to when considering the exercise of that discretion.


Clarifying the meaning of “serious and irreversible harm”


One of the suspensive claims provided for in the Bill is where a person claims that they would be at real risk of serious and irreversible harm were they to be removed to a specified third country. The Bill enables the Secretary of State, by regulations, to make provision about the meaning of “serious and irreversible harm”. To limit the ability of individuals to delay removal with spurious claims we have tabled a new clause to augment this regulation-making power with substantive provision on the face of the Bill which sets out non-exhaustive and amendable lists of matters which would or would not constitute serious and irreversible harm. The amendments also make it clear that the serious and irreversible harm must be “imminent and foreseeable”, which will bring the provision more closely into alignment with relevant Strasbourg practice.


Legal aid


It is important that those persons who received a removal notice under the Bill have access to appropriate legal services.  A new clause provides for the provision of legal aid in relation to removal notices under the Bill. The new clause will bring certain civil legal services for recipients of removal notices under the Bill into the scope of legal aid, enabling them to access legal services in relation to the removal notice, without the application of the merits criteria. These provisions will help ensure appropriate access to justice is in place within the timeframes set by the Bill.


Foreign National Offenders


Under section 63 of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022, individuals with specific serious criminal convictions, terrorism offences and measures, or those who have been assessed as otherwise posing a national security risk to the UK, may not benefit from certain protections available to potential victims of modern slavery including receiving a recovery and reflection period. The public order disqualification currently applies to FNOs given a custodial sentence of 12 months or more.


The Bill includes a marker clause (clause 28(3) and (4)) to strengthen the application of the public order disqualification to FNOs. The amendments to clause 28 replace the marker clause so that there is a statutory presumption that the public order disqualification applies to FNOs sentenced to an immediate custodial sentence of any length.


Ban on re-entry, settlement and citizenship


Under the provisions of the Bill, those who meet the conditions for the duty to make arrangements for removal are also subject to permanent bans on re-entry, settlement and citizenship. As part of these provisions, the Bill provides the Secretary of State with powers to waive each of the bans in certain limited circumstances. Our amendments tighten the operation of these provisions by narrowing the circumstances in which a waiver of the bans can be sought or provided for. We are also providing for these clauses to come into force on Royal Assent.


New powers in relation to electronic devices and identity documents


Alongside the core provisions in the Bill, it is important to ensure that we have the necessary powers to tackle illegal migration more broadly. Mobile phones and other electronic devices may contain a wealth of information which can directly or indirectly facilitate the confirmation of a person’s identity and an understanding of their activities. This can assist in determining a person’s immigration status or right to be in the UK, as well as in developing the intelligence picture on illegal migration and providing evidence which could be used in criminal prosecutions.


We have therefore brought forward amendments to confer new powers on immigration officers to search for, seize and retain electronic devices (such as mobile phones) from illegal migrants, which appear to contain information relevant to the discharge of their functions, including but not limited to a criminal investigation.


We are also amending section 8 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004 to put beyond doubt that a person’s credibility should be damaged where they make an asylum or human rights claim but refuse to disclose information, such as a passcode, that would enable access to their mobile phone or other electronic device; or fail to produce, destroy, alter or dispose of any identity document without reasonable explanation, or produce a document which is not a valid identity document as if it were.


With the exception of the new clause on legal aid (which would apply to England and Wales), the amendments addressed in this letter would apply UK wide.


Minister Jenrick and I look forward to debating these issues further as the Bill progresses.





Rt Hon Suella Braverman KC MP


  1. Mark B
    April 23, 2023

    Good morning.

    Rt Hon Suella Braverman KC MP fails to mention one thing. That for every illegal we send to Rwanda, we must accept one refugee from them. With many of the Rwandan refugees having serious medical and psychological health issues due to being victims of wars in Africa.

    If people think this is not only going to solve the problem but bring immigration down, they are wrong. You have all been duped.

    1. Ian+wragg
      April 23, 2023

      Waffle and more waffle.
      Bringing disabled Rwandans in for treatment on our already overloaded NHS and benefits system is nonesense and you know it.
      This will not make one iota of difference to the number of gimmigrants arriving on our Shores.

      1. Mark B
        April 23, 2023

        Under Section 16 – Resettlement of vulnerable Refugees

        16.1 The Participants will make arrangements for the United Kingdom to resettle a portion of Rwanda’s most vulnerable refugees in the United Kingdom, recognising both Participants’ commitment towards providing better international protection for refugees.

        This is a government website, Sir John and you have allowed it before.

        1. glen cullen
          April 23, 2023

          You can’t write a law without a loophole

    2. Peter
      April 23, 2023

      Nothing will change. This Bill is just more displacement activity.

      We all know this. The government has no credibility.

      1. Javelin
        April 23, 2023

        Politics today is very much like prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s USA. Except it is not bars that has been shutdown, but freedom if speech and discussion. So what we have a huge number of political bootleggers outside the main stream media discussing reality.

        Freedom of discussion has been shut down on

        – source of covid
        – vaccine effectiveness
        – vaccine harm
        – mass migration
        – climate change
        – net zero agenda
        – woke policies
        – corrupt civil service
        – etc

        The net effect will be the overthrow of the political establishment at the earliest opportunity. Until then the current political establishment will become more and more authoritarian and make the public more and depressed at their behaviour.

        1. Anselm
          April 23, 2023

          And who, pray, is the opposition?

        2. Cuibono
          April 23, 2023

          Not only freedom of discussion but also freedom of association.
          You mention bars ….we have lost so many of our pubs where folk could exchange views etc.
          The plague restrictions might just as well have included gags…they settled for masks…but who time?

        3. glen cullen
          April 23, 2023

          The BBC and Sky mention ‘climate change’ every day on every programme, it’s the opposing view which is cancelled , the brainwashing is so complete its also mentioned now on almost every TV ad

        4. Lynn Atkinson
          April 23, 2023

          Quite so. In the USA too. People cannot comprehend that the whole establishment can be overthrown, what use us the immigration system to us? The Justice system which refuses to hear a case of electoral fraud for the office of the Presidency of the USA? What good is the tax system which denies people the ability to work for their living and care for their families – redistributing the wealth earned to those who earn nothing? What good is a Constitutional Monarch who refuses to defend the Constitution? What good is an economy that does not work for us? A Defence that cannot even defend our fishing waters or our borders? A Government that surrenders a part of the U.K. and threatens to surrender more unless their surrender is accepted? What good is a Health Service which has created a massively unhealthy population across the western world – the more they ‘medicate’ us the sicker we are.
          Time for a rethink. If there is not enough water, not enough food, not enough energy, not enough housing to go around, who had the priority in the U.K. to those resources. It’s the true Sovereigns who say – not their servants in Parliament, Pulpit or Palace.
          Do we recognize that our own relations, those who carry our genes and are native, have no other place to go, have first and indeed only call? I think we do.
          The rotten USSR was disenbowled and out of the ashes came the Christian, renewed, strong, honest confident Russian Federation.
          Take heart, if they can do it, so can we!

    3. NottinghamLadHimself
      April 23, 2023

      Yes you have been duped.

      The number of clandestine migrants in the country who arrived by these boats is dwarfed by that of those who arrive normally on visas at airports but who then simply never return and then melt into the cash economy.

      These often desperate people are being used as pawns in a very cynical game simply because they can be visible on the other hand.

      Incidentally, what do you think that the ones who succeed in making it ashore unnoticed do? Report to the nearest immigration centre?

      1. Gabe
        April 23, 2023

        Indeed these are sunak’s 5 promises so will he actually keep any?

        “These are the five foundations I know can build a better, more secure, more prosperous future that this country deserves.
        1. We will halve inflation this year to ease the cost of living and give people financial security.
        2. We will grow the economy, creating better-paid jobs and opportunity right across the country.
        3. We will make sure our national debt is falling so that we can secure the future of public services.
        4. NHS waiting lists will fall and people will get the care they need more quickly.
        5. We will pass new laws to stop small boats, making sure that if you come to this country illegally, you are detained and swiftly removed.”

        1. Halving inflation still means prices are going up rapidly, it does not ease or reduce the cost of living.
        2. Will grow the economy – what with the highest taxes for 70 years, dire public services, endless and increasing red tape and net zero rip off energy – Sure Sunak
        3. We will reduce the national debt – sure Sunak you were that man who as Chancellor increased it hugely with your endless waste, furlough and other total lunacies.
        4. NHS waiting lists – no chance of this with current healthcare policies unless you just fiddle the figures – doubtless that is the plan as with crime figures. The net harm vaccines have hugely increased heath problems too – especially in Cardiovascular.
        5. Note he says “pass new laws to” so no clear promise to actually take any real action. New laws the migrants will ignore just as they do the old ones.

      2. rose
        April 23, 2023

        Why do you call them desperate? They are quite the opposite: full of hope, ambition, and vigour, taking advantage of a richly rewarding opportunity.

    4. Sharon
      April 23, 2023

      Mark B

      Thanks for the reminder! I thought the idea of a swap of one illegal for someone with health or psychological problems was a mad idea when it was first mentioned. Why would ANYONE think that a good idea??

    5. Timaction
      April 23, 2023

      Indeed. After 13 years in office and all previous promises on legal and illegal immigration who is going to believe them? All hot air and words don’t count for a can of beans until I hear and see 1000 plus being deported daily and legal immigration down to under 50,000 annually for those able to make a POSITIVE contribution, not subsidised by the 46%. Salary limits to £75,000 plus. Real beneficiaries, not car washers and fruit pickers.
      A water pump can be 100% efficient if it runs to capacity at 100 litres per minute but if water flows in at 150, litres per minute we’re all going to drown under the massive legal and illegal immigration this current Government encourages. We cannot gain access to our Health Services under their policies. There simply isn’t enough capacity and never will be. They are privatising the NHS through the backdoor and only those able to afford care will get it.

    6. Peter Gardner
      April 24, 2023

      Mark B, Your statement is not supported by the text of the MOU – which you yourself have quoted separately! Where is the one-for-one agreement stated in writing?.

    7. Nell Pursey
      April 24, 2023

      We don’t need a ‘Stop Small Boats” bill. Btw some pf the boats are rather large. SB needs to explain why have we given France £Millions our money, to SEND ILLEGALS to UK instead of STOPPING THEM LEAVING FRENCH SHORES!. All deliberate.

    8. Berkshire Alan
      April 24, 2023

      Mark B

      Indeed, difficult to believe, we would trade a fit illegal (who perhaps could work) for an unfit person who did not want to come here in the first place, and who in all probability is not/will not, be fit to work !
      We are being governed by fools, but the fools think they are being very clever with their so called policy solutions, because few ever read the small print, and it’s all at the taxpayers expense.

  2. Ashley
    April 23, 2023

    This simply does not go remotely far enough it will do almost nothing to reduce the inward flow. If almost no one is ever forcibly returned (as is the case) there is clearly little point in wasting time, legal aid and further money determining their status. In 2022 only about 4,000 who were forcible returned but about 47,000 arrived (who were detected) and perhaps at least double in reality.

    1. Timaction
      April 23, 2023

      4000 removed. No, 215. That’s why this policy will fail its all smoke and mirrors. They have NO intention to deport anyone. They are actively encouraging it. Please advise where my family and I can go illegally anywhere else on Earth and be given free 4* Hotels, free food, accommodation, pocket money, top of the health and dentistry list and zero chance of being deported? A tent would be too much for these invaders but we’re led by left wing fools who must go. We can’t afford their largesse. We can’t afford for our own let alone these crooks. Family unification for children?????The same parents who let them travel the world alone…….that’ll work and no need of further public service costs and services going forward! The legacies importing our problems of the future as we’ve seen since WW2.

  3. formula57
    April 23, 2023

    And we are supposed to be taken in by the words “…. if you come to this country illegally you will not be able to stay, instead you will be detained and swiftly removed to your home country if safe, or another safe third country such as Rwanda”?

    You will be able to stay, it is just that you might get a fully-funded holiday in Rwanda first. That of course will only happen provided always we find you after you have arrived here, which we probably will not, at least not for years by which time your human rights will not be able to be violated through your being removed then.

    Can we now have a nationwide clap please for the not fit for purpose Home Office?

    1. Lifelogic
      April 23, 2023

      Almost all the UK’s government departments are rather useless, often corrupt, hugely wasteful, generally misdirected and very ineffective (are they even trying to be effective, do they even have sensible objectives?) Certainly net zero is not a sensible agenda). The highest taxes for 70 years yet still truly appalling public services.

      One public “service” (the free, largely ineffective, dangerous and not usually even needed Covid vaccines) seems to be causing up to about 150 people to die a day even now and just in the UK. It has injured or damaged far more. I know directly of three people who developed serious heart arrhythmias. Just how high are these numbers if I know three seriously vaccine damaged people directly? Not easy getting any NHS treatment for this damage they caused either.

      1. Sharon
        April 23, 2023

        With regards to the vaccine harms – my husband recently had a stroke. Thankfully, he’s recovering well, but my point is to say… the occupational therapist told us they are only a small department. She said she doesn’t know what’s happening, but for some reason they have recently been overwhelmed with people with strokes.

        1. Timaction
          April 23, 2023

          No problem here, just look the other way. What vaccine, no vaccine here. Look the other way, no news or discussion on this. Government knows best, no discussion just get a mask and ask no questions.

        2. Ashley
          April 23, 2023

          Best of luck to him. Yes blood clots and strokes seem to be an issue too.

    2. Ashley
      April 23, 2023

      “detained and swiftly removed to your home country if safe, or another safe third country such as Rwanda”

      Sure Sunak – but we are not remotely interested in worthless hot air any longer, so when will they actually act or deliver? We will have suffered 13 years of fake “Conservative” governments in just a few days time.

      Not a Conservative policy to be seem anywhere. Taxed to death, large )Sunak caused) inflation, moronic energy policies, open door migration, abysmal public services, declining living standards, the wars on motorists, landlords and small businesses, hundreds of thousands vaccine damaged… even worse we have only Labour waiting in the wings with even worse policies!

      1. Wanderer
        April 23, 2023

        @Ashley. +1. They’ve destroyed our country for the ordinary man. It’s unforgivable.

      2. Ashley
        April 23, 2023

        The usually very sensible Lord Peter Lilly just now “we have the best civil service in the World” does he really think this? They must be truly appalling everywhere else then! Lilly is certainly sound on the climate alarmist and energy lunacy but then he read Nat Sci then Economics (Clare).

        RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: If the ‘bullying’ bar was any lower, not even a limbo dancer would get under it – but Rishi chucked Raab under the No. 11 bus.

        Well perhaps Rabb decided rather than Suank but Rabb’s replacement is a very poor choice. What is the point in voting at all if ministers do the opposite of what they promised in their manifestos anyway and even if they do try to do the right things obstructive civil servants (nearly all pro EU, anti-brexit, climate alarmist, high tax, red tape pushers & art graduates) can obstruct or very easily get them smeared or even fired with almost total impunity.

        1. BOF
          April 23, 2023

          What I find particularly irksome is that the cs accusers are never identified and get off scott free. Remember the No 10 parties where all.the faces of cs were pixeled out. The public who pay the wages are entitled to know who they are.

        2. Peter
          April 23, 2023

          ‘……then he read Nat Sci then Economics (Clare).’

          You are Lifelogic and I claim my five pounds.

      3. Sharon
        April 23, 2023


    3. Lynn Atkinson
      April 23, 2023

      Ironically in Rwanda 63% of politicians are women – because the men were slaughtered in an horrid genocide. How is Rwanda counted as a ‘safe’ country when France, from which ALL illegal immigrants arrive, is not? Ship them in their runbber dingies onto the beaches of France.

  4. Lifelogic
    April 23, 2023

    Excellent coverage of the appalling vaccine damage that has been done (on Neil Oliver Live last night perhaps causing circa 50% of the large numbers of excess all cause deaths) so circa 150 death a day. Plus coverage of the South African legal action.

    Mark Dowlan is usually sound but yesterday he suggested the Marathon (which might, it seems, come under attack from deluded climate dopes after their snooker lunacy) uses no fossil fuels. Well he only has a politics degree I suppose. Running the marathon means you need to eat about 3 KWH of extra food energy (then there is all the training too). A small efficient electric car can do ~ 26 miles on about 5KWH carrying 5 people so three times more efficient. But then human food uses loads of fossil fuels to fertilises, harvest, dry, prepare, butcher, package, transport, freeze, cook… for a typical diet (about 10 times more than in the food) so a full car is circa 30 times more efficient than a jogger in CO2 terms. Even with one person in it the car about 6 times more efficient. Worse still for heavy meat eaters.

    So why does government have a war on motorists and a road blocking agenda yet encourage walking – clearly not for CO2 reasons. But the transport gov. web site still claims walking and cycling produce no direct or indirect CO2! So are they written by scientifically deluded morons or are they just lying?

    1. Fedupsouthener
      April 23, 2023

      Thank you LL. I shall watch Neil Oliver on catch up with great interest.

    2. Cuibono
      April 23, 2023

      Lying LL…lying big time.
      All the logic in the world is wasted on them. The true agenda is clear.
      Remain in one small space. Eat no meat. Use no fuel. Grow nothing. Keep no pets.Buy only 3 (?) new garments a year. Und so weiter.
      WHY? I am not certain. I mean why expend the energy necessary to imprison the world?
      Nor do I understand the apparent masochism of the useful idiots. Do they really want such a life? Still…I expect they all believed the plague narrative.
      Obviously money is at the bottom of it all.
      Creating a captive market for bug stew??

      1. Nell Pursey
        April 24, 2023

        Wish there were Likes and dislikes option. This reply above would get likes plus plus.

    3. Lifelogic
      April 23, 2023

      Also many of the contestants fly in from all over the World.

    4. BOF
      April 23, 2023

      To your last sentence, both, I would venture.

  5. formula57
    April 23, 2023

    So “Since 2015, we have offered a safe and legal route to the UK for close to half a million people from all over the world” – numbers the equivalent to the population of a city the size of Leicester or twice Plymouth! And this is a not fit for purpose Home Office number so what is the real one, double or treble?

    It is nice we have plenty of capacity.

    1. forthurst
      April 23, 2023

      Yes, but all these people have earned the right to live in England because they are the collateral damage of US State Department warmongering and regime change, all approved of by the Tory Party whose Foreign Policy is drafted for them by the USA. All we have to do is provide men and material to fight their wars and make space in our country for the subsequent floods of refugees that ensue.

  6. turboterrier
    April 23, 2023

    They are damned if they do something and damned if they don’t . It is all too little too late.
    But fair play at least the Home Secretary is doing something, but all those charities for whatever reason must be restrained from helping these invaders and the deluge of money paid out to “immigration lawyers” is stopped the process will be a very long hard road to achieve anything like the reduction in numbers to give some semblance of balance.
    The country has got to accept it cannot be all things to all people all the time. Our country is littered with too many of our own broken and dysfunctional people already in need of assistance, before taking on any more.
    If only our politicians had really listened to Farage for all the many years he was highlighting the problem we might by now be in a better place.

  7. Hat man
    April 23, 2023

    Fine words, but how soon will we see any results? And what will Common Purpose civil servants now be able to do to a minister who requires them to carry out the legislation?

  8. Javelin
    April 23, 2023

    I was told yesterday that the average uber driver receives £1000 in Government benefits. So £12000 a year. Most uber drivers are recently arrived migrants.

    The average tax pay pays £5500 a year. So each uber driver takes 2 tax payers out the system.

    So if you look at migration on an individual basis you can find a cause for them to stay. However if you look at the whole problem you find an economic disaster that will collapse the economy.

  9. Wanderer
    April 23, 2023

    It’s just window dressing and doesn’t cut it.

    It takes until 2025 to say how many legal entrants we allow (better hope China doesn’t invade Taiwan next year then).

    Illegals are “children” unless they look “significantly older” than 18. (supermarkets here use a “looks 25 or older” rule of thumb to sell customers alcohol… in practice we’ll allow anyone in who looks 24 or younger, give them housing, education, and invite in their parents).

    Nothing about dependents there, an 18 year old can be a married man with kids.
    Taxpayer funded Legal aid to continue.
    Negotiations with Strasburg…

    The electorate will see through this and just hate the Con Party even more.

    1. Anselm
      April 23, 2023

      I have taught in Africa in a secondary school. Mensa Bonsu was bald. Catherine Filley left and was married within the week. They were adults. And, so long as they paid the fees (£1.50 a term) they were taught, and, do you know what? They were a pleasure to teach too.
      Recently I taught some “children” who had come by boat. They were all (except one) called Abdulrachman. They were all, in my opinion, in their early twenties. They were loaded by social services with bikes, clothes and a nice home. They lasted, at most, a month. Then they went to London. Every one had a mobile phone.

    2. Donna
      April 23, 2023


  10. turboterrier
    April 23, 2023

    Loved the mobile phone section.
    The invaders are instructed by their traffickers to dump their phones and identity papers as soon as they have connected to the RNLI taxi service.
    Simple process to implement… ALL invaders with no acceptable legal proof of identification will not be given any form of access only a bus ride to the airfield.

    1. Timaction
      April 23, 2023

      Everyone but our reps in Westminster are aware of what’s going on. They are not fit for purpose. Legacies have to go.

  11. Mick
    April 23, 2023

    Stopping the small boats
    Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha you should be on the stage Sir John because your hell of a comedian, you’ve had over 13 years to sort it, good job Sir Winston Churchill didn’t listen to the snowflakes we have in position now a days or we would all be speaking German , from day one these foreign invaders should have been turned back and to hell with the bleeding heart snowflakes, it’s been recorded that a number of terrorise have been found in these small boats and what do we do but put them up in hotels and not prisons and that’s the ones we know about god knows the full amount of undesirables there really are, this by any other means as be a invasion by foreign nationals, who knows how many small cells of terrorise there is living among us, this issue is going to be a vote winner at the next General Election so in what little time your government as left get it sorted because the opposition benches would have a fully open borders policy

  12. DOM
    April 23, 2023

    Most of the incomers are men with beards not children or women. Just say so for god’s sake and stop peeing around with tedious semantics.

    Explain why Labour and the entire Leftist establishment want more incomers and it’s got sweet FA to do with humanitarian concern. Labour’s agenda is racial, electoral, demographic and ideological

    1. Anselm
      April 23, 2023

      And definitely legal. Many lawyers think Christmas has come early.

    2. Cuibono
      April 23, 2023

      I’ve always wondered about Labour and votes from newcomers.
      Getting votes in that way must be a very short term strategy in a multicultural, as opposed to multiracial country? Obviously every culture is going to want its own politics eventually.
      ( Multiracial, I believe, means everyone basically marching to the beat of the same drum).

      “Democracy is like a tram. You ride it until you arrive at your destination, then you step off.” Erdogan,

    3. Nell Pursey
      April 24, 2023

      Agree totally with tbis reply above.

  13. turboterrier
    April 23, 2023

    What is with legal aid for those receiving a legal notice for removal?
    All the countries I have visited there was a complete understanding if you crossed any of their red lines you were gone. No argument or excuses.
    Why is it everything this country seems to do is different to everybody else?
    The whole immigration situation is totally unsustainable. Stop completely ALL the benefits and other incentives on offer to come here. Having lived abroad you get no help or assistance until you have proof of employment and residency if you are lucky.

    1. rose
      April 23, 2023

      This is a very old country, older than many you may be thinking of. Old countries are prone to decadence. Decadent in that we won’t defend our borders or our soveriegnty, or enforce our laws, or properly educate and train our children – or even feed them on proper food. We don’t even see the need to grow our own food or produce our own energy. In company with other old countries, we have allowed ourselves to be strangled by bureaucracy.

  14. BOF
    April 23, 2023

    While more lengthy and leaky legislation grinds its agonising way through parliament, the criminals, who have paid other criminals, keep arriving daily by dinghy and lorry or by whatever illegal means is available. The numbers grow and grow.

    Our PM has given nearly half a billion pounds to the French. The French are happy! The illegals are housed and fed in hotels, given legal aid and medical care. U K tax payers foot the bill for £billions while UK homeless are left to rot.

    Meanwhile Greece is turning the boatloads of illegals around!

    1. Fedupsouthener
      April 23, 2023

      BOF. The Greeks are sensible. It’s about time the whole of the EU turned them all back. Once they are on European soil it’s a sure thing they will get to their destination which is all too often the UK. How does a genuine refugee who has nothing manage this? What an absolute mess. Meanwhile we all get taxed more. Wonderful.

  15. Cuibono
    April 23, 2023

    The U.K. may have a “proud history” of protecting those who need it but that history has never extended to its own people. Never.
    Not really a complex or sensitive issue…just made that way by idiotic liberal wangling.

  16. Fedupsouthener
    April 23, 2023

    Well after reading this nonsense I’m even more concerned. Authorities having the means to support these people? They haven’t the means to support the population now and we are paying vast sums for reduced services already. Just look at the legal work involved in assessing these invaders. The lawyers are still going to cost us a fortune in legal aid. What the bill should have said was that ANYONE arriving by illegal means will not be able to stay. Honestly John, do you really think that there is any point in sending even one person to Rwanda if we have to take one back? I cannot believe the stupidity of it all. The costs will be just as high to the taxpayer and only a very small percentage will actually go so where are all the others going to go? Oh, silly me. In hotels just like now. There are going to be thousands as more arriving this year than last so any tin pot scheme like this won’t make a bit of difference. We can all look forward to becoming the minority in our own country. I utterly despair of your government and cannot believe you can have any pride in serving as an MP under such idiots anymore. Any young ambitious person needs to get the hell out of here asap.

    1. a-tracy
      April 23, 2023

      I’m beginning to really wonder about local authorities and why they can’t afford anything if you listen to them. My council area charges £2200 for a band D home, it has large pockets of social deprivation with some wards in the 10% most deprived in England. They have built over £12500 new homes since 2001 and they still can’t afford to fix roads, clean busy walking and cycling paths, plant any flowers, the town centre is on its knees. I watched Diddly Squat farm series for the first time last week and watched the whole run I enjoyed it so much, but the bureaucracy of that conservative majority council scuppering everything, and a parish council insisting he put a slate roof on a farm shop, not a composite that looked exactly the same, a full slate roof. Whereas in my town you can paint the town yellow and pink striped if you want, put up gaudy signs, leave buildings to rot on main roads, put up any lights you want even if they distract drivers, leave broken windows and shrubs growing out of public buildings. This council must be taking in an extra £2.5m per year from new homes, that’s just from one town yet our services have gone, no more civic hall with shows, no more comprehensive shopping centre. The joke is that our left behind town is paying the most council tax in the County. It’s a Labour town and Labour did this to us removing our Borough Council and always promise to do better next year, the Tories are invisible in our town so no one gives a monkeys, even when the Tories were in charge of the Council they disregarded it.

      None of the children I know that grew up in the town came back after taking their degrees. This is the sort of town that gets all the displaced people because posh towns fight not to take any. I wonder if Diddly Squat farm should offer to house asylum seekers, perhaps he’d get permission for that.

    2. Ashley
      April 23, 2023

      Much truth in this.

  17. Dave Andrews
    April 23, 2023

    Given that almost all the arrivals come via France, a signatory to the ECHR, all children will have been taken into their care system. That means any “child” coming into this country must have absconded from their system and should be returned into their “care”, otherwise we can presume they are not children as claimed.
    Why give legal aid? Surely there is plenty of funds available from the numerous charities, who can pay the legal costs out of donations or crowd funding.
    As to Afghans fleeing their country, if they would stand up to the Taliban they would greatly outnumber them. Why should we give refuge to cowards?

    1. turboterrier
      April 23, 2023

      Dave Andrew’s
      Very good point about the child being registered with France if that is applied on the whole journey then how come the children are not registered when they first land on EU shores especially?
      My understanding of Maritime Law is that people at life risk can be lifted and taken to the nearest port of safety and not as in our case the nearest home port. It is the people themselves that have placed themselves in peril. By launching the dingy with a outboard engine is breaking countless French legal marine requirements. Do the government really understand what is and what not is our responsibility?

      1. rose
        April 23, 2023

        The child point is answered by understanding that the MPs who worry about “children” don’t believe children are safe anywhere else, not even in their beloved EU. They should be reminded that Ukraine forbade any unaccompanied child refugee from coming here. Obviously more in touch with what goes on in Labour controlled authorities than tiresome obstructionists like Loughton.

  18. turboterrier
    April 23, 2023

    Friends in Canada, Australia and New Zealand cannot believe what we allow to happen. If you want to live there you need skills they are short of, large sum of upfront money for investment into their economy to create jobs, and proof of income so as not to burden their health service and speak English and be young enough to accrue maximum entry points. Only then can you start the process to becoming a passport holder.

  19. Old Albion
    April 23, 2023

    What a load of govermental bluster. Nothing will change Sir JR and you know it.

    1. MFD
      April 23, 2023

      Yes Old mate! Short direct and very true.
      I just have a policy of total non-contact with any foreigner. Black , white or yellow, I do not discriminate.

  20. Chris S
    April 23, 2023

    Given that all those arriving by small boats have had a minimum of €5,000 to pay the people traffickers, I see no reason whatsoever why anyone of them should be granted legal aid at my expense.

  21. John McDonald
    April 23, 2023

    A lot of words for the Lawers to feed on and cover in-action regarding the illegal invasion of the UK by criminal gangs trafficking people across the channel in small boats.
    Perhaps the Government can provide the same number of words to explain why the small boats cannot be intercepted and returned to France the nearest safe haven as those in the boats are clearly in danger from the sea and the criminals involved the moment they leave French beaches and indeed before.
    Having a document that says why something can’t be done you can at least can see what needs to be down to solve the problem.
    Obviously this can’t be done without the help of France and a much bigger fleet of patrol boats, not the RNLI.
    A key to this is not barring the people from coming in to the UK if they have attempted to cross illegally but they have been returned to France.
    We spend £billions keeping the war going in Ukraine, hotel bills, legal add etc. etc. Stopping most of the boats from landing on UK shores for a year or so should do the trick.

  22. Cuibono
    April 23, 2023

    How much heart ache and worry and expenditure to re learn a very basic lesson…
    Ordinary mortals, however proud and arrogant can not perform miracles.
    Especially when that miracle depends on taking from some to give to others.
    The feeding of the five thousand left no one hungry or deprived.
    Politicians are maybe learning that they possess few godlike qualities.
    If any.

  23. beresford
    April 23, 2023

    Meanwhile it was reported yesterday that a migrant in his forties who arrived in a dinghy and claimed to be a child was found on checking with a European database to be a former ISIS operative. He has been given legal aid from the British taxpayer to fight extradition on the grounds that he has an illness which can only be treated for free by the NHS.

    1. Fedupsouthener
      April 23, 2023

      Beresford. There are no words.🤮

    2. Lynn Atkinson
      April 23, 2023

      So nice to know that they NHS is ‘free’. Les stop funding it with many hundreds of billions then.

  24. Elli+ron
    April 23, 2023

    Apart from the legal aid provision, which will make those lefty lawyers rich and is unnecessary for those who payed 5,000 pounds to the gangsters who put them on the boat, i applaud this bill which has the chance of reducing the unacceptable level of immigration down.
    Well done Suella and the contributors, including (I’m sure) Sir Redwood.

  25. agricola
    April 23, 2023

    Well I hope it works. We will not know until we see daily plane loads taking of for safe destinations. I would commend to Suella Braverman that she publishes daily departure numbers. Politically it would be a good move. It will be interesting to see how the immigrant chasing lawyers react to this, is Parliament to be supreme.

    There is no mention of dealing with the estimated 2,000,000 illegals who have established themselves in the black or criminal economy. Who is tasked with finding them and effecting their deportation.

    I suppose government hope that when deportation is seen to be up and running it will deter these crossings. Depriving the smugglers of the rubber boats would be very effective. I have yet to hear of any case where containers from China were opened and inflatables found. Is the EU turning a blind eye because it suits them to get rid of illegals to the UK.

  26. IanT
    April 23, 2023

    Not too much support (or belief) in Ms Bravermans efforts here from a brief scan of posts Sir John.

    However, I read through her letter and did feel that she was doing what she could to tie down the small detail that many of our uninvited guests (and their legal teams) use to circumvent their removal. Whether this will stem the tide in practice, I have my doubts but I don’t doubt Ms Bravermans determination to try. I’ve alway believed the real answer is to find some lever to persuade the Fench to simply take them back but I’ve no idea what that would be, so cannot really critise Ms B in that respect.

  27. Anselm
    April 23, 2023

    If the Home Secretary cracks this one – and the figures are reported almost daily so we can check – she will be a heroine.
    PS Watch out for claims of harassment and bullying…

  28. Iain Moore
    April 23, 2023

    We know what will happen, our useless British establishment won’t get control of our borders, but they will have established safe routes from around the world, so we will find ourselves in a whole lot worse position than we already are, after all we have been voting for control of our borders for a decade and it has just got worse, and worse, and worse. So what hope should we have of it actually getting better?

    Rule 39 order shows the complicity of our Governing classes to ensure we have no border control . Lord Sumption pointed out that this is Judge made law , it was created by the ECHR , it was not something we ever agreed to , but instead of telling this anonymous ECHR Judge ( we still don’t know who he is) to get lost , our Government rushed to subordinate us to it.

    We, the people vote to recover our sovereignty, but our rogue establishment rush to give it away, and even when there is NO legal obligation to subordinate ourselves to a foreign power, they still do it anyway.

    1. acorn
      April 23, 2023

      The UK is a “Common Law”; that is, a Judge made law country, having no written Constitution but a mish-mash of Statutes, that pretend to be a sort of Constitution. Hence, UK law is whatever the government of the day says the law is, or will be when it changes it tomorrow.

      It is not compulsory to be a member of the ECHR. The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU, it is a Council Of Europe body. BTW. The United Kingdom was one of the founding States of the ECHR; and one of the first States to ratify it in 1951.

      Voting to get back parliamentary sovereignty, is another joke played on “leave” voters ignorance. Can any of you tell me how many “divisions” (votes), have been won by opposition parties in our Punch & Judy farce of a legislature, since 2015, for instance? Can you spot any differences between the UK’s “sovereign parliament”, and a “dominant party authoritarian dictatorship”; like Rwanda for instance? (Don’t mention the Rwanda genocide of the 1990’s.)

  29. majorfrustration
    April 23, 2023

    We cant even look after our own population yet we just let the boat people arrive and enjoy the benefits of the UK – envy of the world. Soft touch and spineless politicians more like.

  30. Alan Paul Joyce
    April 23, 2023

    Dear Mr. Redwood,

    Few people expect this to work. The capacity, not to mention the determination, to process hundreds if not thousands of migrants and send them to Rwanda is not there.

    The government looks as if it is hoping, fingers tightly crossed, to rely on images of a few ‘unlucky’ migrants shepherded on to a plane and being sent to Rwanda in order to deter further crossings of the Channel. The criminal gangs behind the small boats will no doubt wish to test the government’s resolve. If the planes do take-off the government should be prepared for some quite unsavoury scenes in the departure lounge.

    A prudent government would have a back-up plan in case the desired strategy fails to deliver the stated objective. Has the government got such a plan or is this just a last desperate throw of the dice?

    The Prime Minister has made ‘stopping the boats’ one of his government’s five priorities and said that people should judge him on this. I think they will.

  31. Donna
    April 23, 2023

    Well it’s certainly a better attempt at pretending they’re doing something meaningful than we’ve had in the past.
    But it’s just a pretence.

    If they were serious about blocking these claims they’d make it illegal for any “child” ….. whose family has obviously failed to protect him/her ….. to ever ship over any family members and, when the “child” reaches age 18 (or 25 in reality), they’d automatically be removed.

    This is just another attempt to fool most of the people by the most gutless Government we’ve ever had.

  32. heavensent
    April 23, 2023

    Don’t know what can be done now but we stirred it up in the first place – I don’t think that this new legal framework is going to make much difference considering probably only a few hundred will ever be sent out again to Rwanda or wherever and the boats will still come. We need fresh thinking on all of this and present Tory rule is in the doldrums navel gazing like a stuck needle going round and round. First off these migrants coming here are mostly young males – get them on work corps to work on the land and the roads – get them into the fishing boats – am sure there is plenty of work in the forests and on construction. Then the hospitality sector needs people not to mention manufacturing and factory work. They should be dispersed and not allowed live in their location of choice – the word will soon go out – instead we need legislation to cover this

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      April 23, 2023

      Oh they are being ‘dispersed’ to the Brexit voting areas, Sunderland is almost sunk and will never vote for Brexit again – it’s called gerrymandering.

      1. Diane
        April 24, 2023

        LA: Indeed they are and we have seen and continue to see ongoing backlash & legal actions here and there from MPs and local residents. November 2022 (DT) ‘A S are to be sent to rural areas in an effort by the H O to secure a fairer distribution of migrants around the country’ Home Office minister: ” We are also attempting to procure accommodation in a much broader range of local authorities than has been seen in the past ” To ensure greater fairness on us all apparently. 497 on Saturday / 11 boats. Where’s that barge?

  33. JoolsB
    April 23, 2023

    How come you politicians and the media have not mentioned it’s England’s patron saints day today when you all wax lyrical when it’s the devolved nations patron saints day and even more so Ireland’s. Is that why today has been chosen by nanny Government to send us all the ridiculous alarm on our mobile phones to detract from talking about England and our patron saints day? Imagine choosing St. Andrew’s or David’s Day, there’d be an uproar.

    1. Cuibono
      April 23, 2023

      Happy St George’s Day to everyone! 🇬🇧
      You are so right.
      But then, we English are used to being trashed.
      One might almost believe that the goal was to turn us into a minority in the country that used to be ours.
      Mention of England has even been removed from this diary.

      1. Cuibono
        April 23, 2023

        Sorry…wrong flag tho they are flying the Union Jack today for a royal birthday.?

  34. Original Richard
    April 23, 2023

    “The Bill will send an unambiguous message as to our intent, that if you come to this country illegally you will not be able to stay, instead you will be detained and swiftly removed to your home country if safe, or another safe third country such as Rwanda”.

    In the case of a possible return to a “home country”, what is defined to be “safe”? Would incarceration for committing an act defined as a crime in the UK be classed as making the home country “unsafe”?

    Unaccompanied children :
    What is the Home Office’s current definition? Is it still anyone under the age of 25?

    1. rose
      April 23, 2023

      Whatever the definition of child, that is what will now be arriving in large numbers, as bridgeheads.

    2. Lynn Atkinson
      April 23, 2023

      45 year old have been accepted an ‘unaccompanied minors’.

  35. Original Richard
    April 23, 2023

    Not only is this “an invasion” from the figures alone, it is “an invasion” because it is largely composed of unidentified young men of fighting age.

    Genuine asylum seekers would not be destroying their identification as they would want to show us they are genuine and in need of safety.

    Even “asylum seekers”, those fleeing their country, are not necessarily in favour of our western democracy, as has already been demonstrated.

    People may come to the UK as economic migrants, but that does not mean they are cultural migrants.

    The only one real way to stop the invasion is to stop the boats coming across and return them to France, as was demonstrated by Australia.

    The reason we can return these illegals back to France is because they have thrown away their IDs as they cross the Channel. Because when in France they have kept their IDs.
    We should return to France anyone without an ID.

    Once the illegals know that they cannot get into the UK without ID, instead of being given free accommodation, healthcare, £40/week pocket money and the freedom to roam our streets as they please until they abscond into the underworld, the crossings will stop.

    Or is the government going to wait until there is a really serious incident within the UK before it does its most important job – to protect its citizens?

  36. glen cullen
    April 23, 2023

    But we already have the –
    Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, 41PART 4ASection 80B (Asylum claims by persons with connection to safe third State),
    that’s not being used ….so why would a new law be used or make any difference

  37. glen cullen
    April 23, 2023

    St. George’s Day today and at 3pm we start a new year …1984

  38. Bryan+Harris
    April 23, 2023

    It is important that those persons who received a removal notice under the Bill have access to appropriate legal services.


    From apperanaces most illegals are well funded, with smart clothes and a smart phone – Why should we pay for them when they will contribute little or nothing to the UK, while taking ever more from us?

    1. Original Richard
      April 23, 2023

      Bryan+Harris :


      To keep the legal profession and judiciary in the opulence to which they have become accustomed. Don’t forget the Cabinet Office and Home Office use tax-payer money to fund those the organisations taking the Government to court over their Rwanda plans.

  39. Bert+Young
    April 23, 2023

    Illegal migration of any sort has to be stopped . We are an overcrowded country with a very limited economy straining to deal with an already massive set of problems . It is absolute nonsense to propose a swap of one illegal with a Rwandan – no matter what the degree of health the Rwandan might be in . Equally the ECHR has no right to influence our affairs ; we are a Sovereign nation who must stop all interference in our decisions . A tough stance is necessary next week – no “ifs” or “buts”.

  40. Iain Moore
    April 23, 2023

    //Ambassadors from all 27 EU countries will gather at a secret location in England later this month for private talks about the post-Brexit relationship.//

    Setting a path to our sell out?

  41. Bloke
    April 23, 2023

    The whole process resembles a complicated mess of ineffectiveness.

  42. Timaction
    April 23, 2023

    Indeed. After 13 years in office and all previous promises on legal and illegal immigration who is going to believe them? All hot air and words don’t count for a can of beans until I hear and see 1000 plus being deported daily and legal immigration down to under 50,000 annually for those able to make a POSITIVE contribution, not subsidised by the 46%. Salary limits to £75,000 plus. Real beneficiaries, not car washers and fruit pickers.
    A water pump can be 100% efficient if it runs to capacity at 100 litres per minute but if water flows in at 150, litres per minute we’re all going to drown under the massive legal and illegal immigration this current Government encourages. We cannot gain access to our Health Services under their policies. There simply isn’t enough capacity and never will be. They are privatising the NHS through the backdoor and only those able to afford care will get it.

  43. Narrow Shoulders
    April 23, 2023

    Legal aid, bearded children. acceptance that illegals will arrive here and the lack of the term illegal immigrant stand out to me from that letter.

    If we are to really address the issue we won’t let them land or arrive – turn them round at the point of arrival – and we certainly won’t pay for them to appeal.

    Still it’s only other people’s money isn’t it.

  44. glen cullen
    April 23, 2023

    Home Office – 22 April 2023
    Illegal Immigrants – 497
    Boats – 11
    Those arriving but not surrendering to authorities = unknown
    Those arriving by ferry = unknown
    Those arriving in lorry/car = unknown
    Those arriving by aeroplane = unknown

    1. glen cullen
      April 23, 2023

      497 – the same size as a british army regiment

    2. Timaction
      April 23, 2023

      Zero deported.

      1. glen cullen
        April 23, 2023

        zero sent to Rwanda

  45. Wokinghamite
    April 23, 2023

    A clear, assertive and purposeful message from the Home Secretary. We are looking to her to resolve this situation. I think we have the best person on the job.

    1. Timaction
      April 23, 2023

      Words are cheap. Actions are required………Deportations and prosecutions nil.

  46. Geoffrey Berg
    April 23, 2023

    Having read this circular , I can see this bill is turning into a hotchpotch of compromises just to get it through the Conservative Party in the Commons.
    Suella Braverman was right that we do need to leave the European Convention of Human Rights and really this Bill should contain an automatic trigger mechanism that if the ECHR seeks to delay or frustrate extradition of illegal migrants then we will ipso facto have withdrawn from the ECHR. Likewise British Judges, being unelected, have no democratic right at all to interfere with Parliament’s policy decisions (if there is in future to be interference with Parliament’s policy decisions the only properly democratic mechanism is via a Referendum) and Judges should be deemed to have resigned their judicial positions before pronouncing such interference with public policy (thereby invalidating any attempted interference). In the end I suspect it is the British Judges who are going to scupper this Bill. There should therefore be no grounds, no exemptions (as well as no legal aid funded by taxpayers) at all from deportation for illegal migrants or else British Judges would distort and abuse those exemptions as a pretext to prevent most or all extraditions.
    Needless to say Sunak is a traditional Conservative who wrongly would far rather lose elections than annoy people in ‘the establishment’. So that is what will happen.

  47. Peter Gardner
    April 24, 2023

    Whether this works or not remains to be seen. Most people on commenting on here think it will not.

    The new laws – if they survive the Lords, unlikely, will apply only to unlewful migrants who are already in UK. It will do nothing to prevent them arriving. Australia’s policy was successful because it combined the key elements of a strong legal framework, detention of unlawful immigrants in offshore processing centres and action at sea to turn back the boats. Australia is not a signatory to the ECHR but is to the UNHCR. That may be a significant difference. Time will tell. But the real weakness in the UK’s measures is the complete absence of countermeasures at sea. On the contrary there appears to be no intention to change the current situation by which the French Navy escorts the boats into the UK’s territorial waters to be handed over to either the RNLI or Border Force who ferry them to a UK port.
    Unless the Government takes action in the Channel to turn back the boats, the law and Rwanda deal will prove at best a mild deterrent of marginal significance. There is nothing in international law to prevent it doing so. Its own domestic law (Offences against the Person Act 1861) alredy provides for the arrest and punshment of those endangering human life at sea. As far as I know there has not been any attempt to use this law against the drivers of these boats and neither has the Government any intention of doing so.
    It is all rather feeble and lacking political will. Even if it convinces Tory politicians it certainly won’t convince either would-be immigrants or the people smugglers and agencies assisting the unlawful immigrants.

  48. Lesley Whittal
    April 24, 2023

    Surely we have far too many immigrants, legal or otherwise. It’s time to put a stop to such vast numbers of people coming here to live. Our infrastructure is not capable of dealing with the millions and millions of immigrants here already. Put a stop to ALL immigration before civil war breaks out!!

Comments are closed.