No, I am not going to give way at this point; I have waited since 5.30 pm. Sorry, Bob.
Anti-refugee MPs have been emboldened by the Home Secretary’s rhetoric of hate, as we can see from the amendments and new clauses and by what we have heard from many Government Members. Unbelievably, the Bill has the potential to be even worse than when it came to the House on Second Reading. Let us not forget that the day after an immigration facility was attacked—it was firebombed—the Home Secretary spoke of an “invasion” of southern England. It has been reported today that the Home Secretary even fuelled a rebellion against her own Bill in order to introduce tougher amendments.
9.45 pm
I put it on record that no migrant or refugee is responsible for the state our country is in right now. The crisis in our education system, in housing and in our NHS has been caused by the Government and 13 years of Tory failure, not those fleeing from conflict and climate change, who deserve our compassion, not our contempt.
Thankfully, my hon. Friends the Members for Poplar and Limehouse (Apsana Begum), for Sheffield, Hallam (Olivia Blake) and for Streatham (Bell Ribeiro-Addy) have tabled a number of amendments and new clauses to drastically improve the Bill, and they deserve the Committee’s full support. New clause 10, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Hallam, sets out a requirement to introduce a safe passage visa, which would give entry clearance to those already in Europe wishing to come to Britain to make an asylum claim. Critically, that could end the crisis in the English channel by providing refugees with safe passage and safe routes.
The Bill relies on the idea of deterrence to stop small boat crossings, but we have seen time and again that deterrence does not work. There is no robust evidence
to support the idea. Dangerous crossings have continued, even since the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 and the Rwanda asylum plan.
There is also an issue of parliamentary scrutiny. The Bill may have significant implications for Britain’s asylum system, the European convention on human rights and our international legal obligations, but we have only two days in which to debate it, which is not acceptable for a major piece of legislation. Detailed scrutiny is invaluable at picking up potential problems, of which this Bill has many. Government Members have no right to speak about parliamentary sovereignty when they are rushing this piece of complicated legislation through with minimal scrutiny.
I think about those 27 people who tragically died crossing the channel in November 2021, as well as those who have lost their lives crossing the Mediterranean seeking refuge. Their deaths could have been avoided if safe passage and a humanitarian corridor had been in place. We have the opportunity this evening to do that—to introduce an amendment that provides safe passage for our fellow human beings and to reject the potentially fatal elements of this Bill.