usa

Illegal Migration Bill: Jenrick sees no more compromises on migration bill

The government does not expect to make compromises on plans to remove people arriving in the UK illegally, says immigration minister Robert Jenrick.

The House of Lords has voted to overturn several parts of the Illegal Migration Bill – which ministers hope to pass before the summer recess.

The bill would place a legal duty on the government to detain and remove those arriving in the UK illegally.

It is key to Rishi Sunak’s attempts to stop small boat crossings.

In the face of staunch opposition in the Lords, the government agreed to changes to the treatment of children and pregnant women.

But speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Jenrick said no new compromises would be made.

“It’s not a serious or grown-up way to conduct a debate to say, ‘we don’t want this, we don’t want that’, and not to come up with an alternative,” he said.

“The UK has the most comprehensive plan to tackle illegal migration of any European country.”

Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, also speaking to Today, said the bill was “a con that will makes things worse”.

The government has “lost common sense and lost common decency,” and are “undermining the proper approach we should be taking,” she said.

MPs are expected to reverse changes made to the bill in the Lords but the draft legislation will then return to the upper chamber.

The standoff continues with time running out for the plans to be approved before Parliament’s summer break begins next Thursday.

The bill, backed by MPs in March, is central to Mr Sunak’s high-profile pledge to “stop” small boats crossing the English Channel.

It would place a legal duty on the government to detain and remove those arriving in the UK illegally either to Rwanda or another “safe” third country.

The government says it is committed to its plan to remove migrants to Rwanda, despite the Court of Appeal ruling it was unlawful. On Thursday, it was given the go-ahead to appeal the ruling at the Supreme Court.

There has been concern about how children will be treated under the new migration bill, as well as accusations that existing UK regulations to prevent modern slavery would be undermined.

Although the legal duty to deport migrants would not apply to under-18s the bill would give ministers new powers to deport them in certain circumstances and detain them for extended periods.

It would also extend the limit on how long children could be detained before applying for bail from three days to eight. A previous version of the bill proposed allowing children to be detained without the ability to apply for bail for up to 28 days.

 

EU countries have relocated just 117 asylum seekers out of 8,000 pledges

The EU-wide relocation system launched in June and touted as a major step forward in the reform of migration policy has so far resulted in 117 asylum seekers being transferred across the bloc – out of an annual target that envisions 8,000 pledges.

“We’re working very closely with all member states to ensure that we have in place a common solution,” a European Commission spokesperson said on Monday while announcing the numbers.

“I know this number doesn’t seem like a lot but we need to keep in mind that we have 8,000 pledges as such.”

The low figures come as asylum applications reach highs not seen since the 2015 migration crisis. August alone saw 84,500 requests lodged, with Afghans and Syrians leading the count.

The gradual rise in border crossings is fuelling tensions between EU countries, who continue to disagree on a common migration policy to manage new arrivals.

Relations between France and Italy have deteriorated over the disembarkation of the Ocean Viking, a ship that Rome did not allow to disembark despite its obligation under international law.

The vessel, operated by the humanitarian organisation SOS Méditerranée, had 234 people on board, including 57 children. Some of them had been stranded on the vessel for 19 days, raising fears of loss of life.

French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin called Italy’s actions “inhumane” and “incomprehensible,” arguing the vessel was in Italian waters and was therefore required to disembark somewhere in Italy.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said she was struck by the “aggressive reaction” from Paris, which she deemed “incomprehensible and “unjustified.”

Under current EU rules, asylum applications have to be processed by the first country of entry. By refusing arrival, a state can forgo such responsibility and pass it on to another country.

In a bid to strike a more balanced and predictable system, 18 EU countries, together with Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein, signed in late June a declaration launching the Voluntary Solidarity Mechanism (VSM).

Austria, Denmark, Poland and Hungary were among those who turned down the initiative.

The joint statement lays out a brand-new scheme to enable the transfer of asylum seekers from Southern countries to other states across the bloc.

It only applies to people in need of international protection who arrive via the Mediterranean route, giving priority to those considered “most vulnerable.” This would exclude certain nationalities, such as Indian, Moroccan and Turkish, whose applications have broken records in recent months.

‘Unequal notion of solidarity’

Upon its signature, the voluntary mechanism, promoted by France during its six-month presidency of the EU Council, was hailed as a “historic agreement” and a potential prelude to a permanent and efficient relocation system, one of the main priorities pursued by the European Commission and southern EU countries.

The mechanism works on the basis of national pledges, which are designed according to population, GDP and political priorities.

Each country commits to either host asylum seekers or provide financial support to those who do.

Out of the 21 countries who participate in the scheme, 13 have made relocation pledges, with the majority coming from France and Germany, while the others have chosen to offer financial assistance instead.

In total, countries have committed to relocating 8,000 asylum seekers between June 2022 and June 2023.

An internal document leaked by the research NGO State Watch revealed that a “political goal” that initially sought to relocate 3,000 people by the end of the year had been downgraded to a more feasible target of 1,000 people. A European Commission spokesperson refused to comment on the targets but did not deny them.

But according to the EU executive’s latest update, just 117 relocations have been completed by mid-November, amounting to a mere 1.46% of the annual 8,000 objective.

As the mechanism is entirely voluntary and not legally binding, the European Commission is unable to enforce the compliance of national pledges. The European Parliament and the European Court of Justice are equally excluded from carrying out oversight.

The system also has an opt-out clause that countries can invoke to halt relocations if they consider their migration systems to be under “disproportionate pressure.”

Experts have criticised the scheme for its absence of legal foundations and the selectiveness inherent in the relocation process, which allows states to decide who to welcome and who to reject.

An analysis by the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) said the scheme was fraught with a “profound lack of foreseeability and predictability” and gave preference to an “intergovernmental, asymmetric and unequal notion of solidarity.”

Despite the criticism and the low results achieved so far, the European Commission defends the mechanism as a temporary solution to ease the burden of southern EU countries and manage the issue of disembarkations.

Following the Ocean Viking incident, French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin said nine European countries had committed to hosting two-thirds of the rescued migrants, with the remaining third staying in France.

“France has launched a call of solidarity to member states and others have responded positively,” said a Commission spokesperson.

 

euronews