Question
The Home Secretary is clearly not standing by her own plans. Several times this year, the Home Secretary has used her power to prevent entry into the United Kingdom on the basis of individuals’ views, including people opposing mass migration. I recently asked her to prevent entry by Randa Abdel-Fattah, who planned talks around the anniversary of the 7 October massacre. Abdel-Fattah has glorified terrorism and said that massacre was “exhilarating”. Is it not shameful that the Home Secretary allowed this antisemitic supporter of terrorism into our country, where she likely radicalised our citizens?50% point-scoring
Answer
As the right hon. Gentleman is well aware, it is long-standing policy not to comment on individual cases. He often brings such individual cases to the Dispatch Box, so he should know that we cannot always go into all the specifics. He knows that all individuals who seek entry to the United Kingdom must meet the requirements of the immigration rules, and I will always enforce them as strongly as possible.20% point-scoring 20% vibes
Verdict: AMBER (27/100)
The reply only partly answers the question. On the individual case, it declines to comment, citing long-standing policy, but it never says whether the Government considers the entry shameful. On the views attributed to the questioner, it offers only the general point that all entrants must meet the immigration rules, which does not address those views or justify this specific case. Both parts are answered in vague, hedged terms, so the person who asked would likely need to submit a follow-up for a specific answer.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Government considers it shameful that Randa Abdel-Fattah, described as an antisemitic supporter of terrorism, was allowed into the UK, where she is said to have likely radicalised citizens. | Partially Addressed | Hedged | The reply declines to comment on the individual case, citing long-standing policy, which is a stated reason. It never engages with whether the Government considers the entry shameful, and the remaining statements (all entrants must meet the rules, enforcement will be strong) are general platitudes rather than an answer on this case. |
| What justification the Government has for allowing Randa Abdel-Fattah to enter the United Kingdom, given the views attributed to her. | Partially Addressed | Hedged | The only justification offered is that all entrants must meet the immigration rules, which is a general framework rather than a case-specific justification, and the reply does not address the views attributed to her. The statement that specifics cannot always be gone into is a partial refusal. |