Question
Like the Home Secretary, I come from an immigrant family that came here legally, but I fail to understand why she thinks not being able to get settled status for 20 or even 30 years will deter people from coming here illegally, provided that there is no prospect of them being removed from the country because of laws like the European convention on human rights?
Answer
The right hon. Gentleman and I disagree on the ECHR—a debate we have had many times. The time period in which someone attains settlement should both reflect the means by which they came to the country and incentivise the behaviour that we want to see, which is people working or studying, contributing to society, and taking steps to integrate. That will have an impact on the behaviour of everyone who comes to this country, whether they have come on a work visa or are in the asylum system. It is a fair solution for everyone.25% vibes
Verdict: AMBER (38/100)
The reply gives a direct and specific rationale for the 20-30 year settlement period, saying it should reflect how people arrived and encourage work, study, contribution and integration. It does not explain how denying settlement would deter illegal migration when removal is blocked, and its response to the human rights (ECHR) point is only a bare statement of disagreement. The central question is therefore only partly answered, and the person who asked would likely need to follow up on the deterrence and ECHR points.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| What is the Government's reasoning for believing that denying settled status for 20 or 30 years will deter illegal migration, where there is no prospect of removal because of laws such as the European Convention on Human Rights? | Partially Addressed | Direct | The reply gives a concrete rationale for the 20-30 year settlement period: it should reflect how people arrived and incentivise work, study, contribution and integration (statements 2-3). However, it never explains why denying settlement would deter illegal migration when removal is blocked, and its only response to the ECHR point is a bare statement of disagreement (statement 1), so the core of the question is left largely unanswered. |