PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Topical Questions - 5 January 2026 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

Today the powers in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 come into force—no thanks, I might add, to Opposition Members, who voted against them at every opportunity. The Act has given vital new tools to law enforcement agencies, with approaches that have been tried and tested in the countering of terrorism and will now be brought to bear on people-smuggling gangs. From today, we will be seizing mobile phones at Manston in order to gather vital intelligence to disrupt people smugglers. Those who plan small boat crossings face up to five years behind bars, while those who supply equipment to smugglers could be locked up for 16 years.

Our work is beginning to take effect. Last year we disrupted 22,000 small boat crossings and disruptions were up by 33%, and since we have been in power the number of removals has been more than a fifth higher than it was under the last Government. However, I know that we must do more. The challenge that we face is great, but we will do whatever it takes to restore order and control to our borders.

In my constituency I have launched the We Love Westcliff campaign, which, as well as promoting greater civic pride, aims to drive down antisocial behaviour such as fly-tipping and drug dealing. What support will the new neighbourhood policing teams provide to help us to achieve that goal?

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his campaign. Essex police have been allocated £4.5 million, which will fund 74 more neighbourhood police officers in 2025-26. They will provide a visible and engaging police presence, build strong relationships with local communities, and tackle the issues that my hon. Friend has raised.

I call the shadow Home Secretary.

We now know that Alaa Abd el-Fattah expressed racist, anti-white, antisemitic and violent views. Members of the present and the last Government say that they did not know about that beforehand, and of course I accept those assurances, but now that we do know about those disgusting comments, will the Home Secretary use her powers under section 40(2) of the British Nationality Act 1981 to revoke his citizenship and deport him on the basis that he meets the statutory test in subsection (2), namely that he is not

“conducive to the public good”?

Let me say first that those tweets and those comments are absolutely abhorrent, and that I share the horror and revulsion felt across the country by all who have now seen and read them. The shadow Home Secretary used to be the Immigration Minister, and he will know that the power to deprive an individual of citizenship—which, of course, was granted by the last Government in this case—is used in a very specific way to deal with the most harmful offenders, particularly serious and organised criminals and those who pose a threat to national security. I do not propose to change the basis on which those deprivation powers are used.

The statutory test is

“conducive to the public good”,

and the Home Secretary could use that. Will she now confirm that she will use every legal mechanism to prevent the return to the United Kingdom of Shamima Begum, who chose to support the Daesh regime that murdered civilians, raped thousands of women and girls, and killed people for being gay? More broadly, does she agree that anyone who espouses extremist, racist or antisemitic views or supports terrorism, and who is not a British citizen, should be deported from this country immediately? She has those powers; will she use them?

Let me be very clear. The case in relation to Shamima Begum was litigated by the last Government all the way to the UK Supreme Court, which did not hear the last appeal because all legal questions have now been dealt with. We as a Government have accepted that position, and our position on this case will not change. We will robustly defend it in the European Court of Human Rights. As the right hon. Gentleman will know, I cannot give more detail on the case as it progresses, because it is now subject to that litigation, but this is the approach that the Government are taking, and we will defend the position that has already been set by all our courts, right up to the UK Supreme Court.

In addition to what I laid out earlier in the House, the changes announced by the Home Secretary are subject to consultation, which is live and will end on 12 February. Any decision to implement these proposals will take full account of relevant legal precedent.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

The Home Secretary is turning heads by focusing on people arriving in this country, but the latest migration statistics show a worrying trend in the opposite direction. The number of working-age UK nationals leaving the country is concerning from an economic and a demographic perspective. Why does the Home Secretary think that they are leaving? Is it the disastrous Brexit legacy of the Tories, the terrifying prospect of a future Reform Government or her own Government’s low-octane approach to boosting young people’s life chances?

The hon. Member will know that the methodology has changed. In fact, the numbers have stayed relatively flat. He will also know that it is a freedom of all our citizens that if they are able to work somewhere else, they may choose to do so. This Government are not going to interfere with that.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his work in this area and to the Select Committee for its work and its recent visit. My experience of working with France is that it wants to solve the shared challenge. There is no silver bullet, but my hon. Friend has mentioned ways in which it can be solved. That is why we have the “one in, one out” pilot, as well as our ordinary day-to-day intelligence co-operation. We want to do more with our neighbours and solve this problem together.

I repeat that the numbers have stayed relatively flat. I think that the hon. Member is imputing a motive to those individuals that has not yet been stood up by any of the data or the evidence. He will know that we are pursuing discussions in relation to a youth mobility scheme with our partners in Europe.

Antisocial behaviour is a scourge that has gone untackled for too long. We are funding hotspot policing in our town centres and other areas in which antisocial behaviour is rife; that is having an impact. Our neighbourhood policing guarantee, which will mean 3,000 more police on our streets by next March, will have an impact. We are introducing respect orders, which will be a really useful tool to tackle prolific antisocial behaviour offenders. The message has to be loud and clear: we will not accept this behaviour, and the police are responding.

Yes. I was really pleased that charges for shop theft increased by 25% in the year to June 2025, because the police are taking these issues seriously: they are really getting in there, working with our retailers, getting the prolific offenders and tackling the issue. I am always very pleased to meet.

My hon. Friend is right: 20% of offenders are responsible for 80% of crime. We need to ensure that repeat offenders are targeted, and that is what the police are doing. There is a raft of tools that we can use, but partnerships between the police and the retail sector are key. The number of shop theft charges has increased, but we need to look at other measures, such as treatment when people have drug addiction and other such issues. I would be very happy to meet my hon. Friend.

Sussex police is one of the most underfunded forces in England, with the number of officers per resident 27% below the national average. Following the national decrease in police officers during the first year of this Government, will the Home Secretary commit to ensuring that police officer numbers go up in 2026?

I will just repeat the statistic: 94% of the fall in officer headcount in 2024-25 came during the last four months of the previous Government. Total funding for 2026-27 is £18.3 billion, which is a £746 million increase on the previous year.

The Home Office English language testing procurement has formally launched. Given that there is a live process, I will not comment on that specifically. However, I can assure my hon. Friend that the delivery model must meet appropriate integrity requirements.

Nearly 17,000 companies licensed to sponsor worker visas have five or fewer employees, and over 3,000 of these have just one employee. Ministers have been unable to tell me how many inspections have been made of companies since the general election. How sure is the Home Secretary that these are not bogus companies offering a back door to Britain?

Any UK business can apply for a sponsor licence, provided that it complies with the relevant requirements. I will take that point away, look at it and come back to the hon. Member with more detail.

In the light of the appalling antisemitic terror attack at Bondi Beach, the faith communities in Aylesbury are scared. I welcome the Government’s funding to protect places of worship, but it does not extend to my local Jewish community, who do not have their own synagogue. What further measures will the Minister consider to ensure that all faith communities, even those without their own premises, are well protected?

As the Home Secretary has said, we were all appalled by the antisemitic terror attack at Bondi Beach. As my hon. Friend will know, all faith communities should be able to worship in peace and without fear. That is why the Government are investing £70.9 million in 2025-26 to strengthen security at places of worship. I listened carefully to the point she raised and would be very happy to discuss it with her further.

I call the Chair of the Home Affairs Committee.

As a fellow west midlands MP, the Home Secretary will be aware that policing in her constituency is incredibly different from policing in Staffordshire Moorlands. Can she confirm that, when we get the police reform White Paper in a few weeks’ time, we will not see any moves to abolish Staffordshire police, which knows how to police Staffordshire Moorlands, and merge it into West Midlands police?

The right hon. Member is attempting to tempt me into commenting in a way that I know she knows I will not do. She will have to wait, as will everyone else, for the details of our proposals in the policing White Paper. However, let me assure her that the thread running right through the White Paper, and the approach that this Government and I personally will take, is to ensure that policing is fit for purpose and has the outcomes on the ground that the public rightly expect.

For my constituents back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme, a crime is a crime wherever it takes place. Can the Minister set out what steps she will take to ensure that rural crime in my constituency and across Staffordshire is always treated with the same urgency as crime that takes place in our town and city centres?

We are supporting and working with the National Police Chiefs’ Council on its new rural crime strategy, and we are working very closely with local police forces such as Thames Valley police, which has a rural crime team tackling these issues. Our neighbourhood policing guarantee applies everywhere, and all areas—rural or urban—must have the right number of people in their local community tackling crime.

It is widely reported that the Home Secretary is a strong supporter of robust reform of the European Court of Human Rights. A large number of countries on the European continent share our concerns over that. Has she discussed them with any of her opposite numbers? In particular, where does she see the common interest in reforming the Court?

These are live discussions taking place not just between myself and my counterparts, but with other members of the Government. The right hon. Gentleman will have noted the political declaration achieved at the last meeting at the Council of Europe. That work was led by the Justice Secretary but was a cross-Government effort. We will continue in that vein, because reform of the European convention on human rights, and article 3 in particular, is a key part of our agenda. We will have legislation on domestic reform of article 8 in due course.

Mr Speaker, I wish you and your team a very happy new year. I welcome the Minister’s work on the defending democracy taskforce. How can MPs like me, and political parties more generally, get involved in supporting the taskforce, because I am passionate about representing Harlow and not Moscow?

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend. I intend for this work to be a shared endeavour right across the House. Members and their teams should remain vigilant about the threats to our democracy, particularly in the run-up to the elections in May. I again encourage take-up of the personal and online security guidance available to all Members and staff. Any malicious activity should be reported through the appropriate channels, including the Parliamentary Security Department.

Does the Home Secretary agree that British citizens should be prioritised over asylum seekers in the allocation of publicly funded housing under the £100 million pilot scheme?

The hon. Member may have heard me say earlier that we have started the process of hotel exit, which means we have reduced the amount of money we are spending on that. We want all British citizens to be adequately housed, which is why we released the homelessness strategy at the end of last year. Beyond that, we want order and control in our asylum system, so that the British people’s proud record of providing shelter can continue, and so that people can have confidence in that order and control.

We have continued the settlement after five years for residents, providing certainty. The new mandatory requirements on income and language we see as sensible. However, they are out for consultation and no firm decision has been made. It would be a pleasure to meet my hon. Friend and her constituents.

On 7 October the police told a private meeting that they planned to ban Israeli fans from Villa Park. That was, to quote the minutes,

“in the absence of intelligence”.

On 9 October they accepted that they needed to find a more clear rationale for the decision already made. On 16 October they said they suddenly found significant intelligence for a ban. That supposedly came from a conversation with the Dutch police on 1 October, before the first meeting held in the “absence of intelligence”. Does the Home Secretary believe West Midlands police—yes or no?

As I think the hon. Gentleman knows, we have asked His Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary and fire and rescue services to look at that and we are waiting to see what it has to say. That is absolutely the right thing to do. Did we disagree with the decision? Yes, we did. Do we want to get to the bottom of what happened? Absolutely, we do.

In relation to the changes, announced at the end of last year, to indefinite leave to remain, my constituent Dr Matthew Hewitt advises on an issue relevant to his family and many other families across the country: that the information being put out by the Government is ambiguous as to whether or not the shorter five-year route will remain for those currently on partner visas, or whether the baseline changes to 10 years will apply to those currently on those partner visas. I would be grateful for some clarity on that, please.

The consultation document released under the settlement proposals is very clear about what deductions apply in what context and what other hurdles people may have to clear. Maybe my hon. Friend and I should have a conversation to get to the bottom of the particular example he mentions.

Rural life, particularly for those in farming communities, is more typically based on traditional roles, which can often see women marginalised in their role within the family and, sadly, more likely to be victims of abuse. Can the Minister assure me that with any new strategy on tackling violence against women and girls, women who live rurally will be able to access the support they need?

Happy new year, Mr Speaker.

The violence against women and girls strategy is absolutely for every woman and girl in our country. There are specific problems faced by people in rural communities, and I will gladly work with the hon. Lady and others from rural communities to get that right.

Happy new year, Mr Speaker.

Does the Minister agree that far too much resource is being spent on exceedingly heavy-handed policing of peaceful protests, which is likely to increase with plans to restrict protests based on their supposed cumulative impact, as planned in the Crime and Policing Bill?

No, I disagree with my hon. Friend on that. Policing protests is always a balance that we have to get right: we have to respect the right to protest, but we also have to ensure the police have the powers they need to tackle issues and ensure that protests can happen peacefully, as they have done for so many years in this country.

With congratulations on his engagement, I call Ben Obese-Jecty.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

On 9 February 2020, the Home Secretary co-signed a letter to the then Prime Minister urging him to suspend a deportation flight to Jamaica for foreign national offenders. Fabian Henry, who had been convicted of grooming and raping two young girls, was removed from that flight and is believed still to be living in the UK. Having previously campaigned to keep them in the country—even demanding in this Chamber that the flight be halted—has the right hon. Lady now taken any action as Home Secretary to deport this dangerous child rapist, whom she helped to remain in the country?

I signed that letter because one of the individuals was a constituent of mine who had served in the British armed forces—serving this country on two tours of Afghanistan—and was British in every meaningful way, and his case should have been looked at more by the Home Office before he was placed on that deportation flight. I will look at the details of the specific case the hon. Gentleman mentions and write to him on that.

We continue to await a Home Office decision on the future of the Gaza student scholarship scheme. While thinking about that, will the Government commit to honouring the visas of the small number of students and their families who already have funded places to come here but have not yet been permitted to leave Gaza?

I am grateful for that question. As my hon. Friend says, this Government have supported Chevening scholars and those with fully funded scholarships in Gaza to come to this country to study during the 2025-26 academic year. I have heard from my hon. Friend on multiple occasions that there is demand for more support, and we are aware of that; it is, as she knows, a fluid situation on the ground, and we are looking at it closely and seeing what may be done in the future.

For the final question, I call Iqbal Mohamed.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and a happy new year to all.

I have a constituent who was in care as a child and who was arrested at age 11, more than four decades ago, for stealing. Even though it is a minor petty crime, this juvenile crime has not been removed from their Disclosure and Barring Service certificate, and my constituent believes that this has impacted their ability to be employed in the social care sector as it appears on their DBS certificate and is not eligible for removal. Will the Home Secretary consider changes to the DBS filtering framework for petty minor offences committed by children to determine whether such offences should continue to appear on DBS certificates and later impact employment?

There is an independent system that oversees whether access to files from the DBS has been granted appropriately. If the hon. Gentleman would like to write to me on this specific case, I am more than happy to ensure that it is followed through.