On Monday 25 April 2016, the House of Commons debate amendments to the Immigration Bill, in particular the so called Lord Dubs Amendment – agreed in the House of Lords – which proposed to allow 3,000 refugee children in Europe into the UK.
This is a very difficult subject and one which people have very passionate feelings about.
Nobody can be unmoved by the scenes we see on a regular basis of the plight of Syrian refugees.
I supported the Government and voted against this particular amendment. I did so having taken a very close look at this issue, as you would expect as the former children’s minister. I visited the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan – the biggest refugee camp in the world (holding 86,000 Syrian refugees at the time) – and have seen first-hand how families can be horrifically affected by the war.
What worried me from listening to supporters of the amendment is that they seemed to think that the UK isn’t doing anything, and is the only country that can make a difference. I think it’s worth looking at what the UK government and the UK taxpayer has been doing in this arena, in which I think we have done a very impressive job. It is very controversial in many people’s eyes exactly how much of the UK taxpayer’s money goes into international development, however I think it is the right thing to do in this case. We will be spending £2.3 billion on displaced Syrian refugees, supporting them in and around Syria, in the camps, giving them educational and medical aid – all practical measures designed to bring them some degree of comfort under difficult circumstances. I’ve spoken to many refugees, who all want to return to Syria when it is safe to do so. Therefore the best thing to do is being able to maintain them in safer countries, close to Syria (and in some cases in Syria itself), which are Arabic speaking, where they can be looked after properly, both in refugee camps or in rented accommodation. This is why virtually all of the government’s spending has been concentrated in the area. The £2.3 billion we have spent is more than the whole of the EU’s contributions put together.
We hosted the London conference in February this year where countries came together to offer financial assistance. Together we pledged to create 1.1 million jobs in the area around Syria so there can be employment and sustainability for those families who aren’t able to return to their homes in Syria, and importantly, 1.7 million education places so that every Syrian child of school age is able to maintain an education. Our taxpayers’ money, our programs, our support framework organisations are absolutely integral to that.
We’ve spent £46 million for refugees in Europe on lifesaving aid and food, on infant packs, on hygiene kits and bedding. We are seconding resources to European asylum support office operations in Italy and Greece, who have been at the forefront of supporting the children, aiming to speed up the process of identifying the children who will qualify for asylum status, and particularly those who can be reunited with their families. We’ve seconded some senior asylum experts in the French Interior Ministry to improve family reunions and we’ve so far taken 24 Syrian children to reunite them with their families who are already safe in the United Kingdom.
We’ve dealt with over 3,000 asylum applications from unaccompanied children from other parts of the world, and last week we made an agreement with the UNHCR for a new resettlement scheme to take 3,000 children-who are at risk in the Middle East area and in North Africa, on the recommendation of the UNHCR so that we will be extending the scheme to all children at risk. This is the largest resettlement effort to focus on children at risk from the Middle East and North African area.
The government has made a value judgement; we could take 3,000 child refugees from European countries, which are safe countries, or we could take 3,000 of the most vulnerable children from unsafe countries, in and around the Middle East, Syria and North Africa. These are the most vulnerable children, and hopefully we can give them help before they get trapped by people traffickers and begin dangerous journeys in overcrowded boats.
We have also offered 75 expert personnel to help with processing and the administration of migrants in Greek reception centres, who can act as interpreters and provide medical support. This is in addition to the three Border Force vessels which are assisting the Hellenic Coastguard in conducting search and rescue missions, and a Royal Navy vessel as part of the NATO mission in the Aegean. This will not only save lives, but also tackle people trafficking.
Ultimately, it’s not a question of whether we are taking refugees or not. We are taking refugees, but we are taking them from the places where they are most in need and from the source of danger.
Moreover, there is the case that if you keep taking in refugees from Europe, there will be another lot of 3,000 refugees, and another lot after that- all being exploited by people traffickers. This doesn’t help the problem at its source.
Finally, we’ve seen a lot of coverage of the Jungle at Calais and other impromptu refugee camps, which is a humanitarian disgrace. If the UK had a camp full of thousands of refugees at Dover, including many children, our social services would have done the right thing and taken these children into care. We would have found them homes, and given them a place of safety whilst their long term future is assessed. This should be happening in France and in other parts of the continent. We have a large number of children in care in the country, and a shortage of approximately 10,000 foster care placements that we need to look after. We need to be working more with the asylum seekers already in our country, who have a longer term future as well with us.
These are the reasons I voted with government, to resist these well intentioned calls to take a further 3,000 refugee children from Europe. However, we have pledged to take a further 3,000 refugee children, but the most vulnerable, from the most unsafe areas and I think that is the right thing to do. I’m sure in the future we will do more, but at the moment we are doing much more than our European counterparts and other countries. We are the largest bilateral contributor to humanitarian response for the crisis in Europe and the Balkans.