Migration bill: Minister accuses Lords of trying to wreck asylum reforms

Immigration Minister Robert Jenrick has accused peers of "wrecking" the government's asylum reforms, as MPs prepare for key votes on the plans.

Mr Jenrick said ministers could not support some of the changes peers made to the Illegal Migration Bill.

MPs are expected to overturn most of the 20 changes to the bill voted through by the House of Lords.

But the government has offered some concessions, including on detention limits for children and pregnant women.

MPs are debating the bill in the Commons, where they are expected to cast a series of votes on amendments backed by the Lords.

The bill is central to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's pledge to stop small boats crossing the English Channel.

The latest figures show more than 13,000 migrants have made the crossing so far this year, including more than 1,600 in the last four days.

Earlier, Mr Sunak said he was "throwing absolutely everything" at tackling Channel crossings and insisted his plan to stop the boats was "working".

But back in Parliament, the passage of the Illegal Migration Bill has not been easy, with peers demanding changes and campaigners calling on MPs to reject the government's proposals.

The bill is the government's attempt to deter people from making the crossing by toughening up the rules and conditions around seeking asylum.

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

The bill originally removed the existing time limits on how long unaccompanied children and pregnant women could be detained, but they were reinstated by peers.

On Monday night, ministers proposed an amendment to allow immigration bail to be granted after eight days to unaccompanied children in detention.

The government has also agreed to keep the current limit on detaining pregnant women at 72 hours. But ministers will still have powers to extend detention to seven days.

Another new change means the duty on the home secretary to remove anyone entering the UK without permission will only apply when the legislation becomes law, not retrospectively.

Some of the government's critics over the child detention issue have said they will accept the eight-day compromise, but intend to push for more concessions on the quality of accommodation provided.

Opening Tuesday's debate, Mr Jenrick paid tribute to the Lords for "undertaking its proper role as a revising chamber".

But he added: "Some of the changes made by the House of Lords are however, little short of wrecking amendments, and not one that the government can support."

Mr Jenrick said it was "vital" that the bill is passed quickly and described amendments made by the Lords as being "riddled with exceptions and get-out clauses".

Mr Kinnock said the bill would "only make a terrible situation worse" by increasing the asylum backlog, and "ensure people smugglers are laughing all the way to the bank".

With Parliament due to break for summer at the end of next week, Home Secretary Suella Braverman said the government's proposals would help the "crucial" new law pass "swiftly".

It would also "send a clear message that the exploitation of children and vulnerable people, used by criminals and ferried across the Channel, cannot continue," she added.

The government's efforts to curb the number of small boats crossing the Channel have been hampered in Parliament and the courts.

A plan to house asylum seekers on a barge moored in Dorset has been delayed.

And the government's policy of sending migrants to Rwanda is set for a legal battle in the Supreme Court.

On Monday, a senior Home Office official confirmed the department was paying to keep nearly 5,000 beds empty across the country, in case a sudden influx of migrants caused overcrowding at detention centres.

The government has stressed it remains committed to its plan to remove migrants to Rwanda, and has said it will challenge a Court of Appeal ruling last week that this was unlawful.