Name: Immigration and Asylum Bill
Uploaded: 2026-10-22T13:00:07+00:00
Duration: 5599 s

00:08 - 00:12

Speaker 1

Order. Minister to conclude her speech.

00:12 - 05:13

Speaker 3

Thank you very much, Chair. It's a pleasure to see you back in the chair again today. And I appreciate all the discussion and debate we've had so far today. So I'm going to pick back up my response to various opposition amendments and starting with amendment 141 in the name of His Majesty's opposition. This would allow outstanding liabilities to be considered in immigration applications, including settlement.

The government is already considering the wider approach to settlement, as hopefully colleagues will have seen from some of the media discussion and debate. This is currently undergoing quite a lot of discussion. And so it wouldn't be appropriate to preempt that work through this amendment. For those building a life in the UK, making that contribution will form part of their wider contribution to society. And people with outstanding asylum support debt will be prevented from returning to the UK until that debt is repaid.

It is our intention that those who receive support will be expected to make contributions when they are financially able to do so. The detailed operation of the scheme will be set out in secondary legislation. We've already committed to sharing draft regulations, as I've mentioned to colleagues already today, during the passage of the bill, providing members with the opportunity to scrutinize the detail of the policy and how these provisions will operate in practice. This approach ensures appropriate parliamentary oversight whilst retaining the flexibility needed to develop the scheme in the light of wider decisions on settlement policy. These draft regulations will be subject to the affirmative procedure and will afford a further opportunity for parliamentary scrutiny before they're made.

And I might just take this moment to respond to some of the questions that the honorable gentleman opposite raised in the session this morning. He asked whether the scheme would raise more money than it costs, which I think is an important challenge. The government is determined to bring the costs down to the taxpayer. That's part of the principle of this objective. The primary objective in this is fairness and sustainability, with any revenue generated reducing the burden on the public purse.

As I've said, details of the scheme are under development and will be published in draft regulations. But we'll look for as much transparency as possible, not just in the process of this, but how we can publish data in our regular asylum statistics as well going forward. The honorable gentleman raised amendment 124, I believe, just checking it's in this group. Yes, forgive me. The honorable gentleman raised amendment 124 about the powers it gives to the Home Secretary for exemptions, what circumstances it might be used and so on.

The amendment enables regulations to confer a discretion on the Secretary of State to waive, reduce, or refund liabilities arising under the asylum support contribution scheme. As I mentioned earlier this morning, this is commensurate with section 8 of the Immigration Health Surcharge Order, which provides the Secretary of State for the Home Department with the same discretionary power to reduce, waive, or refund part of that charge. This power will of course be at the discretion of the Secretary of State. We anticipate it will only be used in exceptional cases. The honorable gentleman asked about the amount and the income threshold, how that will be set.

As colleagues have raised, the ten thousand pounds figure, that is an indicative estimate of the standard contribution that may be required. The final flat rate contribution will be set in secondary legislation and is intended to reflect the average asylum support costs, which is how that figure's been got to across the system, rather than the precise costs occurred in an individual case, as we've already discussed this morning.

The estimates will depend on the final design and the implementation of the scheme, including collection mechanisms. We'll continue to assess the expected costs and benefits as the scheme is developed, but we don't consider it appropriate to make commencement legally dependent on five-year forecasts, which may be subject to considerable uncertainty. So hopefully I've addressed the issues the honourable gentleman has raised. Moving to government amendment 124, this enables regulations to confer a discretion on the Secretary of State to waive, reduce, or refund liabilities under the asylum support contribution scheme, as I've just mentioned. The policy intention remains that those with the means to contribute towards the cost of support they previously received should do so.

However, there may be circumstances where it would be fair and proportionate to depart from that general principle. The amendment provides flexibility to respond to such circumstances and supports the fair and effective administration of the scheme. The detailed circumstances will be set out in regulation subject to parliamentary scrutiny. This amendment therefore complements the wider contribution scheme whilst ensuring it can operate fairly and proportionately in individual cases. Government amendments 125 and 126 are technical amendments that deal with how the requirements pay back a contribution towards asylum support operates if the recipient becomes bankrupt or enters another form of insolvency process.