The government has been accused of “faffing around” while people traffickers escape prosecution and asylum seekers drown in the Channel.
Labour’s Yvette Cooper and home secretary Suella Braverman clashed in the Commons over claims that the number of people with smuggling convictions had “collapsed” over the last three years.
The shadow home secretary said that while the number of small boat crossings had increased “20-fold”, “the number of criminals paying the price for their crime has collapsed”.
She cited figures that indicated that there were just three convictions a month in the first half of 2022, down from 12 convictions a month in 2020 and eight per month in 2021.
“The smuggler gangs have proliferated, the dangerous boat crossings putting lives at risk are up 20-fold, yet the number of criminals paying the price for their crime has collapsed,” she said. “Why has she totally failed to take action against the criminal gangs?”
Braverman is coming under increasing pressure to tackle the number of people making the perilous journey across the Channel to reach Britain.
More than 40,000 people have already made the crossing this year, up from 28,000 the previous year.
In response, Braverman criticised Labour for voting against the government’s Nationality and Borders Act, which has introduced a maximum sentence of life imprisonment for people smugglers.
“Despite trying to sound tough on illegal migration and people smugglers, the reality is that it was Labour who voted against our new offences to prosecute the people smugglers who are causing the problem on the Channel in the first place,” she said.
“It was Labour who voted against tougher sentences, to enable us to deport foreign rapists and foreign drug dealers, it was Labour who would scrap our Rwanda scheme … they have no plan whatsoever for illegal migration, they are against our plan and all they want is open borders.”
Cooper said in response: “Since the [Nationality and Borders Act] came into force, the number of people arriving by dangerous boat has reached a record high, so their legislation hasn’t worked.
“The prime minister promised extra money for the National Crime Agency, but even in two days since he made that announcement it turns out the Home Office doesn’t know how much it is and the Treasury hasn’t agreed anything.
“So, can she tell us how much additional funding there will be for the NCA and where is it coming from? Because on the Conservatives’ watch a multi-million pound criminal industry has grown along our border and while ministers faff around gangs are making profit and people are drowning.”
The clash comes after the High Court ruled that the government’s plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda was lawful.
The first flight to Rwanda was initially due to take off on June 14 but was grounded following a series of objections against individual removals and the policy as a whole, including by the European Court of Human Rights.
But in a summary of the ruling read out in court, Lord Justice Lewis said it was “lawful” to relocate asylum seekers to Rwanda and for their asylum claims to be determined there rather than in the UK.
However, Lord Justice Lewis, sitting with Mr Justice Swift, ruled in favour of eight asylum seekers, finding the government had acted wrongly in their individual cases.
Braverman said the High Court’s ruling “thoroughly vindicates the Rwanda partnership”.
On the court’s finding in favour of the Rwanda plan, she said: “It’s what the overwhelming majority of the British people want to see happen. The sooner it is up and running, the sooner we will break the business model of the evil gangs and bring an end to these illegal, unnecessary and unsafe Channel crossings.”
Cooper replied: “The home secretary describes today’s court judgment as a vindication.
“I have to wonder whether she has read it, because it sets out evidence of serious problems in Home Office decision-making, identifies significant financial costs of this scheme and also very limited numbers of people who will be covered, and certainly no evidence that this will act as a deterrent or address the serious problems that we face.
“Instead of this unworkable, unethical, extortionately expensive and deeply damaging policy, the government should be using this investment to go after the gangs who are putting lives at risk.”