Hansard

These are people who are leaving the safety of France and putting their lives in the hands of ruthless human traffickers. That is what we have to stop. People are drowning in the Channel, and that cannot go on. Bob Doris might want to ask such questions, and I respect his right to do so, but the priority should be to stop the trade and the crossings.

We have to send the right message, and Labour is sending the wrong message. It is sending the wrong message to the smugglers, the traffickers and those who are willing to put large sums of money in the hands of those criminals and risk their lives in dinghies crossing the Channel.

Unfortunately, the message from Labour is that Britain is open again for illegal business. Members should make no mistake—this is costing the British taxpayer billions. It is costing more than £8 million a day to house illegal arrivals in hotels, many of which are in communities that are already stretched for housing and services. Who pays the price? Local families, rural businesses, tourism operators and hard-pressed councils. This is not compassion—it is collapse, and it is happening on Labour’s watch.

Let us turn to the Scottish Government. The Scottish National Party has consistently refused to accept the reality of illegal immigration. Its attitude to border control is one of ideological fantasy—a completely open border with limitless immigration, legal and illegal alike. It talks about compassion, but its refusal to distinguish between legal migration and unlawful entry undermines public trust.

Let us be honest—that is not lost on the Scottish people. Time and again, Scots have told pollsters and politicians that they share the concerns of the UK public at large. They are concerned about the pace of immigration and they are alarmed by illegal crossings. They understand that a country that cannot control its borders is a country that cannot control its future.

What Labour and the SNP do not seem to grasp is that public consent for immigration depends on two things—that the system is fair and that the system is enforced. The Rwanda plan might not have been perfect, but it showed seriousness. It aimed to protect lives, shut down smugglers and restore order. Labour’s bill does none of those things.

In the House of Commons debates, our colleague Chris Philp has rightly warned that the bill is a repeal bill, not a reform bill. Our party leader, Kemi Badenoch, has said that Labour is gutting a deterrent without offering an alternative. They are both right. The bill is not a plan; it is a posture—a gesture to the leftist consensus that is comfortable with chaos. Yet, in this Parliament, we are asked to give consent.

We recognise that this is largely—I would say wholly—a reserved matter. By convention, the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party respects the overall legislative authority of the UK Parliament in reserved areas. That is why, despite our trenchant opposition to the bill and everything that it represents, we will abstain on the motion.

However, let there be no mistake—the Conservative Party remains the only party that is serious about restoring control, integrity and order to our borders. Labour and the SNP are out of tune with the mood of this country, Scotland included. Until they confront reality, they will continue to betray the very people whom they claim to serve.