Call for protection to stop parents being ‘punished' over Channel crossings
Campaigners are calling for stronger protections to prevent parents being punished for trying to seek sanctuary with their children under a new offence over English Channel crossings.
Those who endanger or risk another life at sea during the dangerous journeys could face five years in jail as part of Government plans to curb crossings and crack down on people smugglers.
According to the Home Office, the offence is to stop more people being crammed into unsafe boats and would apply to those involved in physical aggression and intimidation, as well as anyone who resists rescue.
But the clause laid out in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill currently going through Parliament has been described as 'ill-defined' and could apply to a wide range of conduct beyond violence.
Regardless of any reassurances from ministers, charity Freedom From Torture has raised concerns that any future government would be 'free to apply this clause broadly'.
The draft law reads of the offence where a person 'did an act that caused, or created a risk of, the death of, or serious personal injury to, another person'.
This could include physical or psychological injury, and covers journeys by water to the UK from France, Belgium and the Netherlands.
Campaigners believe 'at the very least' the offence should be amended to clearly define the acts being criminalised.
Sile Reynolds, head of asylum advocacy at Freedom From Torture, told the PA news agency: 'If this Bill goes through, the Government risks punishing parents rather than protecting families seeking sanctuary.
'We're gravely concerned that the offences in the Bill are so broad they'll catch everyone in the same drag net.
'What's deeply disturbing is that the Government itself has recognised this could result in the prosecution of parents who make the unbearably difficult decision to bring their children on these dangerous journeys to reach safety in the UK.'
In the Bill's document on the European Convention on Human Rights, it reads that while it is 'very unlikely', there is 'no absolute bar' to prosecuting parents who have taken children on these journeys, which could result in the break-up of families.
It said any decision to prosecute a parent would be made by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) on a case-by-case basis, and CPS policy is normally not to prosecute parents, and therefore is an 'appropriate safeguard'.
A refugee mother who fled torture at the hands of her family in Iraq with her children said the Bill will 'never stop' people from coming if violence and conflict continues in their home countries.
In comments shared through Freedom From Torture, Gulan, who wished to remain anonymous, said: 'We want to keep our children safe, but there aren't enough safe ways to escape.
'Instead of making things harder, the Government should create safe routes for families. It's really sad that we aren't getting full help to escape from danger.'
The mother-of-two escaped when her youngest child was five, after being locked up and tortured by her family, who said they would kill her for falling in love with a man from another religion.
She embarked on a nine-month 'terrifying' journey where she did not know their destination until authorities took them in once they arrived in Dover.
'We left everything behind to save my children, as there was no protection for us,' she said.
Gulan described how they were sold by smugglers to other smugglers once they reached specific locations and were not allowed to ask questions or find out where they were going.
'It was terrifying and depressing, and I don't want to remember it as it was another trauma layered on top of the violence we had experienced at home,' she added.
Eventually, she said in France the smuggler told them to sneak into the back of an overcrowded lorry heading for a goods boat.
She said since arriving in the UK her family have 'integrated into the community and found happiness'.
Ahlam Souidi, who runs Freedom From Torture's Women Together group for survivors, which includes Gulan, said of the women: 'They identify as victims – not criminals – and they believe it is essential that they are supported in rebuilding their lives, not punished and victimised for a second time.
'They urge us to consider the reality of their situations – what would you do if you were in their shoes?
'These are the realities that must be acknowledged and addressed with urgency. '
A Home Office spokesman said the upcoming law will secure Britain's borders by strengthening law enforcement's ability to identify, disrupt and prevent organised immigration crime faster and more effectively.
'The endangerment offence in the Bill is targeted solely at those individuals who put the safety and lives of others at risk during dangerous Channel crossings, something that no responsible parent would ever do to their child,' the spokesman added.
'As normal, prosecutors will look at all factors when considering a case.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
Fettes College may cut jobs after Government's VAT decision
The private school in Edinburgh said it needs to run its operations "as efficiently as possible". Jobs at a prestigious Scots private school may be lost as it looks to cut costs following the UK Government's introduction of VAT on school fees. Fettes College in Edinburgh said the decision was one of the reasons it took the 'difficult' decision to 'right size our staffing model'. The Scotsman reported that the school – attended by former prime minister Tony Blair – has opened a consultation process for both teaching and operational staff in order to reduce numbers. The most recent accounts show 751 students in August 2024, down from 780 the previous year. academic year, inclusive of VAT. The Labour government imposed VAT on private education and boarding fees, effective from January 1. Ministers argue that removing the VAT exemption will benefit the wider education sector, including the 94% of pupils who attend state schools. A spokesman for Fettes College said the sector is facing a 'tough time' and appealed for privacy for the staff involved. Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. The spokesman said: 'Various factors have conspired to increase costs on all organisations and schools are not immune, particularly with the recent imposition of VAT on school fees and rise in national insurance contributions. 'Despite being financially very well managed with a strong student roll, these factors are having an impact on our costs and numbers, and we are obliged to run our operations as efficiently as possible. 'These headwinds obviously affect our families too and our parents need to be certain that we are taking the necessary decisions to run the school efficiently and to use their money effectively. 'A consultation process began in May to right size our staffing model. This difficult decision may result in some redundancies. 'We will continue to provide the highest standard of educational experience, delivering our innovative vision for the school and maintaining our position as a leader in the sector.'
North Wales Chronicle
an hour ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Rantzen warns peers not to hamper progress of assisted dying law
The Terminally Ill Adults (End Of Life) Bill cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday, but opponents have vowed to continue their resistance in the unelected chamber. The legislation could face a difficult passage through the Lords, with critics poised to table amendments to add further restrictions and safeguards to the Bill. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. 'Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. 'So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through.' Dame Esther, who turns 85 on Sunday and has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to 'buzz of to Zurich' to use the Dignitas clinic. Paralympian and crossbench peer Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told BBC Breakfast: 'We're getting ready for it to come to the Lord's and from my personal point of view, about amending it to make it stronger. 'We've been told it's the strongest Bill in the world, but to be honest, it's not very high bar for other legislation. 'So I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.' Conservative peer and disability rights campaigner Lord Shinkwin said the narrow Commons majority underlined the need for peers to take a close look at the legislation. He told Today 'I think the House of Lords has a duty to expose and to subject this Bill to forensic scrutiny' but 'I don't think it's a question of blocking it so much as performing our duty as a revising chamber'. He added: 'The margin yesterday was so close that many MPs would appreciate the opportunity to look at this again in respect of safeguards as they relate to those who feel vulnerable, whether that's disabled people or older people.' Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who steered the Bill through the Commons, told the PA news agency she hoped peers would not seek to derail the legislation, which could run out of parliamentary time if it is held up in the Lords. She said: 'I would be upset to think that anybody was playing games with such an important and such an emotional issue.' A group of 27 Labour MPs who voted against the legislation said: 'We were elected to represent both of those groups and are still deeply concerned about the risks in this Bill of coercion of the old and discrimination against the disabled, people with anorexia and black, Asian and minority ethnic people, who we know do not receive equitable health care. 'As the Bill moves to the House of Lords it must receive the scrutiny that it needs. Not about the principles of assisted dying but its application in this deeply flawed Bill.' Meanwhile, one of the leading opponents of the Bill, Conservative Danny Kruger, said 'these are apocalyptic times'. In a series of tweets on Friday night, the East Wiltshire MP – who is at odds with his mother, Great British Bake Off judge Dame Prue Leith in her support for legalisation – accused assisted dying campaigners of being 'militant anti-Christians' who had failed to 'engage with the detail of the Bill'.
Rhyl Journal
2 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
Rantzen warns peers not to hamper progress of assisted dying law
The Terminally Ill Adults (End Of Life) Bill cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday, but opponents have vowed to continue their resistance in the unelected chamber. The legislation could face a difficult passage through the Lords, with critics poised to table amendments to add further restrictions and safeguards to the Bill. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. 'Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. 'So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through.' Dame Esther, who turns 85 on Sunday and has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to 'buzz of to Zurich' to use the Dignitas clinic. Paralympian and crossbench peer Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told BBC Breakfast: 'We're getting ready for it to come to the Lord's and from my personal point of view, about amending it to make it stronger. 'We've been told it's the strongest Bill in the world, but to be honest, it's not very high bar for other legislation. 'So I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.' Conservative peer and disability rights campaigner Lord Shinkwin said the narrow Commons majority underlined the need for peers to take a close look at the legislation. He told Today 'I think the House of Lords has a duty to expose and to subject this Bill to forensic scrutiny' but 'I don't think it's a question of blocking it so much as performing our duty as a revising chamber'. He added: 'The margin yesterday was so close that many MPs would appreciate the opportunity to look at this again in respect of safeguards as they relate to those who feel vulnerable, whether that's disabled people or older people.' Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who steered the Bill through the Commons, told the PA news agency she hoped peers would not seek to derail the legislation, which could run out of parliamentary time if it is held up in the Lords. She said: 'I would be upset to think that anybody was playing games with such an important and such an emotional issue.' A group of 27 Labour MPs who voted against the legislation said: 'We were elected to represent both of those groups and are still deeply concerned about the risks in this Bill of coercion of the old and discrimination against the disabled, people with anorexia and black, Asian and minority ethnic people, who we know do not receive equitable health care. 'As the Bill moves to the House of Lords it must receive the scrutiny that it needs. Not about the principles of assisted dying but its application in this deeply flawed Bill.' Meanwhile, one of the leading opponents of the Bill, Conservative Danny Kruger, said 'these are apocalyptic times'. In a series of tweets on Friday night, the East Wiltshire MP – who is at odds with his mother, Great British Bake Off judge Dame Prue Leith in her support for legalisation – accused assisted dying campaigners of being 'militant anti-Christians' who had failed to 'engage with the detail of the Bill'.
