Labour has called on the Conservatives to clarify their plan to strip the right to remain permanently in the UK from thousands of people, saying those affected had a right to know what was being proposed.
Anna Turley MP, the Labour chair, has written to Katie Lam, the shadow Home Office minister whose interview about the plans last weekend sparked renewed interest in the policy of retrospectively revoking indefinite leave to remain (ILR) status for large numbers of people.
In her interview, Lam said the deportation of so many legally settled people was necessary to make the UK “culturally coherent”, a sentiment which prompted some Tory MPs to complain to party whips.
The policy, as set out in a draft bill led by Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, says that people will lose their ILR status if they commit a crime, if they earn less than £38,700 for six months or longer, or if they or any dependant claims any kind of benefit.
Despite repeated questions from journalists, the Conservatives have not clarified even central aspects of the policy, including what benefits would count towards losing ILR, and if families would be split up.
In her letter to Lam, Turley said her interview had drawn attention to a policy which involved “deporting people who have played by the rules, who are lawfully in this country, working in our schools and hospitals and businesses and living as our neighbours”.
Retrospectively removing their right to stay would, she said, “break up families and communities as well as undermining the rule of law and trashing our country’s reputation for fairness”.
Turley went on: “Beyond questions of morality, your proposals raise deeply troubling practical and legal questions that require urgent clarification.”
The letter lists 25 questions, ranging from asking for an estimate of how many people would be forecast to be deported under the policy, to more detailed queries about the reasons for being stripped of ILR.
On the income threshold, it asks whether this would include pensioners whose income is less than £38,700, or women whose income has dropped below this level due to maternity leave, or those who have cut their hours to care for children or other relatives.
Anna Turley: ‘Beyond questions of morality, your proposals raise deeply troubling practical and legal questions that require urgent clarification.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/Shutterstock
The letter notes that the bill defines anyone who has received any type of “social protection” losing their ILR status, and asks if this includes people who have claimed child benefit, pensions, statutory sick pay, payouts of industrial injuries or one-off support after a flood or eviction.
skip past newsletter promotion
Get the day’s headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion
It goes on to ask if people would also face deportation if a spouse or children claimed a benefit, even if they are a UK citizen. Telling Lam that many people with ILR have children who are UK citizens, Turley asked if such people would be deported, adding that if they were, “would you be content for the responsibility to care for those children to fall to the state?”
The letter went on: “What costs do you anticipate arising from the transfer of the children of foreign-born parents with ILR into the care of the state? Do you believe that it is in the best interests of a child for one or both of their parents to be deported?”
Turley ended: “The people you are talking about deporting are part of our country: our friends and neighbours and colleagues – people whose lives are intertwined with ours. The fact that this is where the Conservative party is today shows just how far your party has fallen.”
The Conservatives and Lam were contacted for comment.
