Susan Murray MP: speeches
4 Jul 2024–3 Jul 2025
How these years work
Our reporting years run from 4 July to 3 July, starting with the 2024 general election. They are not official parliamentary sessions. Office costs keep IPSA’s April–March financial years. Records may cover only part of a year; a missing record does not mean no work was done.
Read what this MP said, asked and contributed in Parliament.
9 published records · newest first.
Speeches
- 18 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I beg to move, that the clause be read a Second time. It is a pleasure to work under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. The new clause would enable replacements of large portions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 —in particular, sections on asylum, immigration control, age assessments and modern slavery—to ensure the upholding of the refugee convention, to provide for safe and legal routes to sanctuary for refugees and to help prevent dangerous channel crossings.
- 18 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I thank the Minister. It is good to hear that the Government support the principle of family reunion, but we will press the new clause to a vote. Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.
- 18 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I thank the Minister for her clear outline. The Liberal Democrats want to enable the replacement of large portions of the Nationality and Borders Act and ensure that we uphold the refugee convention. We wish to push the new clause to a vote. Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.
- 18 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. This new clause would make provision for leave to enter or remain the UK to be granted to the family members of refugees and of people granted humanitarian protection. Through the clause the Liberal Democrats seek to support refugee family reunion and to help people to integrate into the community, learn the language, make a home and work to contribute to society, exactly as the hon. Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh discussed.
- 4 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source
More
The Minister makes good points about the practicalities. It is good to hear that she recognises that the Liberal Democrats are simply trying to ensure that we have international influence and cross-border activities.
- 4 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source
More
That is a really important point. If the new clause were accepted, civil servants would perhaps have to look at ways to schedule meetings in advance so that they were not done on an ad hoc basis.
- 4 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source
More
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. The Liberal Democrats would like to introduce new clause 7, because we want to strengthen cross-border co-operation and Britain’s role in that process. We also believe that we need to reverse some of the last Government’s roll-back of provisions to tackle gangs involved in modern slavery. The new clause would require the border commander to meet the executive director of Europol every three months, which would help to achieve those goals.
- 27 Feb 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source
More
I want to let the Committee know that I know Daniel O’Malley from Scotland through the Liberal Democrats.
- 21 Jan 2025 · Asylum Seeker Hotel Accommodation: Reopening · Hansard source
More
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on the important issue of reopening hotels to accommodate asylum seekers. Despite repeated ministerial promises, we continue to see the result of a broken system—a system that has caused immense hardship for asylum seekers and communities and has placed a significant burden on taxpayers. Let us be clear that this debate arises only because of successive Conservative Governments having failed to deal efficiently with the growing backlog of asylum claims. According to the Migration Observatory, the number of outstanding asylum applications under the Conservatives soared from 27,000 in 2018 to 132,000 by 2022. As of September 2024, Home Office data indicates that over 97,000 cases involving 133,000 individuals still await an initial decision, with a further 127,000 in the appeals and removal process. Despite repeated assurances, most claimants still wait beyond six months for any clarity on their status. During that process, asylum seekers are trapped, unable to work, unable to integrate and forced to depend on Government funds. The reliance on contingency accommodation, whether in the form of hotels, barges or former military barracks, is an expensive sticking plaster to cover a deeper wound. It provides neither dignity for asylum seekers nor value for money for the taxpayer. We have heard Ministers assert that these hotels are only a short-term measure, yet Home Office figures show that there were over 35,000 individuals in hotel accommodation as of September 2024. Successive Governments have spoken of reducing dependency on this provision, yet the number of people in hotels remains persistently high. Worse still, the backlog remains alarmingly large and we are left grappling with new, reactive announcements rather than a cohesive plan. The situation benefits no one. The fundamental problem is the time it takes to make decisions on asylum claims, coupled with the ban on working. It is the worst of both worlds: forced inactivity for those seeking safety and to pay their fair share, and an unnecessary bill for the public purse. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research estimates that granting the right to work would generate £1.3 billion in additional tax revenue and would reduce expenditure by as much as £6.7 billion each year. We could address the backlog more effectively and reduce the public cost if we ended the rigid prohibition on work, yet time and again Governments have resisted such a solution. The Liberal Democrats have advocated a clear, sensible plan. First, we propose creating a dedicated, well-resourced processing unit that is separate from the Home Office, with a singular mission of resolving cases quickly. Secondly, we propose reinstating a six-month service standard so that claimants receive an initial decision quickly. Finally, we would grant asylum seekers the right to work after a set period, allowing them to pay their fair share instead of languishing in costly Government-funded accommodation or on street corners. As we consider whether to reopen asylum hotels for asylum seekers, we must remember that no one genuinely wants this. Asylum seekers deserve dignified conditions, local communities deserve to feel safe from people loitering with nothing to do and taxpayers deserve an end to the wasteful spending brought on by Government’s incompetence. I urge colleagues from all sides of the House to support practical reforms as proposed by the Liberal Democrats, which will finally clear the asylum backlog, end the expensive overreliance on temporary accommodation, such as asylum hotels, and allow those who are seeking refuge to stand on their own feet and contribute to society.
Explore activity by topic or department
Contributions by debate topic
4 Jul 2024–3 Jul 2025. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained.
View as listWhat this shows and doesn't show
Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →