Global Irregular Migration and Trafficking in Persons Sanctions Regulations 2025

Baroness Hamwee Excerpts

Wednesday 17th September 2025 Grand Committee

[Lord Verdirame (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that introduction. I support the Government’s efforts in this area and appreciate the need for innovative policy solutions, but I have some questions about this statutory instrument.

To begin with, as the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee noted, the Explanatory Notes and the Explanatory Memorandum are rather thin. We are creating the world’s first sanctions regime on irregular migration with a substantive statutory instrument, as one would expect, but with rather short explanations and without an assessment of the impact. Can the Minister tell us a bit more about the practical impact that the Government expect this new instrument to have on the control of irregular migration? As the Minister noted, there were 25 designations a couple of months ago, so, by this stage, the Government will have probably carried out some assessment of the impact of this new tool.

The Explanatory Memorandum says that this will be a global regime that will allow the United Kingdom to

“target relevant persons and entities wherever they are in the world”.

In accordance with that, Regulation 4 defines both people smuggling and trafficking in persons in terms that are not limited to unlawful entry into the UK. But are we really going to designate persons who are involved in people smuggling anywhere in the world? The legal regime may be global, but the policy scope has to be more defined. Is there some connection with the UK that would be a trigger for designations in the policy?

I notice also the remark of the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee on the criteria for involvement not being included in the Explanatory Memorandum. It is important, when this instrument is implemented, to know exactly what the criteria for involvement are, but perhaps that is a problem that can be remedied with guidance published online in due course.

The memorandum mentions that sanctions for human trafficking have been adopted under the global human rights sanctions regime, but that regime was deemed to be inadequate. Can the Minister tell us a bit more as to why that regime was not fit for this purpose and why it was necessary to create a wholly new sanctions regime?

One of the purposes of the regulations is to prevent and combat the instrumentalisation of migration by state actors—the Minister referred to that. This is an interesting and important development, and I am glad to hear that the European Union is keen on this. This is where it is likely that the sanctions will target the political level of certain states—for example, the situation at the border between Poland and Belarus—whereas the other sanctions are likely to target more ordinary criminals, so to speak. Does the Minister agree that it is particularly important for this aspect of the new sanctions regime to ensure that there is international action and co-operation?

I have a final, more technical point. Regulations 6 and 7, under the “urgent procedure”, contain a list of states—the US, the EU, Australia and Canada—where individuals might be designated under similar sanctions and where we would adopt an urgent designation, in part based on those other designations. I was a little confused because I understood that no other states had a sanctions regime like this one. So, in what circumstances would that urgent procedure come to fruition?

[Baroness Hamwee (LD)]

My Lords, the Minister should not be too upset about his late appearance on the Front Bench, with trumpets blaring outside. It is surprising, given the nature of this building and with the conditions outside that we are seeing today, that it does not happen more often.

From these Benches, I will not oppose the sanctioning of criminals who seek to abuse and profit from people smuggling and human trafficking. However, I confess to a degree of doubt as to how effective they will be, given the evasive skills of criminals and, bluntly, whether the sanctions will matter to many of them. That may, in part, depend on having a personal or business presence in the UK. I hope that having this ambitious regime does not mean the diversion of resources from actions that may be more effective.