Mr Paul Kohler

Party affiliation

Parliament's party history for this member: Liberal Democrat (4 Jul 2024 – present).

Register of interests

Register on Parliament's site

Latest on this tracker 378

1. 3 Nov 2026·Parliament·Mr Paul Kohler

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fifteenth sitting)

   It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough and the hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire completely, but I want to make a separate point. I have some sympathy for the Minister. Last week, we rightly <span id="543" class="column-number" data-column-number="543"></span>criticised the Government’s approach on hotels; now, we are rightly criticising their approach on large sites. The argument might be, “Well, what are the Government expected to do?” I urge them to take a wholly different approach. A few weeks ago, the Home Affairs Committee went to Denmark. Denmark is often seen as hardcore on immigration issues, but it is far subtler than that. Their approach to asylum accommodation is so very different. Rather than the neoliberal obsession with outsourcing and making the asylum billionaire Graham King millions, if not billions, Denmark uses non-governmental organisations. The Red Cross runs the asylum centres rather than private enterprise making a profit. They run on a not-for-profit basis. If they make a profit, the money goes back into the asylum centre or is given back to the Government. That wholly changes the tone. In Denmark, we saw local people not protesting against asylum centres, but volunteering to work in them. One asylum centre was being closed and local people petitioned for it to be kept open. We could change the whole nature of the debate if we went to NGOs rather than private providers to deliver the accommodation—accommodation that I accept is needed, although the Government must improve and speed up their processing of claims.

   Hansard source
2. 3 Nov 2026·Parliament·Mr Paul Kohler

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fifteenth sitting)

   Just in case it is not going to happen, could I press the Minister on changing the tone of the debate to our choice of who runs those asylum centres? That is critical.

   Hansard source
3. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Mr Paul Kohler

   Immigration: Earned Settlement

   As a member of the Home Affairs Committee, I proposed an amendment to our recent report on earned settlement that included a plea to only make changes to indefinite leave to remain for those not already embarked on the pathway to settlement. While my amendment was defeated, only three Labour MPs on the Committee voted against it, with four other Labour colleagues voting with me or abstaining. In the statement, which I applaud and welcome, the Home Secretary rightly lauds the UK’s reputation for playing fairly, so will she join the Liberal Democrats in agreeing not to make any retrospective changes to the time required to achieve indefinite leave to remain for all those already on pathways to settlement, not only care workers—or do other contributions not count?

   Hansard source
4. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Mr Paul Kohler

   Budget Resolutions

   I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. This country faces fundamental problems: the faces at the top may have changed, but once again Labour has shown itself incapable of making the tough calls. This morning, I hosted a post-Budget roundtable for local employers in my constituency. I regret to report that the business community in Wimbledon shares my concern about this short-term, lacklustre Budget. By kicking the can down the road, this mañana Budget has failed the businesses that are critical to growing the economy. Rather than providing businesses with breathing space, the Chancellor has many of them drowning in crippling taxes and excessive regulation. Raising the business rates relief threshold to £18,000 is, of course, welcome, but high streets across my constituency, in Wimbledon, Raynes Park, New Malden and Morden, will see little benefit. Craig Hurring, the chief executive officer of Love Wimbledon, informed me today that the change will benefit an estimated 1% of the businesses in his business improvement district. Other changes that are in the pipeline are making matters worse. A company that manages fantastic serviced office space for new businesses in Wimbledon tells me that new restrictions on business rates relief mean that it will have to increase rents by up to 25%—a huge cost to start-ups. Business rates are crippling my local businesses. Gina Conway runs an award-winning hair and beauty salon in Wimbledon. She employs 38 people and trains up to 20 apprentices every year, but she tells me that “the pressure for most salon owners is too much to bear”. The long shadow of covid, soaring energy bills, VAT and crippling business rates are killing high street businesses. I was honoured to be present for the excellent maiden speech by the hon. Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Sagal Abdi-Wali). I own a bar in Covent Garden in her constituency, so it feels a bit like she is my MP—I will invite her to it one day. That means that I know at first hand how the night-time economy is suffering. Since 2020, the UK has lost almost three in 10 late-night venues, and across the sector we continue to lose the equivalent of 13 businesses every week. The changes for self-assessment taxpayers are just as worrying. The Chancellor said that he would champion “the small British firms that give character to our communities”.<span id="vol792_col305" class="cross-reference" data-house-id="1" data-column-number="305" data-volume-number="792" data-external-id="D4B71A13-44AC-4127-9B51-E65739BB69CB">—[<em>Official Report</em>, 28 October 2026; Vol. 792, c. 305.]</span><span id="679" class="column-number" data-column-number="679"></span> Instead, 2029 risks becoming a brutal cash crunch, with 18 months of tax squeezed into 12 months. Increasing the tax on rental income is misguided. As the OBR has outlined, it will inevitably result in fewer homes to rent and higher rents. I fear that the new Prime Minister is repeating his predecessor’s mistakes. His only plan is to have a plan. The Budget makes no substantive progress on addressing welfare spending, social care or defence readiness. The only glimmer of hope is the Prime Minister’s recent comments on Europe, but even here my constituents still do not know what he really intends. According to Goldman Sachs, a close relationship with the EU could boost our economy by at least £60 billion per year. The Prime Minister must be bold. He must tear up his predecessor’s red lines, seek unfettered access to the world’s largest market and let British business realise its full potential.

   Hansard source
5. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mr Paul Kohler

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fourteenth sitting)

   I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

   Hansard source
6. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mr Paul Kohler

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fourteenth sitting)

   The new clause would require the Secretary of State to publish a breakdown of the appeals made against Home Office decisions on asylum claims since March 2023, and would provide for their ongoing quarterly publication. It is a source of concern that no detailed Home Office data on appeals has been published since 2023. Such data includes much more information that that contained in published tribunal statistics, and it is essential for scrutiny, especially of the quality of first-time decision making. The Bill makes large-scale changes to the way in which claims are handled, and it is vital that we have a clear picture of its impact. As I made clear in a previous sitting, I have serious concerns about the use of the independent immigration appeals authority to handle first-tier tribunal cases, in particular because Australia trialled something similar and found that non-judicial tribunal panels often took more time to reach decisions because their members struggled with the complexities of immigration law. We also heard in oral evidence from Professor Richard Ekins and Dr Conor Casey about the concern that there would just be more appeals. Dr Casey said: “You might just relocate the backlog from the first-instance appeal level up to the upper tribunal.”<span id="vol_col22" class="cross-reference" data-house-id="1" data-column-number="22" data-volume-number="" data-external-id="89692846-14C4-4C52-8D15-8E29A8FF3ED7"><em>––</em>[<em>Official Report, Immigration and Asylum Public Bill Committee, </em>15 September 2026; c. 22, Q42.]</span><span id="499" class="column-number" data-column-number="499"></span> Data and information on appeals will therefore be crucial in judging how the new system works. I appreciate that, in answer to a written question, the then Home Office Minister, the right hon. Member for Nottingham North and Kimberley (Alex Norris), stated: “Appeals data from April 2023 onwards is currently unavailable for publication due to ongoing work as immigration data transitions to a new caseworking system. Work is ongoing to make this information available, and it will be included in a future edition of the Immigration System Statistics Quarterly release.” However, it has now been three years since the last set of data was released, and I am left with a sense of incredulity that this great office of state needs such a lengthy timespan to make itself accountable. Perhaps this goes back to the point I made in new clause 8: the Home Office is just too large, and often does not have the bandwidth, to do everything that it needs to do. New clause 14 would legislate for the continued publication of all data relating to appeals made against Home Office decisions on asylum claims, whether in the first-tier tribunal or the IIAA. Only with that data can we effectively scrutinise the impacts of the changes introduced by the Bill. I therefore ask the Minister to guarantee the regular publication of that data to ensure proper scrutiny by Parliament.

   Hansard source
7. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mr Paul Kohler

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fourteenth sitting)

   This was a probing new clause. I am pleased that the Minister is addressing the issues that underly it. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion. <em>Clause, by leave, withdrawn.</em>

   Hansard source
8. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mr Paul Kohler

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fourteenth sitting)

   I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. New clause 17 would require the Secretary of State to publish an integration strategy, as announced in the “Protecting What Matters” social cohesion plan, and to address in the strategy the impacts of the core protection model on integration. In June, the House of Lords Justice and Home Affairs Committee noted “with disappointment that no strategy for integration in England was written following the publication of Indicators for Integration.” The Committee said: “We welcome the commitment to develop an effective cross-government integration strategy but are concerned that the lack of date of publication means that the issue is being kicked into the long grass.”<span id="509" class="column-number" data-column-number="509"></span> It is necessary for the Government to offer greater clarity on their work to develop a cross-governmental strategy that assesses the impact on integration of the core protection model introduced by the Bill. The Liberal Democrats are concerned that having to renew asylum status every two and a half years could jeopardise employment opportunities and be detrimental to the education and integration of asylum seekers. We need to ensure that the state allows those with a legitimate claim to be here the best possible chance to thrive. In particular, refugees are often especially vulnerable upon arrival. It is crucial that they are properly supported to recover, build a new life and become productive members of society as quickly as possible. The Home Office must work with local authorities and the charitable sector to provide refugees with robust support networks. New clause 17 would require the Secretary of State to publish an integration strategy outlining the support that will be put in place for those who are most vulnerable. Can the Minister tell the Committee when the proposed and promised report will be published?

   Hansard source
9. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mr Paul Kohler

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fourteenth sitting)

   This was a probing new clause. Although the Minister’s response has given me some comfort, I wish that we could have a backstop date for when the report will be published. Otherwise, there is a danger that it is promised but never comes. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion. <em>Clause, by leave, withdrawn.</em> New Clause 18 Break Clause: Asylum Accommodation Contracts “(1) The Secretary of State must exercise the break clauses available under each Asylum Accommodation and Support Service Contract as soon as is reasonably practicable. (2) In this section, ‘Asylum Accommodation and Support Services Contract’ means any contract entered into by the Secretary of State for the provision of asylum accommodation and support services.”—<em>(Mr Kohler.)</em> <em>This new clause would require the Secretary of State to exercise the break clause available under each Asylum Accommodation and Support Services Contract at the earliest opportunity.</em> <em>Brought up, and read the First </em><em>time</em><em>.</em>

   Hansard source
10. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mr Paul Kohler

    Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fourteenth sitting)

    I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. This new clause would require the Secretary of State to exercise the break clause available under each asylum accommodation and support services contract as soon as possible. The use of hotels is one of the most objectionable issues for many people in this country, as was mentioned earlier in today’s proceedings. Contingency hotel suppliers <span id="511" class="column-number" data-column-number="511"></span>receive an average of £145 per person per night at the expense of the taxpayer—it is quite outrageous. Many hotel rooms have three or four asylum seekers in them, so providers make £500 or £600 per night for each room. The ballooning costs come because of Home Office inefficiencies in processing asylum cases and inadequacy in negotiating the initial contract. The Liberal Democrats want to temporarily open Nightingale processing centres and double the number of asylum case workers to clear the asylum application backlog. That would cost a fraction of the £2.1 billion spent on hotel accommodation in the year to March 2025. The Home Office tells us and we have heard in today’s Committee that it is reducing dependence on hotels. However, its progress has been stalling of late. Recent data shows an 8% increase in hotel usage, undermining official claims that reliance on this accommodation is successfully being phased out. All that is against the backdrop that costs to the Home Office for asylum accommodation contracts are estimated to triple in the 10 years from 2019 to 2029, from less than £5 billion to more than £15 billion. We have tabled new clause 18 to try to require the Secretary of State to exercise the break clause available under each asylum accommodation and support services contract. The power to terminate contracts without penalty is now exercisable and includes a nine-month notice period, so it will not come in overnight. Why does the Home Secretary not trigger this clause and begin moving asylum seekers immediately? Will the Minister clarify when the break clause will be exercised and how long British taxpayers will have to foot this unacceptably high Bill?

    Hansard source

2024 General Election: Wimbledon

Election result on Parliament's site

Parliamentary career

Career on Parliament's site

Published contact details

Only the details Parliament publishes for this member. Contact page on Parliament's site