BREAKING: Labour INVITING migrants to Britain with LEGAL ROUTE in 'Ukraine-style' scheme

We have a breaking GB News exclusive for you now from the Home Office. In fact, we've got two scoops. First one, new Home Office analysis has revealed widespread abuse of human rights laws by illegal immigrants resisting removal from the UK. I mean, tell us something we didn't already know, but Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights, the right to a private family life, was originally written to stop the state from tearing apart genuine families, but now it's being exploited by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals to resist removal and stay in the UK against the wishes of the government. And this comes as the government is looking to introduce legislation that will change the way the article is interpreted in the courts. And we thought, why has the government decided to give us this story out of the blue and tell us we're not allowed to report it until half past ten this evening? It seemed a bit weird. They're just telling us something that we all already know. They abuse this stuff. They're going to try and get a bit tougher on it. And we thought, it seems a bit too good to be true. They're doing something nice for us. It turns out it was, because in the last few minutes, the other breaking news, part of the reforms that the government will be bringing in will also include so-called safe and legal routes in a Ukrainian-style asylum scheme that will bring thousands more asylum seekers to the UK. The Home Office, Shabana Mahmood has said moments ago, my reforms will save the asylum system for a generation. I will open new legal routes for genuine refugees while closing loopholes that have been too often abused. My goal is simple, to ensure we have an asylum system, not just for today, but for generations to come. And part of this, apparently, is that they are going to announce a new Ukrainian-style sponsorship scheme, so for households or for communities who want to allow asylum seekers to come and live with them. And Chloe, you were looking into this, and you think that you can actually make money from this? Yeah, well, I'm not sure it's going to be loads. I think you get 350 quid a month, typically, if you take in a Ukrainian, which, to be honest, is not much money, given that, I mean, in London, at least, you can rent out a spare bedroom for a grand plus. But I think a lot of people did this out of goodwill. And I mean, it's not really too much of a gamble taking on a Ukrainian refugee. They've got a culture very similar to ours. I think the likelihood of a Ukrainian living in your house, you know, suddenly launching on you with a machete or raping you, I think, is quite small. To only get 350 quid a month to take on the risk of potentially having, you know, a fighting-age male from Afghanistan living with you who, you know, comes from a very different culture, I don't think is worth it. So I'm interested to see how many people will be taking on these Afghans. It'd be interesting to see if all of the lefty so-called feminist women who don't seem to have any problem at all and say we're all just making it up when we say there's a culture problem. I wonder how many of them will be taking on these Afghans. I'm looking forward, I am seriously looking forward to seeing how many of, you know, some of the people that I used to be mates with that maybe, oh, they don't like GB News or whatever, that are all pro-refugee out on those marches in Walthamstow, how many of them use their spare room for this. And just some detail on this now that's coming through to us is that apparently the scheme will resettle refugees who are fleeing their country due to conflict, famine, drought and other disasters. And they are referred to the UK by the UNHCR, which is the UN's refugee agency, which actually has been quite controversial, especially with some of the things they said over Gaza. Refugees likely to be prioritised are especially from countries Sudan and Eritrea, apparently. So, yeah, I mean, it seems like that's the way it's going. Would you resettle a Sudanese man or woman in your spacious home? Well, probably not, I have to say. Just say no, of course you wouldn't. No, I wouldn't, I wouldn't. Be honest. You're not being dishonest. But why do you feel a sense of shame saying that? This is the problem, isn't it? No, I don't want any. No, I will not have a random Sudanese man in my flat. It was more about the fact that you said I had a very spacious home. Oh, I see. I don't want to be vulgar enough to say that my five bedroom Victorian villa would not be appropriate. He needs a bedroom for each of his dogs. Actually, I have three dogs now. No, I wouldn't. A bedroom each? Yeah, they've all got a bedroom. That's why I wouldn't want to kick one of the dogs out. No, I don't get £350 a month for the dogs. You keep trying to get me to stay at your house. Where would I stay? Oh, yeah, that's that. Because, you know, I don't want you driving home late at night. Anyway, so, look, the Ukrainian scheme, I think, showed what a brilliant country we are. And the difference was that we knew those people were coming from war zones, right? And they were women and children. Yeah, and they were women and children. You're absolutely right, because the men were staying behind and fighting. You're going to think I've gone a bit soft now, but if you want to do this, then firstly, I'd probably be doing it with the people that are here already, because I don't think you should be doing it with new people coming, because we actually need somebody to put the people here. And we were talking about the army bases earlier, so that would solve that problem. But if you want to, fine, you have to take responsibility for what they do. You have to take responsibility for them. If they go out on a rampage or do something wrong or in the community or do anything, that's your responsibility. There have been cases where it's gone badly wrong already. The Parsons Green bomber was a young lad who had been living with a couple. There was also the case of the illegal migrant in Bournemouth who stabbed an aspiring Royal Marine to death in the street. He had been living in a home. Canada's done this. They've had just shy of 400,000 refugees through its private sponsorship model since 1979. Look, I don't know the details of this scheme. I'm simply going on what you've said. I remember when, a few weeks ago on this programme, where we were talking about how better to manage the whole asylum and refugee system so that people weren't coming here on small boats illegally. And one of the things that, Christo, I remember we talked about at the time was, well, if you could process them outside of the UK, if you could set up processing centres where you assessed whether these people did have a well-founded fear of persecution, or in this case it would seem are coming from a war zone with legitimate fear, then it made sense to do that, to have them screened at that point and then say, now there's a route which is a legal and safe route, so you're not forcing people to go into the hands of the criminals. In fact, you're taking away their trade and stopping them from coming on small boats, which is dangerous. Now, I don't know, because I haven't, you know, this is just broken in the last few minutes, but if it were that, then actually there might be some real sense. There are bits of this that, in theory, could kind of be okay, because if you are really seriously clumping down on people being able to lie about this right to a family life, oh actually I need to live here because my cousin's here, and all of this ridiculous tosh that they tell, if they get rid of that kind of thing from the law, that could be quite good. If you then say, okay, there is a route which you can get to, you have to have already been approved by an outside refugee agency, and we're not putting you in a house or a military barracks, we're putting you at Gary Lineker's, who wants you, then like, in a way, I'm a bit like, okay, that starts to affect us a bit less. Sorry, Patrick, can I just say, on this negotiation that we've been doing, I think it's with the French and some other countries, about how we should have a clear interpretation of Article 8, because, I mean, I have for many years had lots of, my constituency is Brent West, it's Wembley area, there are lots of asylum seekers that come to my constituency, we have hotels, but the process, I see, and I've made representations to government, of the way in which somebody fails when they go to court, they're deemed not to be a genuine asylum seeker, and then they will put in an appeal, and they'll put in another appeal on human rights grounds, and that's exactly what's wrong, and that's what she's about to change. I think I'll speak for 90 odd percent of the people watching this, we do not want more refugees, we do not want more asylum seekers, we should be closed to the rest of the world until we can put Brits first in this country, we're running out of money, our services are collapsing, the crime that's being imported into this country is off the scale, I say no, unless they're women and children and in desperate need, the Brits, the majority, do not want more asylum seekers. Using the internet without a VPN, a virtual private network, is a bit like taking to the road without car insurance, all it takes is one unlucky moment to cost you a lot of cash. This video's sponsor is Private Internet Access, they are the VPN to help keep you safe. Click the link in the description below to find out why over 30 million people have downloaded PIA to protect themselves online. A virtual private network is an app that hides your IP address and helps keep your data private. When you're browsing the internet at home you give up a large amount of data to businesses, to shops and indeed to social media giants too. Hackers have the ability to steal your personal data with ease including sensitive information such as passwords, keystrokes and even your personal photos. Private internet access helps protect your personal data by encrypting your internet connection to keep your data out of the hands of cyber criminals. And it's not just hackers either to be concerned about, information can be censored too. When Canada passed their C18 bill social media giants decided to ban news content on their platforms. But PIA can protect your ability to consume the news and content you love. Private internet access is available for Windows users, Mac OS, Android, Linux, iOS and you can use one PIA subscription to protect an unlimited amount of devices. And we've got a huge GB news discount for you too. Click the link in this video's description and you'll get a massive 83% off PIA. That's under £2 a month, the price of a coffee, and you'll get an extra four months completely free on top. Also there's a 30-day money-back guarantee too. Visit piavpn.com forward slash gbnews to start protecting yourself digitally today. Also this Ukrainian style scheme for more people. Yes, I mean the Home Office and Shaban Mahmood that at least have been saying for a significant amount of time and Yvette Cooper was as well, Article 8 is being abused and that they're going to reform it. But you know I agree with Adam that you know we'll believe it when we see it. I know that changing the law is a long and complicated process so I appreciate that isn't something you can do at the snap of the fingers. But I think when it comes to all everything that they say with regards to immigration, nobody believes that it's actually going to happen. And I wouldn't be surprised if it is the case that Shaban Mahmood, if she does keep her job as Home Secretary under Barnum, if she does soften her tone because her current talking tough approach is just winning nobody because what's happening is just as Adam said most of us on the right who you know Shaban Mahmood is thinking maybe we can get some voters back who have switched to reform. Her tough talk isn't working because everyone's saying oh you're all the talk and none of the walk so we don't believe you. Why would we not just vote for Nigel Farage instead who we think is actually going to follow through. Meanwhile all the people on the left, soft left, are getting completely disillusioned with her saying oh she's reform light or she's even she's worse than reform. So both sides both left and right are turning against her so maybe if she goes for a more soft left approach it will actually make her slightly more popular. Let's remember that reform have promised to lead the ECHR. We won't have this problem if we leave. The concern for me with this Barry would be that there's a chance that we end up with the kind of worst of both worlds. I would just say that this is breaking news and it's something that we'll need to look very carefully at but my take on this is that it's really good that we're going to redefine what the courts are able to do around article 8. I think that's positive because it has been abused and I've seen that in my own constituency and made representations on the basis of that. But the other thing I would say is it does make a lot of sense to try and process people before they get to this country and providing those safe and legal routes and processing them whilst they're still abroad is much better than allowing them to be in the hands of the criminals and coming here on small boats illegally. Now the other thing though you said was that they're going to allow lots more people to stay, to get a settlement here. Now my view is that those people who came here and abided by the rules, they worked, they got their visa, it was understood that in five years time if they did what they said they would be able to have settled status in this country. The proposal was to make that 10 years. My view is that it's not settled status that needs changed, it's the rights of citizenship that needs changed. At the moment the only right you have as a citizen as opposed to somebody with indefinite leave to remain is to have a blue passport and to vote in a general election. That's exactly my point. I think that actually a lot of the benefits that people get from at the moment being on indefinite leave to remain should be reserved for citizens. I think we should be, it should be a really big thing to be a citizen of this country and there should be rights and benefits that go with that, that people who simply have the right to stay here, to live, work, contribute to the economy, I want all of that. But my understanding with this and I'm willing to be corrected is that because there was this big controversy earlier on wasn't there, Mike Tapp and Shobhana Moon wanted to sack him, Star refused to sack him and it all got a bit weird. She was going to stop him having access to documents in the Home Office and everything, anyway. What Mike Tapp is actually saying is that anyone who's come here as a care worker should be exempt from Shobhana Moon's longer period of having to wait for indefinite leave to remain. Which could mean that if she rose back on that, which it looks the noises are tonight that she has, she's softened on it, that you could come here as a care worker for five years, bring a couple of family members over and then after five years you get indefinite leave to remain and then you could claim benefits. So that's the bit she needed to, but you think she should stop that? At the moment that is what the situation is, it's not about what might happen, that is the situation. But the point I would make Patrick is this, we as a country held out that and we said these are the rules, obey the rules and that's what you get. Now I don't want us to welch on the deal that we made with those people, but what I do want us to do is to rethink actually what the rights of citizenship are and it seems to me that actually the balance at the moment is wrong and actually more rights should be for British citizens. By all means give people the right to live here, to work here indefinitely, contribute to society, but certain benefits, not all of them, but certain benefits should be reserved for citizens. What do you reckon Adam looking at these cases? I just think look if I go to America, say I sold up and went there and I lost everything, if I couldn't provide for my family I'm probably going to be deported. I'm not going to start getting benefits from America or if I went to Spain. Singapore. I just think this country is a soft touch and the world knows that. They know that they can come here on a work visa, maybe work a few years and then suddenly they're going to get the rest of their lives paid for and I think that is the mindset of the world. We are looked at as a free ride and this is what the MPs and our politicians need to realise. We're looked at as soft touch. This was specifically designed to counter the Boris wave. The Boris wave basically, what was it, it was 40,000 vacancies identified in the care sector, 660,000 people given those visas. That was stupid. The Tories did that. Four million people in total. In terms of, sorry you derailed me, I can't remember what Adam's point was. We're a bit of a soft touch basically. We shouldn't even be. Can I just say the evidence is that the people who have come and worked here for five years don't then say I don't want to work anymore. What they do is they go on working. They want to do well for their families. What about their dependents and everyone that comes over with them on student visas and things like that. Barry, it's undeniable that our immigration system has been abused over the last four million people. I'm simply giving the statistics around the people who came but under those conditions to get five years of ILR. They go on and they keep working and they keep contributing to our society. They are legal. They came here legally. They've always operated legally. They should not become us. It's one thing being given a visa to go work in a country where you're going to go contribute and pay your taxes but I just think it's mad that anyone can move to a country and just be handed a load of benefits. If I moved to any other country I would not expect a penny. Even if I was homeless I would not expect them to put a roof over my head and I think that's just common sense. The fact that we're still having to have this debate I think is bonkers. Everyone should be on board. It's just intuition. And if you're deported you know that country is not going to be called racist but because a lot of the people and a lot I mean maybe millions that have come to this country of brown or black skin if we dare to deport them we're labelled Nazis, we're labelled racist but it isn't the case if someone like me or you went to another white country and they deported us. It's interesting actually on that point. It's the left like to label us and stop us. Just quickly if we just show the Daily Telegraph we'll talk about this a bit later but it's relevant because the Daily Telegraph front page has a story about the Polish government has told its citizens to cash in on British benefits before returning home. Advice published which is a Polish government website for citizens living abroad who wish to return home says when leaving the UK is worth considering whether you are eligible for Jobseeker's Allowance. Post-Brexit arrangements allow European Union citizens who acquired settled status before December 2020 to transfer some benefit payments abroad when they move to an EU country for up to three months. It means those returning to Europe in this case Poland could claim hundreds of pounds from the British taxpayer to support their job hunt in Poland. So it's stories like that about British taxpayers money going around to things like that that all feeds into this idea of reform. There was a group of Bulgarians that managed to take millions out of this country while living in Bulgaria in benefits and they scanned the system. I think we should also stop anyone that has been born abroad and is here a foreigner sending their benefits back home because that's money that is just leaving the country. I think there should be a block on that and that's what a lot of people do they come here they get benefits and send it back to the country. It turned out we were paying benefits to Salman Abidi's mum and Salman Abidi is the Manchester arena bomber and his mum had moved back to Libya I believe and then it was only a few years later that we realised that we'd actually been paying her benefits for a period of time. So anyway Shabana Mahmood is trying to reform it how far she goes we'll have to wait and see there's some strong stuff in there as far as I'm concerned some stuff that sort of you know we'll have to wait and see how it pans out anyway.