PARLIAMENT finally passed the Rwanda Bill last week.

Now we have to wait and see what happens in terms of implementation – but as I write this article, the legislation seems to already be having a huge geopolitical effect.

I have supported the Government in implementing the policy throughout the parliamentary process, because I believe that the levels of illegal immigration into this country have been too high.

In contrast, the Labour Party and other opposition parties have opposed these measures. Remarkably, the Labour Party has voted against tougher measures to tackle illegal immigration 139 times and have voted to block, delay or weaken plans to stop the boats 126 times.

Even more worryingly, Labour have declared that if elected they will repeal the Rwanda Bill even if it does prove to be effective in reducing the number of illegal crossings. I find this a remarkable admission – to end a policy that discourages these dangerous and unsustainable crossings.

And the question remains, to all who criticise the policy, what is your alternative?

All of this highlights an even more basic and fundamental question. How much uncontrolled immigration does this country want – and indeed, how much can we actually deal with?

Controlled legal immigration is one thing. My view is that it can have benefits, especially when those coming to the country have the skills we need and the desire to want to be a part of our society.

But this needs to be at a level that the host country finds acceptable and can sensibly absorb. This means that immigration should not have a detrimental impact on our health service, education, housing, or other public services.

At the level we have experienced in recent years, I am not sure that this has been the case. I also believe that 'multiculturalism' has not really worked as promised. We must quite sharply tack to an integrationist immigration approach. This will ensure that the fabric of our society and the British way of life will be preserved, while at the same time also maximising the benefits for those who have come to this country to truly contribute and be a part of it.

As for illegal entry into the country, I am fully behind the Government. Illegal entry undermines our entire immigration system. It is, of course, grossly unfair on those who are legal migrants – as well as to the rest of the country. And when the asylum process is used by individuals who have come through safe countries, this undermines the entire asylum process as well.

Paying people smugglers to break British law while residing in a safe country should never be an option – and we have seen a number of tragedies occur as a result of this practice.

I still find it remarkable that there are people in this country who seem to want to encourage or support these crossings.

If we do not make a realistic attempt to curtail legal immigration and abolish illegal immigration, we will completely lose control. It is true that this is a global issue, and it is interesting to see in the US that they are experiencing similar problems, where a failure to control illegal immigration has resulted in a huge influx into the country.

As for our European neighbours, they are watching the Rwanda policy very closely – and I would not be surprised if a similar scheme is enacted, either by some member states or by the EU itself as a whole.

If that happens, I wonder where it would leave our country were the Labour Party to go through with its intention of abolishing the Rwanda policy.

The fact is that in accommodating and looking after those who have come by boats to our country, we have seen an impact on those who are vulnerable and in need of help within our own society.

Ultimately, the success or otherwise of the Rwanda policy will not be proved in the numbers of people removed to Rwanda, but in the reduction of people attempting the dangerous and illegal crossing of the English Channel.

I will be hoping that these numbers are decreased, for the sake of everyone involved.