To answer these criticisms, Ms Patel’s Bill proposes a one-stop shop where asylum seekers will have to lodge up front at the start of the process all their evidence backing their asylum application and potential grounds for appealing a rejected claim.

It is seen by Ms Patel as one of the most significant reforms and is designed to end the “merry go round” of appeals which mean that applications take on average more than 500 days to process, notwithstanding the delays and problems that then follow in seeking to remove them from the UK.

9. Offshore processing centres for migrants

Offshore processing centres which are also enacted by the Nationalities and Borders Bill are “still on the table”, according to ministers, despite being rebuffed last week by Albania after ministers opened preliminary talks for the Balkan state to host them.

Channel migrants could be flown within seven days of their arrival in the UK to be held in the centres while their asylum application is processed. They would not return to the UK if rejected. It is seen by many Tory MPs as a critical reform to negate the “pull” factor of coming to Britain.

The downsides are the cost – estimated at as much as £100,000 for a migrant sent to Albania for example – and finding countries willing to take Britain’s asylum seekers.

10. France’s proposal for asylum reception centres in France

Pierre-Henri Dumont, the MP for Calais, has proposed that reception centres – situated miles from the northern French coast – should be used to house the migrants from which they could make asylum applications, including to the UK. Their removal to the centres would be compulsory.

This, he argues, would remove the need for migrants to make the perilous Channel crossing. If rejected, they would be deported to their home country. If accepted, they would cross to the UK. “They would have a safe route to the UK if that application was agreed,” he said.