MONDAY saw a Commons vote on an amendment to the Immigration Bill, which would have forced the Government to extend help to unaccompanied child refugees who are stranded in Europe, after fleeing Syria and other war-torn countries.

The amendment was tabled by Labour’s Lord Dubs, who came to Britain as a child refugee through the government-backed Kindertransport before the Second World War. His amendment had been passed by the House of Lords, and would have required the Government to relocate and support 3,000 unaccompanied children from Europe.

UNICEF, Save the Children and others had suggested the figure of 3,000 as a "fair share" of the UK’s contribution to tackling the growing problem. There are currently an estimated 26,000 unaccompanied child refugees in Europe, many of whom have fled the fighting in Syria, but also other countries, and Labour have repeatedly called on the Government to do more to tackle the crisis.

Four days before this debate, ministers - trying to stave off a rebellion from fellow Conservatives - announced limited plans to resettle “the most vulnerable children, accompanied by their families” from the Middle East and North Africa. This was welcome, but fundamentally didn't address the issue that we were fighting for action on - the fate of unaccompanied refugee children already in Europe, many of whom are among the most vulnerable.

That’s why I and my colleagues voted against Government plans to remove the Dubs Amendment from the Immigration Bill. However the Tories defeated the amendment by just 18 votes.

It simply doesn’t make sense. It would have been an important and overdue step to help some of the most vulnerable refugees that have sought sanctuary in Europe. It would not have solved the problem on its own, but it would have been an important step forward.

Many constituents contacted me in support of the amendment. Some are concerned from a wider humanitarian point of view - while others have personal or family experience of fleeing war, and I’ve heard some truly harrowing tales. I asked the Minister: “Does he not agree that when children survive such horrific tragedies, we need to do our bit in taking some of them here for protection in this country?”

The Government should have acted much more quickly on this over the last year - their response has been slow, limited and reluctant, and Monday’s vote means another vital opportunity has been lost.