MR Glen devoted nearly half his column last week to the plight of the Afghan refugee, Reza Maghsoudi, and how he was working hard on his behalf and ensuring that the case is ‘on the personal radar of the minister’ as he put it (View from the Commons, January 4).

It is of course welcome that he is doing so and we can only hope that his, and Reza’s supporters’ efforts, are successful.

But why is Reza in this predicament?

Why is he locked up in a detention centre with the prospect of being returned to the second most dangerous country in the world?

It is as a direct result of a wide range of aggressive policies which have been introduced with the intention of deterring such people from coming or seeking asylum here. Benefits have been reduced to the lowest in Europe; housing is of a standard a select committee described as ‘disgraceful’, and where benefits are eligible to be paid, they are needlessly delayed.

These and other policies have been supported or voted for by Mr Glen and, in a speech in the House of Commons in 2013 he said: ‘One aspect of that reform, referred to in the Queen’s Speech, is access to benefits for immigrants. It is right that the Government are considering limiting access to housing benefit and health care for people who have not earned the right to it. It is not enough to keep ignoring that uncomfortable truth because we are frightened of being too right wing, too nasty or too unpleasant ...’ (debate on the Queen’s Speech).

There is a kind of irony here with Mr Glen now helping someone who is a victim of an aggressive set of policies of which he has been such a keen supporter.

Peter Curbishley, Great Durnford