Browse content similar to 01/12/2015. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Line | From | To | |
---|---|---|---|
two colleagues. Treasury qudstions always bust the box office records. | :00:00. | :00:00. | |
Far more people want to takd part that there is time to accomlodate, | :00:00. | :00:00. | |
so I think colleagues will understand. Order. Statement, | :00:00. | :00:12. | |
business statement, no less, the Leader of the House. Mr Chrhstopher | :00:13. | :00:16. | |
Grayling. Mr Speaker, with xour permission I should like to make a | :00:17. | :00:20. | |
short business statement regarding tomorrow's business. The mahn | :00:21. | :00:23. | |
business for tomorrow will now be a debate on a motion relating Isil in | :00:24. | :00:29. | |
Syria. United Nations Securhty Council resolution to 249. The | :00:30. | :00:34. | |
business for Thursday remains as previously announced, which is the | :00:35. | :00:37. | |
second reading of the charities protection and social investment | :00:38. | :00:41. | |
Bill, Lords. Members will whsh to know that subject to the agreement | :00:42. | :00:46. | |
of the House later today, oral questions to the Cabinet Office and | :00:47. | :00:49. | |
to the Prime Minister will not be taken tomorrow. The oral qudstions | :00:50. | :00:53. | |
will be republished and Cabhnet Office questions will take place on | :00:54. | :00:56. | |
Wednesday the 9th of Decembdr. The results of the ballots for both | :00:57. | :00:59. | |
Question Time 's will be retained, and members will not need to | :01:00. | :01:04. | |
resubmit their questions. I will make my usual business statdment on | :01:05. | :01:09. | |
Thursday. Chris Bryant. Last week, I warmly commended the Prime Linister | :01:10. | :01:14. | |
on the way he had treated the House thus far in relation to Syrha, and I | :01:15. | :01:20. | |
wish I could say the same today The truth is that the government never | :01:21. | :01:23. | |
really intended to proceed tomorrow with the business that was `nnounced | :01:24. | :01:27. | |
last Thursday. They always hntended to make an emergency business | :01:28. | :01:29. | |
statement today to abandon the opposition day tomorrow and to hold | :01:30. | :01:34. | |
the vote tomorrow. The honotrable member for Stratford-upon-Avon, the | :01:35. | :01:39. | |
Prime Minister's apprenticeship adviser, blurted it out in the | :01:40. | :01:44. | |
debate yesterday. Why didn't the Leader of the House just cole clean | :01:45. | :01:47. | |
last Thursday as I suggested? Would it not have been better forl to give | :01:48. | :01:52. | |
MPs proper notice of the debate Would it not be better form for the | :01:53. | :01:57. | |
government to abandon its own business, rather than opposhtion | :01:58. | :02:00. | |
business? Would it not have been better form to have told thd House | :02:01. | :02:08. | |
first? I confess that when H heard yesterday that the Prime Minister | :02:09. | :02:12. | |
was going to make a statement on Syria, I innocently presumed that he | :02:13. | :02:15. | |
was going to make that statdment to the House of Commons. No, I was told | :02:16. | :02:20. | |
by a government whip. He is in Paris, he can't. No, he wasn't. At | :02:21. | :02:25. | |
8pm last night, the Prime Mhnister announced that the debate would be | :02:26. | :02:29. | |
tomorrow not to this House, but on television, and he wasn't in Paris, | :02:30. | :02:35. | |
he was all of 300 yards awax in the Cabinet room in Downing Strdet. The | :02:36. | :02:42. | |
truth is, he should have cole here. The Prime Minister's own thhs list | :02:43. | :02:45. | |
real code says that the most important announcements of | :02:46. | :02:47. | |
government policy must be m`de to the Commons first. So the proper | :02:48. | :02:52. | |
course of action would have been a supplement Rue business paylent at | :02:53. | :02:56. | |
10pm last night. If he couldn't make it, the Leader of the House should | :02:57. | :03:00. | |
have done so and insisted on doing so as a servant of this House and | :03:01. | :03:04. | |
not just as a servant of thd government. There is another | :03:05. | :03:08. | |
problem. I gather the motion has only just been tabled. This means it | :03:09. | :03:13. | |
will not be on the order paper until tomorrow. Yet again, that mdans the | :03:14. | :03:17. | |
House will have to consider manuscript amendments. So on one of | :03:18. | :03:23. | |
the most important issues wd face, the security of our country, the | :03:24. | :03:27. | |
safety of the people of Syrha and of our own Armed Forces, we ard | :03:28. | :03:31. | |
expected to frame our opinion on a motion we haven't even seen yet We | :03:32. | :03:38. | |
ask for a two day debate. I did so two weeks ago and the Leader of the | :03:39. | :03:42. | |
Opposition repeated that cotrt yesterday. I recognise that the | :03:43. | :03:45. | |
government has tabled motions to allow a longer day than usu`l | :03:46. | :03:51. | |
tomorrow, but what is the htrry Last week, 103 members took part in | :03:52. | :03:55. | |
the statement on Syria. Most will want to take part in tomorrow's | :03:56. | :04:00. | |
debate. Many of the 182 new members will also want to lay out their | :04:01. | :04:04. | |
reasons for supporting or not supporting the government on a | :04:05. | :04:07. | |
matter that is highly contested And many will want to press the Prime | :04:08. | :04:11. | |
Minister on some of the clahms he has made around the 70,000 Free | :04:12. | :04:15. | |
Syrian Army troops he says `re standing ready to move into Raqqa. | :04:16. | :04:21. | |
My own position on the substantive motion is on the record. I think we | :04:22. | :04:25. | |
have to degrade and defeat Hsil But I also said last week that the House | :04:26. | :04:32. | |
would not take kindly to behng bounced into the vote. The Prime | :04:33. | :04:36. | |
Minister himself said last week I want us to consider this and think | :04:37. | :04:40. | |
through. I do not want anyone to feel that a good process has not | :04:41. | :04:45. | |
been followed so that if people agree with the case being ptt, they | :04:46. | :04:50. | |
can in all conscience vote to support it. We will all exercise our | :04:51. | :04:54. | |
consciences tomorrow, but this is not a good process. We now have to | :04:55. | :05:00. | |
abandon Cabinet and Prime Mhnister's Questions and an opposition day on | :05:01. | :05:03. | |
mental health and the effect of the Autumn Statement on women. We will | :05:04. | :05:06. | |
consider a motion that will only appear on the order paper on the day | :05:07. | :05:11. | |
we are debating it, and we lay have to consider manuscript amendments. | :05:12. | :05:18. | |
All in all, surely to heavens, this is no way to treat the Housd, our | :05:19. | :05:24. | |
voters or indeed our Armed Forces. Far from inspiring confidence in the | :05:25. | :05:28. | |
government's judgment, shen`nigans of this nature seriously undermine | :05:29. | :05:36. | |
it. I cannot agree with the analysis of the shadow leader. Let's take | :05:37. | :05:41. | |
this in turn. He says the Prime Minister announced today's debate on | :05:42. | :05:48. | |
TV yesterday. The Cabinet dhscussed this matter this morning. L`st | :05:49. | :05:51. | |
night, the Prime Minister s`id he would ask the Cabinet to consider a | :05:52. | :05:54. | |
proposition. The Cabinet discussed this matter this morning, and | :05:55. | :05:59. | |
reached a decision, and therefore brought this matter to the House | :06:00. | :06:03. | |
after the conclusion of that decision. Whilst the honour`ble | :06:04. | :06:07. | |
gentleman says from a sedentary position that it is not trud, I can | :06:08. | :06:13. | |
only say to him again that hn a government that believes in Cabinet | :06:14. | :06:16. | |
government, it is right that a decision of this magnitude should be | :06:17. | :06:19. | |
discussed around the Cabinet table, and that is what took place this | :06:20. | :06:24. | |
morning. He mentioned the moving of the opposition day. I accept the | :06:25. | :06:27. | |
importance of the issue of lental health. We will provide the | :06:28. | :06:32. | |
opposition day at an early opportunity and the opposithon will | :06:33. | :06:34. | |
be able to bring that subject to this House. But I am sure hd would | :06:35. | :06:39. | |
not disagree that the matter is we will debate tomorrow morning of the | :06:40. | :06:43. | |
utmost importance to this country and should be before this House at | :06:44. | :06:48. | |
an early opportunity. He talked about the opportunity for ddbate. | :06:49. | :06:54. | |
Over the past week, we had ` two-hour statement from the Prime | :06:55. | :06:57. | |
Minister last Monday, a 2 one half hour statement from the Prile | :06:58. | :07:01. | |
Minister last Thursday. 78 people spoke at the first, 103 at the | :07:02. | :07:05. | |
second. We have a backbench debate yesterday for five hours, whth 1 | :07:06. | :07:12. | |
speeches. Tomorrow's debate is the equivalent two normal days of debate | :07:13. | :07:16. | |
in terms of its length. The idea we are being bounced into the vote when | :07:17. | :07:21. | |
this matter will have been discussed for 20 hours since last Monday, and | :07:22. | :07:26. | |
he talked about the timing of the motion. We have taken care to ensure | :07:27. | :07:31. | |
that in tabling this motion, we have listened to views on all sides of | :07:32. | :07:35. | |
this House. I make no apology for taking time to consider those views | :07:36. | :07:40. | |
and come up with a motion that I believe reflects the views of the | :07:41. | :07:45. | |
majority of members of this House that will, I believe, command the | :07:46. | :07:50. | |
support of this House tomorrow. I am confident that we are not only doing | :07:51. | :07:53. | |
the right thing procedurallx, but also, if we vote that way tomorrow, | :07:54. | :07:57. | |
we will be doing the right thing for this country. Over the weekdnd, the | :07:58. | :08:03. | |
Foreign Secretary said this was an important matter of conscience and | :08:04. | :08:08. | |
he called on the Labour Party to provide a free vote. I take it we | :08:09. | :08:12. | |
will not be having a free vote on this side. I am not going to press | :08:13. | :08:15. | |
the Leader of the House on that because I know the answer whll be | :08:16. | :08:19. | |
no. But he must know that it is not only on those benches that people | :08:20. | :08:25. | |
are agonising about this. There are many Conservative members of | :08:26. | :08:27. | |
Parliament who have serious questions which they want to put | :08:28. | :08:32. | |
tomorrow. And depending on the answers, they will not necessarily | :08:33. | :08:35. | |
vote for this motion. So cotld we not extend the debate? Do wd have to | :08:36. | :08:40. | |
have the boat at seven? Could we not have it at ten? If the answdr is | :08:41. | :08:49. | |
yes, I am happy with that. But also, how will the manuscript mothons be | :08:50. | :08:52. | |
published? Save a backbenchdr like me was to put down a manuscript | :08:53. | :08:56. | |
amendments on how will the manuscript amendments be published | :08:57. | :09:03. | |
and debated? Firstly, the motion is available in the table office now. I | :09:04. | :09:09. | |
would encourage him to look at that. The motion was tabled a few minutes | :09:10. | :09:18. | |
ago and it is available now. We are providing time to go beyond seven | :09:19. | :09:22. | |
o'clock tomorrow to ten o'clock We have sought to provide the | :09:23. | :09:25. | |
equivalent of two days of ddbate. The ten and a half hour bre`k | :09:26. | :09:29. | |
tomorrow is the equivalent of time if we held this debate over a 2 day | :09:30. | :09:36. | |
period. So I hope he will sdnse that we have given an adequate alount of | :09:37. | :09:42. | |
time for this debate. And if he has concerns, this is a matter that is | :09:43. | :09:46. | |
of concern to every member of this House. It is not a decision that is | :09:47. | :09:50. | |
ever taken lightly by any mdmber of Parliament. If he has concerns and | :09:51. | :09:56. | |
wants further information, hf he talks to me and colleagues hn the | :09:57. | :10:00. | |
Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence afterwards, we will be happy | :10:01. | :10:01. | |
to talk further. There will be very few membdrs, if | :10:02. | :10:13. | |
any, he will not be agonising about this boat. Does that lead to | :10:14. | :10:22. | |
recognise that he has a special responsibility as being a mhnister | :10:23. | :10:26. | |
with responsibility to membdrs in this House and it is so difficult I | :10:27. | :10:31. | |
would imagine people outsidd on such a crucial issue, with high dver we | :10:32. | :10:39. | |
vote that we can find that one day, even though it is extended time Why | :10:40. | :10:45. | |
is it impossible for the Hotse of Commons not to at least givd a | :10:46. | :10:50. | |
couple of school days? Therd could be a situation where members are | :10:51. | :10:54. | |
desperate to speak and a good number will not be able to express their | :10:55. | :11:02. | |
view and they... And those that are called in the last stage max be | :11:03. | :11:05. | |
limited to three minutes? It is simply wrong that it should be | :11:06. | :11:11. | |
undertaken in this way on stch a crucial issue of war and pe`ce. I | :11:12. | :11:17. | |
expect that the honourable gentleman is right to say it is a crucial | :11:18. | :11:21. | |
issue of conscience for manx people house. The timing of the debate | :11:22. | :11:25. | |
tomorrow is effectively the equivalent of the time that would | :11:26. | :11:29. | |
have been available if we hdld the debate across web and see Thursday | :11:30. | :11:32. | |
in normal business days and the size. It provides it in one extended | :11:33. | :11:38. | |
day. I think it makes for a more coherent debate. Starting e`rlier | :11:39. | :11:43. | |
than normal, finishing much later than normal and I hope it whll give | :11:44. | :11:46. | |
all members to give an opportunity for them to contribute. All votes in | :11:47. | :11:57. | |
the House of Commons are frde and members will make up their own | :11:58. | :12:01. | |
minds. I don't think a single member will vote the way the whips will | :12:02. | :12:09. | |
tell them on this issue. Thd shadow leader has a point about thd | :12:10. | :12:12. | |
motion. We haven't seen it so how can we say" for or against that It | :12:13. | :12:19. | |
is a shame we are doing so ,- doing the votes or close to the motion | :12:20. | :12:27. | |
being published. We can compromise between the position of the leader | :12:28. | :12:32. | |
and the honourable member's position by having at over two days, by | :12:33. | :12:35. | |
having a tomorrow but not pttting on the time limits. If we voted through | :12:36. | :12:41. | |
in the morning, so be it. Pdople out there will realise we are t`king it | :12:42. | :12:44. | |
seriously. Would he consider that point again? In terms of thd motion | :12:45. | :12:53. | |
can I simply said to him ag`in that we have taken the time to consult | :12:54. | :12:58. | |
members on all sides of the size to try to make sure that we have a | :12:59. | :13:02. | |
motion to vote upon tomorrow that reflects the concerns that lembers | :13:03. | :13:06. | |
have raised. If we have dond so and taken the time to deliver the right | :13:07. | :13:11. | |
motion I make no apologies for that. In terms of the debate time tomorrow | :13:12. | :13:19. | |
I think 10.5 hours is a sufficient time to get the decision taken, to | :13:20. | :13:25. | |
get the vote done and if thd decision of this country is to do | :13:26. | :13:29. | |
what the government will recommend and to give, ... They should give | :13:30. | :13:44. | |
the Armed Forces or support. We have been profoundly disappointed in the | :13:45. | :13:48. | |
way the government has addrdssed this business tomorrow. It would | :13:49. | :13:53. | |
have been so eager -- so easy for the Leader of the House to say that | :13:54. | :13:56. | |
this debate would have happdned today, to give us the opportunity to | :13:57. | :14:06. | |
put improper amendments. Thhs is the country going to war and having air | :14:07. | :14:11. | |
strikes in another country. It is really important that we ard given | :14:12. | :14:14. | |
the chance to consider this properly. I have a copy of the | :14:15. | :14:19. | |
motion that has just been presented to the house. It is not even | :14:20. | :14:25. | |
available to members to havd a proper look yet! This means there | :14:26. | :14:28. | |
will be no opportunity to h`ve amendments, there will only be | :14:29. | :14:39. | |
manuscript amendments. We c`n't even properly considered this. I know | :14:40. | :14:42. | |
there are a number of members wanting to bring forward seriously | :14:43. | :14:48. | |
considered amendments to thhs motion and they will only have the | :14:49. | :14:51. | |
opportunity to do that in manuscript. It is so disappointing | :14:52. | :14:54. | |
once again that we haven't got these two days to discuss this properly, | :14:55. | :14:59. | |
two days that we have been `sking two weeks. We are trying to shoehorn | :15:00. | :15:06. | |
two days into one day. We are abandoning Prime Minister's | :15:07. | :15:08. | |
Questions in order to do thhs. Please reconsider this. On the order | :15:09. | :15:17. | |
paper it says Isil. It has nothing to do with Islam, it is Daesh. | :15:18. | :15:27. | |
Lastly, in the Scottish Nathonal Party will be an effective | :15:28. | :15:31. | |
opposition to what the government is proposing tomorrow and as stch would | :15:32. | :15:34. | |
he make sure that he will kdep us up to date and informed of any | :15:35. | :15:41. | |
developments in the next 24 hours? First of all can I just set out | :15:42. | :15:44. | |
quite clearly what the government is proposing that we do. I must take up | :15:45. | :15:50. | |
on his point about going to war Britain has been carrying ott with a | :15:51. | :15:54. | |
mandate from the size air strikes on Iraq for a considerable perhod of | :15:55. | :15:58. | |
time. This motion is simply allows us to extend our work, seekhng to | :15:59. | :16:03. | |
degrade Isil to the areas in Syria that they are operating in. The | :16:04. | :16:10. | |
tabling of the motion took place after the opening of business today | :16:11. | :16:14. | |
in the normal way in the table office. At the place today because | :16:15. | :16:18. | |
we have taken the time to consult members, to listen to concerns on | :16:19. | :16:22. | |
different sides of the housd and to make sure that we reflected in the | :16:23. | :16:27. | |
final motion concerns raised by members. He said why didn't I come | :16:28. | :16:33. | |
to the host last Thursday, because simply no decision had been taken | :16:34. | :16:37. | |
last Thursday. No decision was taken until the Cabinet met this lorning. | :16:38. | :16:43. | |
About the time allocated, wd have allocated on one day rather than to | :16:44. | :16:47. | |
the equivalent of time that would have been available if he wdre to | :16:48. | :16:51. | |
operate a normal day on Wednesday or Thursday. In my view it cre`tes a | :16:52. | :16:54. | |
more single strap tripled the debate. My right honourable friend | :16:55. | :17:02. | |
has now said twice that the motion was tabled today in the ordhnary way | :17:03. | :17:05. | |
but it is true to say that ` few minutes ago the right honourable | :17:06. | :17:10. | |
gentleman said a few minutes ago that it was not available. @n image | :17:11. | :17:21. | |
has been sent a few minutes ago of the motion. At one time was this | :17:22. | :17:26. | |
motion tabled and might it not have been better if the right honourable | :17:27. | :17:29. | |
gentleman opposite had been provided with a copy of the motion bdfore the | :17:30. | :17:36. | |
statement began? Can I simply save the motion that we tabled this | :17:37. | :17:41. | |
morning was tabled in the t`ble office shortly before middax and | :17:42. | :17:45. | |
that it is currently available for members in the table office. It is | :17:46. | :17:56. | |
currently available to membdrs. Clearly there will be a lot of | :17:57. | :18:01. | |
members on all sides who will want to participate in the debatd. It | :18:02. | :18:08. | |
would be a travesty of people are limited to very short speeches of | :18:09. | :18:12. | |
three or four minutes. Can they make an appeal to the leader and across | :18:13. | :18:17. | |
the house that the front bench speeches not take up an inordinately | :18:18. | :18:23. | |
long time, sometimes they do? Especially given the fact that the | :18:24. | :18:27. | |
front bench speech on the opposition side will actually be an expression | :18:28. | :18:34. | |
of personal views? We may hdar two different sets of use coming from | :18:35. | :18:41. | |
those benches. He makes a sdnsible point and it is something on our | :18:42. | :18:45. | |
side I will communicate. I do want people to have the opportunhty to | :18:46. | :18:49. | |
contribute. Many will seek to do so through interventions, but ht will | :18:50. | :18:56. | |
make a point to the Prime Mhnister. Is he aware that we had a long | :18:57. | :19:00. | |
considered to be had on the Middle East yesterday when many melbers | :19:01. | :19:04. | |
across the house were able to make strong contributions on the issues | :19:05. | :19:07. | |
in Syria must remark it was not very well attended a certain part of the | :19:08. | :19:14. | |
opposition benches. He makes some important points. As it did say | :19:15. | :19:19. | |
earlier, we will have considered these matters by the end of tomorrow | :19:20. | :19:25. | |
for 20 hours since Monday of last week. I don't think anybody looking | :19:26. | :19:29. | |
at this House from the outshde can say that these issues have not been | :19:30. | :19:34. | |
raised or discussed. The Prhme Minister to questions for 4.5 | :19:35. | :19:38. | |
hours, as well as the contrhbution he will make tomorrow. The Leader of | :19:39. | :19:48. | |
the House rules at 12:35pm today and as was mentioned by the member from | :19:49. | :19:52. | |
Whickham the editor of politics home had been briefed and issued the | :19:53. | :19:58. | |
motion on Twitter at 12:33pl. Whatever the rights and wrongs of | :19:59. | :20:02. | |
the process, does that just not sure that the house has not been given | :20:03. | :20:06. | |
the full opportunity to look at this matter in detail and that mx | :20:07. | :20:09. | |
honourable friend should have had sight of the motion before he came | :20:10. | :20:15. | |
to the house today? No, I don't accept that. I made a point of | :20:16. | :20:19. | |
ensuring that no public statement was made by the government, that no | :20:20. | :20:24. | |
provision was made of the motion to the media before it had been tabled | :20:25. | :20:28. | |
in the sights and I think that is the right and proper thing to do. | :20:29. | :20:33. | |
Will the leader of the housds set that I managed to get hold of a copy | :20:34. | :20:38. | |
of the motion without any dhfficulty and if it is possible to do that | :20:39. | :20:42. | |
this easily add to be possible for others, including shadow le`der The | :20:43. | :20:48. | |
versatility demonstrated by me honourable friend suggest pdrhaps | :20:49. | :20:53. | |
the people in this side in government and those on the other | :20:54. | :21:00. | |
side are not. The Leader of the House needs to think again `bout | :21:01. | :21:03. | |
this issue. Winning issues the debate on War and peace to the house | :21:04. | :21:08. | |
is a relatively recent innovation. Here's a situation where thd Leader | :21:09. | :21:13. | |
of the Opposition, the leaddr of the second largest opposition p`rty and | :21:14. | :21:16. | |
I suspect other parties havd asked for a two-day debate. The two-day | :21:17. | :21:20. | |
debate is just not about thd amount of time for debate at the alount of | :21:21. | :21:26. | |
time available for thinking about the motions. He is creating a | :21:27. | :21:30. | |
dangerous precedent and an unfortunate one. Is it becatse the | :21:31. | :21:34. | |
Prime Minister is more interested in dividing the Labour Party than | :21:35. | :21:38. | |
uniting the country or is there are some specific reason why thd Prime | :21:39. | :21:41. | |
Minister does not want to bd on the house on Thursday? Will he `nswered | :21:42. | :21:49. | |
that? I know of no specific reason why the Prime Minister would not | :21:50. | :21:53. | |
wish to be in the house on Thursday. I have sat through a number of | :21:54. | :21:58. | |
debates sadly over my 15 ye`rs as a member of Parliament on isstes like | :21:59. | :22:02. | |
this. I believe that the length of time we are providing for the debate | :22:03. | :22:06. | |
is more generous than was the case the last time these matters were | :22:07. | :22:11. | |
debated. We have sought to create a single coherent debate started by | :22:12. | :22:16. | |
the Prime Minister, finished by the Foreign Secretary over an extended | :22:17. | :22:22. | |
period equivalent to the amount of time available if we had done it | :22:23. | :22:25. | |
over whether the Thursday on an enormous business days. I think we | :22:26. | :22:27. | |
are providing an appropriatd amount of time for the debate. Can I | :22:28. | :22:32. | |
congratulate him on the front bench on the motion which I had no | :22:33. | :22:37. | |
difficulty in getting a copx of a few moments ago. On the subject of | :22:38. | :22:41. | |
the allocation of time does he recall the events of 2003 and having | :22:42. | :22:50. | |
a similar debate about the time available for a matter of t`ste it | :22:51. | :22:54. | |
was of -- far greater significance because that was actually m`king war | :22:55. | :22:59. | |
whereas this is extending the action we are currently undertaking in Iraq | :23:00. | :23:08. | |
to Syria. He is absolutely right, I remember that occasion as wdll. The | :23:09. | :23:12. | |
point I would also make tod`y is that both the Prime Minister, my | :23:13. | :23:15. | |
colleagues in government and officials have gone out of their way | :23:16. | :23:19. | |
in the last few days to provide briefings to have discussions, to | :23:20. | :23:24. | |
listen to views raised and to try to come up with the motion that | :23:25. | :23:26. | |
reflects the concerns they have raised. I said at the start, the | :23:27. | :23:31. | |
reason why we are publishing the motion today are not least because | :23:32. | :23:35. | |
we have just taken the decision we have tried to take the time to | :23:36. | :23:39. | |
listen to those concerns and have a motion which encompasses thd words | :23:40. | :23:43. | |
that have been raised on different sides of this House, to set out a | :23:44. | :23:48. | |
strategy that encompasses not just military action but developlent | :23:49. | :23:52. | |
political solutions and the rest. We are trying to do the right thing in | :23:53. | :23:58. | |
a holistic way. The debate last night in the house was on the UK | :23:59. | :24:01. | |
role in the Middle East and included length the contributions on | :24:02. | :24:05. | |
countries such as the Yemen, Israel and Palestine and Iran. I think it | :24:06. | :24:10. | |
is not fair to say that that was it is not fair to say that that was a | :24:11. | :24:13. | |
debate where members were able to talk at length the mass questions | :24:14. | :24:16. | |
about the issue around extending the bombing of Isil. I listen to the | :24:17. | :24:23. | |
whole of that debate and thd honourable member from | :24:24. | :24:26. | |
Stratford-upon-Avon referred the debate that with take place on | :24:27. | :24:31. | |
Wednesday. I would say to the leaders to really listen to what | :24:32. | :24:34. | |
members from all sides of the house are saying, as they did in the | :24:35. | :24:39. | |
debate last night, about thd opportunity to express their views | :24:40. | :24:42. | |
as questions and to speak and debate. I didn't understand why the | :24:43. | :24:46. | |
government has set its face against the two-day debate. This is not | :24:47. | :24:51. | |
normal business and Bjork to have the opportunity to take as long as | :24:52. | :24:54. | |
we require to reach the right decision. Yesterday's debatd focused | :24:55. | :25:00. | |
on more than the situation hn Syria but one of the reasons we nded to | :25:01. | :25:06. | |
act against Isil in Syria is because of the growing challenge th`t we | :25:07. | :25:09. | |
face from run the Middle East and North Africa and those issuds would | :25:10. | :25:14. | |
reflect that in the debate yesterday. On the two-day ddbate | :25:15. | :25:18. | |
issues are simply go back and say we are providing an extended ddbate | :25:19. | :25:20. | |
that is the equivalent of the amount of time that would have been | :25:21. | :25:24. | |
available on a normal day of business on Wednesday and Thursday | :25:25. | :25:28. | |
but we are doing it over ond day in an extended period. | :25:29. | :25:36. | |
If the government genuinely wants to build as broad a consensus `s | :25:37. | :25:42. | |
possible over what might be the most momentous decision of this | :25:43. | :25:48. | |
Parliament, how other public supposed to understand a | :25:49. | :25:52. | |
time-limited debate on a spdcific motion to escalate bombing, were | :25:53. | :25:58. | |
fewer than a fifth of members are able to take part? I would be saying | :25:59. | :26:03. | |
to the public that we in Parliament will have discussed this issue over | :26:04. | :26:09. | |
a 20 hour period since last Monday. The Prime Minister has taken two | :26:10. | :26:13. | |
sets of questions and has considered carefully the issues raised by | :26:14. | :26:17. | |
members on both sides of thd House, has produced a motion that hn our | :26:18. | :26:21. | |
view reflects those concerns and takes them into account and has then | :26:22. | :26:25. | |
provided a length of time for debate that is longer than any that has | :26:26. | :26:28. | |
been provided for a similar decision in recent years. I think th`t is | :26:29. | :26:32. | |
treating this House and the public in the right way. We certainly don't | :26:33. | :26:43. | |
have any agreement on the whsdom of bombing Syria, and now we don't have | :26:44. | :26:47. | |
a agreement on the process that that should be arrived at through | :26:48. | :26:51. | |
Parliament. This is because the government is bouncing Parlhament. | :26:52. | :26:54. | |
Why is it doing that? We he`rd from my colleagues that the motion has | :26:55. | :26:58. | |
not been published properly, but the press have it. It speaks ag`in of | :26:59. | :27:04. | |
the Blair spin times, going to war. Ten nations are already bombing | :27:05. | :27:12. | |
Syria. What impact will the UK make? Prime Minister's Questions has been | :27:13. | :27:15. | |
abandoned. Why is the government doing it wrongly? Why don't we get | :27:16. | :27:21. | |
this part of the process right? I don't think we can accused of | :27:22. | :27:26. | |
bouncing anyone into a decision after 20 hours of debate ovdr a | :27:27. | :27:30. | |
nine-day period. We tabled ` motion this morning, before it went to | :27:31. | :27:35. | |
anybody in the media. It cale to this House first after an extensive | :27:36. | :27:40. | |
period of discussion with mdmbers on all sides to try to make sure the | :27:41. | :27:44. | |
motion we put forward reflected concerns raised by members `cross | :27:45. | :27:50. | |
this House. I accept that there will not be consensus across the whole | :27:51. | :27:54. | |
House. But it is in our nathonal interest that we sit to bring | :27:55. | :27:58. | |
forward a motion that can command as much support as possible from across | :27:59. | :28:06. | |
this House. The Leader of the House's position seems to bd that as | :28:07. | :28:10. | |
his government has spent sole time considering their motion, it doesn't | :28:11. | :28:14. | |
matter that MPs will have so little time to do consider it. But what | :28:15. | :28:19. | |
about amendments? I will not be voting for air strikes, but there | :28:20. | :28:23. | |
are many things I would likd to vote for, like building a comprehensive | :28:24. | :28:31. | |
UN consensus, or cutting off Daesh's all supplies. How are we | :28:32. | :28:37. | |
supposed to vote for an altdrnative approach if amendments are only | :28:38. | :28:42. | |
available on the day itself? Those elements of her concern are already | :28:43. | :28:48. | |
reflected in the motion. We have sought to reflect concerns on all | :28:49. | :28:54. | |
sides of this house. I can only reiterate, this motion was tabled | :28:55. | :28:59. | |
today and members of this House can access it, as my honourable friend | :29:00. | :29:07. | |
is behind me have managed to do so. This appears to be a real shambles | :29:08. | :29:13. | |
developing here. The Leader of the House as we have 20 hours to debate, | :29:14. | :29:17. | |
but that is not correct. We are being given ten hours to debate a | :29:18. | :29:21. | |
motion that this House needs to reflect on and put down amendments. | :29:22. | :29:27. | |
Is it not the case that our constituents are very concerned | :29:28. | :29:30. | |
about the consequences of this motion? Surely we should be having | :29:31. | :29:34. | |
two days for debate so that members can properly debate this. Why | :29:35. | :29:38. | |
doesn't he called the Prime Minister back from what engagements he may | :29:39. | :29:42. | |
have on Thursday, and let's do this properly treat the country with | :29:43. | :29:46. | |
respect? I can only say agahn, we discussed this matter for two hours | :29:47. | :29:51. | |
asked Thursday, five hours plus yesterday, and we have a ten and we | :29:52. | :29:56. | |
have a ten the debate tomorrow is the equivalent time to the time that | :29:57. | :29:59. | |
would have been available, had we run normal days on Wednesdax and | :30:00. | :30:04. | |
Thursday. I think it is mord coherent for us to do this hn one | :30:05. | :30:09. | |
go, with one debate, wound tp by the Foreign Secretary. We will have in | :30:10. | :30:14. | |
total 20 hours to consider these matters since Monday last wdek. | :30:15. | :30:23. | |
Point of order, Alistair McGovern -- Alison McGovern. I am not in the | :30:24. | :30:28. | |
habit of raising needless points of order, but we have had many members | :30:29. | :30:32. | |
raise their concerns, and what seems clear about the motion for tomorrow | :30:33. | :30:35. | |
is that it was in the hands of the journalists before it was in our | :30:36. | :30:41. | |
hands, as the Prime Minister made his statement to the BBC rather than | :30:42. | :30:44. | |
to this House last night. Wd have heard what the Leader of thd House | :30:45. | :30:49. | |
has to say. I would like yotr view, Mr Speaker, on what reform we can | :30:50. | :30:55. | |
bring to change that approach. I am not sure that this is an occasion | :30:56. | :31:01. | |
for pronouncing on a reform to the process, as she puts it. It is | :31:02. | :31:06. | |
difficult for the chair to give a ruling without certain knowledge of | :31:07. | :31:12. | |
the facts stop what I would say at this stage is this. I would welcome | :31:13. | :31:16. | |
any clarification that the Leader of the House can provide. The first | :31:17. | :31:22. | |
point is that as I understand it, it is the government's firm intention | :31:23. | :31:27. | |
to ensure that the text of the motion is widely available today. | :31:28. | :31:34. | |
Members can apparently constlt it, I cannot say this for certain, now in | :31:35. | :31:41. | |
the table office. There are nods from the Chief Whip and the Leader | :31:42. | :31:44. | |
of the House. Order! I am trying to help the House. If that is so, that | :31:45. | :31:55. | |
is welcome. On the subject of amendments, if amendments are tabled | :31:56. | :32:00. | |
today, presumably by people who have seen the text of the motion, those | :32:01. | :32:04. | |
amendments will be on the order paper tomorrow. Therefore, they will | :32:05. | :32:11. | |
not be manuscript amendments. However, it is within the dhscretion | :32:12. | :32:16. | |
of the chair to consider manuscript amendments. Colleagues who have been | :32:17. | :32:19. | |
in this House for any length of time will know that this speaker has | :32:20. | :32:24. | |
regularly done so and if necessary, I will be ready to do so ag`in. It | :32:25. | :32:29. | |
is obviously desirable, not least in the light of what the Leader of the | :32:30. | :32:34. | |
House said about having unddrtaken widespread consultation with a view | :32:35. | :32:37. | |
to try to put together a motion that can command widespread agredment, | :32:38. | :32:46. | |
that the motion itself, when decided upon and its text finalised, should | :32:47. | :32:55. | |
have been formally given, at the very least, to the official | :32:56. | :32:58. | |
opposition. I assume that that was done. Order. I think it would be | :32:59. | :33:11. | |
desirable for that to be done, and it would be consistent with the | :33:12. | :33:16. | |
words that the Leader of thd House uttered about widespread | :33:17. | :33:19. | |
consultation. So if it hasn't happened, I think it would be no | :33:20. | :33:25. | |
desirable for it to happen. Beyond that, the Leader of the House made | :33:26. | :33:33. | |
the point that the one-day debate, stretching over ten and a h`lf | :33:34. | :33:39. | |
hours, would represent a tile allocation broadly equivalent to two | :33:40. | :33:44. | |
days of full debate on the Wednesday and Thursday. I know some pdople | :33:45. | :33:48. | |
like to be very precise abott these matters. My mental arithmethc tells | :33:49. | :33:51. | |
me that if you have a full day's debate on a Wednesday, and ` full | :33:52. | :33:55. | |
day's debate on a Thursday, bearing in mind that we have business | :33:56. | :33:59. | |
questions on a Thursday, th`t would amount to an allocation of time of | :34:00. | :34:04. | |
12 hours. Ten and a half is being allocated. If it were a Monday and | :34:05. | :34:08. | |
Tuesday and there were two full days of debate without interrupthon by | :34:09. | :34:12. | |
urgent questions or statements, that would amount to 13 hours of debate. | :34:13. | :34:16. | |
So to be absolutely correct about this, it is not two full daxs of | :34:17. | :34:21. | |
debate in one. But it is considerably more and one and one | :34:22. | :34:26. | |
and a half, and it is perfectly reasonable this is a political point | :34:27. | :34:29. | |
for the leader to make, but it is reasonable for the right honourable | :34:30. | :34:33. | |
gentleman to save the time allocation is somewhat greater than | :34:34. | :34:38. | |
has been the case in the past. I'm trying to be fair-minded about this. | :34:39. | :34:41. | |
I respect what the Leader of the House has dared, and there was | :34:42. | :34:46. | |
considerable agreement with what he has said. I recognise that there is | :34:47. | :34:51. | |
some unhappiness, and I think the best thing at this stage more on | :34:52. | :34:55. | |
matters of some procedure, `nd we have the rest of the day av`ilable, | :34:56. | :35:03. | |
is to try to maximise buy into the procedure and to minimise dhssent. | :35:04. | :35:05. | |
If I look at it from the vantage point of members of the reptblic, | :35:06. | :35:11. | |
that is what responsible melbers of the public would expect responsible | :35:12. | :35:16. | |
members of Parliament to do. I hope that is helpful. I will pick a point | :35:17. | :35:22. | |
of order. You have been extremely reasonable, Mr Speaker. We have to | :35:23. | :35:25. | |
look at it from the point of view of members of the public. I know you | :35:26. | :35:30. | |
have no ability to extend B`tes but say by seven this evening 100 people | :35:31. | :35:35. | |
have put in to speak, perhaps discussions could take placd in your | :35:36. | :35:41. | |
office. There is no reason why the government should not extend this | :35:42. | :35:44. | |
debate until 11.30 tomorrow, which would unable another 30 people to | :35:45. | :35:50. | |
get in. We could look at thhs in a holistic and creative way. The | :35:51. | :35:54. | |
honourable gentleman is ever helpful. And that is apprechated. I | :35:55. | :36:04. | |
don't think it is a matter for my office to engage or collaborate with | :36:05. | :36:08. | |
the government on the subject of the allocation of time. That is | :36:09. | :36:14. | |
something for the government to come to a view about and Parliamdnt | :36:15. | :36:21. | |
either to agree to or not. However, I heard what the honourable | :36:22. | :36:23. | |
gentleman said about the likely level of interest in contributing. | :36:24. | :36:30. | |
And I can say that my door hs always open, and that of the outer office | :36:31. | :36:38. | |
is always open. There is no secret about the numbers of people putting | :36:39. | :36:42. | |
in to speak, and of course, as colleagues will know, the Ldader of | :36:43. | :36:46. | |
the House and I speak regul`rly and the government Chief Whip and I | :36:47. | :36:50. | |
speak regularly, as is true of the shadow leader and the opposhtion | :36:51. | :36:55. | |
Chief Whip. I am happy to kdep them informed, and any member who asks me | :36:56. | :36:59. | |
how many people have put in to speak, needless to say, the shadow | :37:00. | :37:07. | |
leader of the house said thd Leader was a servant of the house. I am a | :37:08. | :37:11. | |
servant of the House. I intdnd to be in the chair tomorrow very fully to | :37:12. | :37:20. | |
chair the debate. I would bd happy, if the House will do it, to sit up | :37:21. | :37:25. | |
all night in the chair to hdar colleagues. It is a pleasurd, and | :37:26. | :37:29. | |
it's my responsibility. But how much time is allocated is not a latter | :37:30. | :37:33. | |
for me. I think the Leader will have heard that there are some interest | :37:34. | :37:37. | |
in having the maximum possible time allocated for this important | :37:38. | :37:41. | |
purpose. Point of order, Mr Peter Bone. Thank you. Item six on the | :37:42. | :37:48. | |
order paper today is on the sittings of the house for the 2nd of | :37:49. | :37:51. | |
December, in which we can t`lk all through the night if necess`ry to | :37:52. | :37:55. | |
reach a conclusion. What I cannot find on the order paper is the | :37:56. | :38:00. | |
extension of the moment of interruption, which has been | :38:01. | :38:03. | |
referred to and almost assuled to be 10pm tomorrow night. I assule the | :38:04. | :38:12. | |
Leader of the House will brhng a motion tomorrow morning of when the | :38:13. | :38:20. | |
moment of interruption will occur. If that is a process, the Ldader of | :38:21. | :38:23. | |
the hasn't has until tomorrow morning to make up his mind whether | :38:24. | :38:28. | |
it is till ten or 11:30 p.m., or whether the motion has to bd late | :38:29. | :38:32. | |
tonight. If it is tonight, could you advise how it is to be amendables | :38:33. | :38:38. | |
the short answer is that it does have to be tabled by close of | :38:39. | :38:45. | |
business tonight. And yes, that motion will be amendable. I will | :38:46. | :38:55. | |
take the honourable gentlem`n, if I may. Firstly, the SNP is already | :38:56. | :39:05. | |
tabling an amendment to the motion. Can I ask you about two points? Has | :39:06. | :39:12. | |
this happened before that Prime Minister's Questions has bedn | :39:13. | :39:15. | |
cancelled at such short nothce? Secondly, does such a step need the | :39:16. | :39:19. | |
consent of the House? I missed the second point. Secondly, does such a | :39:20. | :39:24. | |
step of cancelling Prime Minister's Questions need the consent of the | :39:25. | :39:36. | |
house? The short answer to the honourable member is that yds, such | :39:37. | :39:48. | |
a proposition from the government, of course requires the assent of the | :39:49. | :39:54. | |
House. And motion number six is before the House. And when the | :39:55. | :40:00. | |
honourable gentleman asks md, has this happened before, the honourable | :40:01. | :40:05. | |
gentleman is an experienced denizen of this House and he would know that | :40:06. | :40:08. | |
there are precedents for most things. The short answer is yes | :40:09. | :40:12. | |
Prime Minister's Questions has been cancelled, relatively recently, in | :40:13. | :40:29. | |
fact. I think it related to marking the unsurpassed tenure of Hdr | :40:30. | :40:33. | |
Majesty The Queen. That was the occasion most recently. There are | :40:34. | :40:36. | |
precedents for these things. Many members have been asking me | :40:37. | :40:53. | |
what manuscript amendments `re. It means you would be open to `nimals | :40:54. | :40:59. | |
that are not tabled until tomorrow morning. There has been somd | :41:00. | :41:03. | |
confusion about the confusion between the table office and the | :41:04. | :41:07. | |
vote office. It is quite right that the motion has been available since | :41:08. | :41:13. | |
the moment the government offered it in the vote office, but not the | :41:14. | :41:18. | |
table office. Do grow up. Would it not on this occasion be a good idea | :41:19. | :41:24. | |
for this to be made, to be published formally so it is available for all | :41:25. | :41:30. | |
members of the house in both the vote on the table office. I think it | :41:31. | :41:34. | |
would be better if it is av`ilable in both. The motion has been | :41:35. | :41:40. | |
available in the vote officd since 12:56 p.m.. We are where we are I | :41:41. | :41:48. | |
thank the Leader of the House for what he has said and his telp two | :41:49. | :41:52. | |
provide clarification here `nd there. It is so much better if we | :41:53. | :41:58. | |
can proceed in a consensual manner on matters of procedure. We | :41:59. | :42:01. | |
acknowledge the existence of differences of opinion on the | :42:02. | :42:07. | |
substance, they will exist right across the country, but we lust do | :42:08. | :42:14. | |
our business in an efficient, orderly and consensual way, in terms | :42:15. | :42:18. | |
of procedure. I think the point is made and it should not need to be | :42:19. | :42:24. | |
revisited. On a different point I wish to bring to the attenthon of | :42:25. | :42:27. | |
the house and secure guidance about what happened in the House of Lords | :42:28. | :42:32. | |
last night. Due to the disgraceful way in which the Department of | :42:33. | :42:36. | |
business, innovation and skhlls have backed -- backtracked on thd clear | :42:37. | :42:42. | |
commitment to this House toppled the will of the size and to introduce | :42:43. | :42:49. | |
the market rents only option for licensees, they took the | :42:50. | :42:53. | |
unprecedented step of introducing this serum concept into a sdcond | :42:54. | :42:59. | |
bill which is unprecedented. There is confusion about what one I | :43:00. | :43:05. | |
happen. How do we now procedd from a legislative point of view and how we | :43:06. | :43:09. | |
bring the ministers to this House to explain that they will actu`lly | :43:10. | :43:14. | |
respect the will of the house and do what they agreed to do at the | :43:15. | :43:20. | |
dispatch box? The short answer is twofold. I have no advance notice of | :43:21. | :43:27. | |
it, I am simply saying that it makes it difficult for me to give any | :43:28. | :43:30. | |
authoritative verdict from the chair at this time. Secondly, I would say | :43:31. | :43:41. | |
to the honourable gentleman that he is as dog with a terrier is any | :43:42. | :43:48. | |
backbench member of the sitds, and I hope he takes that in the positive | :43:49. | :43:54. | |
way in which was intended. Xou will not let go of this topic. I think | :43:55. | :44:01. | |
that he will return to the hssue. I don't know whether the government | :44:02. | :44:05. | |
has any plan to come to the house to explain its thinking or how it | :44:06. | :44:10. | |
believes its conduct night hs compatible with what was prdviously | :44:11. | :44:14. | |
said. I know were the honourable gentleman sits and I know hd see the | :44:15. | :44:18. | |
catch my eye and I am always happy to try to facilitate him | :44:19. | :44:23. | |
interrogating the government on this and indeed on other matters. I hope | :44:24. | :44:32. | |
he will hold the sources for now. If he wants to have another | :44:33. | :44:35. | |
conversation with me when I am more in the loop I am happy to assist. | :44:36. | :44:43. | |
Perhaps we can now move to the ten minute rule motion. I beg to move | :44:44. | :44:52. | |
that he'd be given to bring in a bill to make provision about the | :44:53. | :44:57. | |
standards of fire resistancd and relevant labelling requiremdnts in | :44:58. | :45:00. | |
relation to children's fancx dress and play costumes and for connected | :45:01. | :45:05. | |
purposes. The last 20 years has seen a huge evolution in the way that | :45:06. | :45:08. | |
children play and dress up `nd we need legislation to catch up. When I | :45:09. | :45:12. | |
was a child dressing up meant trading a box containing mul's | :45:13. | :45:20. | |
called clothes. What my ear could suffer from was dangerous flammable | :45:21. | :45:26. | |
nightwear. Every year up until 964 small children were sent to hospital | :45:27. | :45:32. | |
with horrific urns and many died. In 1960 for the Daily Mail led a | :45:33. | :45:36. | |
campaign about nightwear and the size decided to act. The laws can't | :45:37. | :45:44. | |
-- updated in 1985. A professor from Bolton University said we h`ve over | :45:45. | :45:51. | |
50 years experience which the fire statistics show that by injtries to | :45:52. | :45:54. | |
children are now in low single figures per annum, sometimes zero. | :45:55. | :46:01. | |
Despite that fantastic prodtction in the injuries it took the EU until | :46:02. | :46:08. | |
2007 choose to adopt a simple - a similar nightwear standard. A whole | :46:09. | :46:11. | |
new multi-billion pound indtstry has grown up since then. These dress | :46:12. | :46:16. | |
costumes are classed as toys by the European Union and because of that | :46:17. | :46:19. | |
our children are less protect than if they were wearing nightwdar. The | :46:20. | :46:24. | |
chief fire officer for Beds observed in his briefing to me that dressing | :46:25. | :46:27. | |
up clothes are not always worn just for play but appear increashngly to | :46:28. | :46:32. | |
be worn as nightwear or norlal clothes. The use of naked flames is | :46:33. | :46:38. | |
more prevalent, particularlx candles, at events such as | :46:39. | :46:42. | |
Christmas, Halloween, barbecues acceptor. Those are tested `gainst a | :46:43. | :46:45. | |
rate of spread of flame which is based on the ability of a child to | :46:46. | :46:50. | |
run away from a burning toy. In his watchdog interview, the chidf fire | :46:51. | :46:54. | |
officer for Beds also said that these toys they can drop walk away | :46:55. | :47:00. | |
from. The test be the same `t least the same as the test board nightwear | :47:01. | :47:06. | |
for children. In the United States a child's dresser garment has a higher | :47:07. | :47:12. | |
level of protection. It must not catch fire until at least three and | :47:13. | :47:15. | |
a half seconds after exposure to a naked flame. Dress costumes in | :47:16. | :47:20. | |
Europe and the UK are tested against a toy direct of which only offers | :47:21. | :47:24. | |
protections of a burning rate of three centimetres per second and | :47:25. | :47:29. | |
that is enormously fast on ` small child. Yet if the same child was | :47:30. | :47:35. | |
wearing a nightdress in the UK with the standard, then the rate allowed | :47:36. | :47:42. | |
would be three centimetres hnto two and a half seconds and that maybe | :47:43. | :47:44. | |
the difference between life and death. It is hard to keep slall | :47:45. | :47:51. | |
children away from fire haz`rds as a consultant in a District Hospital | :47:52. | :47:55. | |
said, the brands that you gdt from flames are often full thickness | :47:56. | :47:58. | |
which means that you need to have skin grafting and they can be life | :47:59. | :48:02. | |
changing. The British Retail Consortium tour without we to | :48:03. | :48:07. | |
believe the flammability tests ES 712 is no longer fit for purpose. | :48:08. | :48:11. | |
Since this test was introduced in 1979 the design has got mord | :48:12. | :48:17. | |
complicated as has their popularity. The test is not kept pace whth the | :48:18. | :48:24. | |
outfit designs and no longer affect of the assessors or wrists. We are | :48:25. | :48:27. | |
failing our children with ET toy safety standards that are not | :48:28. | :48:31. | |
considered fit for purpose by the PRC. Why doesn't the UK simply | :48:32. | :48:36. | |
change the EU wide classification? If we did this is the process. It | :48:37. | :48:41. | |
would have two inform the commission and the standardisation bodhes of 28 | :48:42. | :48:47. | |
countries would have the medting consult and only are they all agreed | :48:48. | :48:49. | |
that they give their findings to a commission which would transpose it | :48:50. | :48:53. | |
into her director for all mdmber states. Whilst the snail-like | :48:54. | :49:01. | |
progress grinds on our children are vulnerable to horrific burns. The | :49:02. | :49:05. | |
Business Secretary requested a change in standards and spot checks | :49:06. | :49:09. | |
on retailer selling fancy dress costumes that these costumes were | :49:10. | :49:12. | |
only subjected to flammabilhty testing to assess if they mdet with | :49:13. | :49:17. | |
the current EU safety stand`rds the very same standards that thd PRC | :49:18. | :49:20. | |
have condemned is not that for purpose. Claudia Winkleman knows | :49:21. | :49:25. | |
only too well from personal experience of a child's costume | :49:26. | :49:29. | |
catching alight and I pay tribute to her campaign which has left many of | :49:30. | :49:33. | |
our High Street stores voluntarily making their play close to the | :49:34. | :49:37. | |
higher nightwear standard, but because it is only voluntarx post | :49:38. | :49:41. | |
will be inferior products on the market. It is so hard to sort out | :49:42. | :49:45. | |
the good from bad as price hs not an of safety. Good housekeeping | :49:46. | :49:50. | |
magazine tested some Hallowden costumes all of which met the | :49:51. | :49:54. | |
current EU standards and thd cheapest in their flammabilhty test | :49:55. | :49:59. | |
was also the safest. The algae cost about ?3 99 did not catch lhght at | :50:00. | :50:04. | |
all whether Sainsbury is fantastic vampire costume at ?13 only cost | :50:05. | :50:15. | |
five seconds to capture light. - catch light. It is a minefidld for | :50:16. | :50:21. | |
consumers. Figures for fire related Internet -- injury show that around | :50:22. | :50:25. | |
Halloween time there was a 37% increase on the 2012 figures in | :50:26. | :50:31. | |
2013. Things are getting worse. Regardless of the trading standards | :50:32. | :50:36. | |
findings that... I wish to lake it clear I am not asking to make it | :50:37. | :50:40. | |
clear to change the designation of these toys in the pollutants, I am | :50:41. | :50:43. | |
asking that the flammabilitx level of these toys as a -- is at the same | :50:44. | :50:50. | |
standard as nightwear. It proves, it is well tried and it affects | :50:51. | :50:55. | |
children. The host library told me that reclassifying fancy drdss | :50:56. | :50:58. | |
costumes is close by not be the best way to achieve the object of. I | :50:59. | :51:05. | |
ever, some types of clothing are subject to specific national | :51:06. | :51:09. | |
regulations such as nightwe`r. This is a domestic rather than ET | :51:10. | :51:13. | |
legislation. It provides a precedent for the UK to lead the way without | :51:14. | :51:19. | |
breaching EU loft. This reflects the general principle that EU | :51:20. | :51:22. | |
legislation sets the minimul European wide standard which do not | :51:23. | :51:26. | |
prevent member states from putting in place national legislation | :51:27. | :51:31. | |
because beyond that. Sometiles this is called gold-plating. I bdlieve | :51:32. | :51:34. | |
the most expedient thing thd government can do would be to insert | :51:35. | :51:40. | |
a statutory instrument into its existing UK legislation which would | :51:41. | :51:44. | |
require any children stress of cost to Brazil in the UK must have the | :51:45. | :51:47. | |
higher British standard for flammability in addition to the | :51:48. | :51:51. | |
current EU toy standard. Our gold-plated standard could be | :51:52. | :51:55. | |
adopted in time throughout Durope if they so choose that the prilary | :51:56. | :51:59. | |
concern of our government mtst be to protect children in the UK `nd to do | :52:00. | :52:03. | |
it as quickly as possible. Too many young children are already living | :52:04. | :52:07. | |
with the consequences of having highly flammable dress up costumes. | :52:08. | :52:12. | |
The chief fire officer's association is by calling for this | :52:13. | :52:16. | |
classification to be changed so that safety standards for fancy dress | :52:17. | :52:19. | |
costumes are stepped up and the nightwear protection seems to be the | :52:20. | :52:23. | |
way to go. I want our government to lead the way on improving fhre | :52:24. | :52:27. | |
safety for our children the way it did in 1964. Don't let us whth | :52:28. | :52:34. | |
another while longer while lore children suffer the consequdnces of | :52:35. | :52:39. | |
this substandard toy director. Europe can follow us but wants to | :52:40. | :52:43. | |
but I would like this Parli`ment to bring in a statutory instrulent to | :52:44. | :52:46. | |
protect our children and I would like to do it as quickly as | :52:47. | :52:51. | |
possible. The question is that the honourable member have leavd to | :52:52. | :53:01. | |
bring in the bill? The ayes habit. He will prepare and bring in the | :53:02. | :53:08. | |
bill? Ledeen Doris, Kelvin Hopkins, Paul Scully, Esther Philip Holub, | :53:09. | :53:14. | |
and Trevelyan, Graham Brady, John Barron, Lady Sylvia Hermon, Mr | :53:15. | :53:19. | |
Stuart Jackson and Mr Tim lhghten, and myself, Mr Speaker. | :53:20. | :53:37. | |
consumer protection standards of fire resistance with childrdn's play | :53:38. | :54:03. | |
costumes etc Bill. Second rdading what they? Friday the 2nd of March | :54:04. | :54:11. | |
2016. Order. We come now to the programme | :54:12. | :54:18. | |
the question is the immigration bill, the motion as on the order | :54:19. | :54:35. | |
paper. The ayes habit. The clerk will proceed to read the waters of | :54:36. | :54:39. | |
the day. Immigration Bill as amended in the public committee to be | :54:40. | :54:47. | |
considered. We begin with the new clause 16 with which it will be | :54:48. | :54:52. | |
convenient to consider new clause 17, amendments eight team to 20 33, | :54:53. | :55:07. | |
47 to 53, 35, 46, 22 to 26, 54 to 57, 41, 21, new clause to sde it, | :55:08. | :55:18. | |
nine and 13, and amendments 32. The move new clause 16 I call the | :55:19. | :55:24. | |
spokesperson for the SNP. Stuart MacDonald. Mr Speaker, I beg | :55:25. | :55:46. | |
to move new clause 16 and the other new clauses and amendments hn my | :55:47. | :55:49. | |
name and those of honourabld and right honourable friend 's. I am | :55:50. | :55:54. | |
unashamedly moving lots of amendments today, and there are | :55:55. | :55:57. | |
several others that we would like to support which I will come to endure | :55:58. | :56:02. | |
course. The large number of changes we want to see reflects our | :56:03. | :56:05. | |
hostility to this bill, which we oppose and will vote against, as it | :56:06. | :56:09. | |
is ill-conceived and regressive and will do little to move the country | :56:10. | :56:12. | |
towards the government's increasingly ludicrous lookhng net | :56:13. | :56:16. | |
migration tugger. If the bill passes, perhaps one or two of these | :56:17. | :56:22. | |
amendments might provide a little comfort in an otherwise ble`k piece | :56:23. | :56:25. | |
of legislation. Turning first to the two new clauses at the start of | :56:26. | :56:30. | |
these dick to rectify two provisions which exemplify for us were | :56:31. | :56:35. | |
fundamental problems lie, what is new clause 16. Its 60 put in place | :56:36. | :56:40. | |
restriction on one the signhficant -- its 60 put in these | :56:41. | :56:47. | |
restrictions. A large part of this Bill seems to us to be a wed sister | :56:48. | :56:52. | |
powers from UK immigration staff which the government rather | :56:53. | :56:55. | |
unquestionably wants to hand over to them. I am happy to give wax. I am | :56:56. | :57:01. | |
grateful to the honourable gentleman. If I heard him correctly, | :57:02. | :57:06. | |
he doesn't like the Bill. And his amendments might make the bhll a bit | :57:07. | :57:12. | |
more likeable. If they were all to be passed, his amendments and his | :57:13. | :57:18. | |
new clauses, would he be in the positive lobby this evening? We have | :57:19. | :57:24. | |
dumped our best to make the bill more palatable, but even with all | :57:25. | :57:27. | |
our amendments, we would sthll find the damage that this bill would | :57:28. | :57:31. | |
cause unacceptable, so regardless of what happens, we will vote `gainst | :57:32. | :57:36. | |
it. I mentioned two of the new clauses at the start of this group. | :57:37. | :57:40. | |
The second is new clause 17, which would repeal the provisions injured | :57:41. | :57:48. | |
used by the 20 act, provisions which would have limited effect on the | :57:49. | :57:52. | |
government's net migration target, but are nonetheless deemed necessary | :57:53. | :57:56. | |
to make the government look tough on immigration. As I said at sdcond | :57:57. | :58:01. | |
stage, it is in reality immhgration theatre, acting out the path of | :58:02. | :58:05. | |
immigration enforcer. But while there is little evidence th`t it | :58:06. | :58:08. | |
will achieve much in terms of immigration control, on the other | :58:09. | :58:12. | |
hand, its consequences in tdrms of cohesion could be said in evidence. | :58:13. | :58:18. | |
On the point he just made, he talked about looking tough. Would he not | :58:19. | :58:23. | |
agree that that is the challenge for the government in this Bill? We want | :58:24. | :58:27. | |
to see measures in immigrathon which are effective, not just that appear | :58:28. | :58:35. | |
to be tough. I agree that wd need to enforce the immigration rulds we | :58:36. | :58:42. | |
have in this country. The problem is that the resources and manpower are | :58:43. | :58:45. | |
not put into doing that. We do not need new rules, it is new rdsources | :58:46. | :58:50. | |
to enforce the rules that already exist. Some of the rules already go | :58:51. | :58:57. | |
to far. Moving on to new cl`use 16 in more detail, this is a modest | :58:58. | :59:02. | |
response to clause 13, which creates powers for immigration officials to) | :59:03. | :59:10. | |
is 448 hours there appears to be any involvement of those suspected of | :59:11. | :59:15. | |
illegal working. This could have consequences for innocent workers | :59:16. | :59:18. | |
whose place of work is closdd for up to two days. Provisions for | :59:19. | :59:22. | |
statutory compensation which our amendment would introduce are | :59:23. | :59:25. | |
designed to ensure that these notices are not issued in an unfair | :59:26. | :59:38. | |
manner. There are three othdr amendments we have signed in | :59:39. | :59:41. | |
relation to write to rent, starting with the crucial amendment 35, which | :59:42. | :59:45. | |
would remove the criminal s`nctions and what we regard as Dickensian | :59:46. | :59:50. | |
eviction process is from thhs bill. Also amendment 36, designed to | :59:51. | :59:53. | |
prevent those letting out rooms on a charitable basis from being | :59:54. | :59:58. | |
criminalised. And finally, amendments 54 to 57, which remove | :59:59. | :00:02. | |
powers to legislate for regtlations for new Scottish rights to rent | :00:03. | :00:07. | |
regulations, with immense effect on devolved Scottish housing l`w. We | :00:08. | :00:11. | |
also support the changes proposed by Labour members such as amendment 22, | :00:12. | :00:15. | |
which is designed to effect what we can only presume to be a dr`fting | :00:16. | :00:18. | |
anomaly under which a landlord would be guilty of an offence for renting | :00:19. | :00:21. | |
to a person with no right to rent even during the period of 28 days | :00:22. | :00:26. | |
when you cannot evict the pdrson. We also back the man amendments 23 to | :00:27. | :00:31. | |
26, which would remove obscdne proposals which would see l`ndlords | :00:32. | :00:33. | |
not only turned into immigr`tion officers, but also a High Court | :00:34. | :00:37. | |
judges and would see summarx evictions without judicial | :00:38. | :00:42. | |
oversight. I know my four from Glasgow North East will havd much | :00:43. | :00:45. | |
more to say on these dreadftl and draconian measures if given the | :00:46. | :00:49. | |
opportunity. Our view is thd same as it was at second reading. Write to | :00:50. | :00:54. | |
rent, in our view, flies in the face of evidence provided by parts of the | :00:55. | :01:03. | |
government's review. It is tnfair to put criminal to landlords and will | :01:04. | :01:08. | |
lead to describe against ordinary citizens without documents `t risk | :01:09. | :01:10. | |
of being rejected from a tenancy whenever there is an easy option of | :01:11. | :01:15. | |
a British passport owner to lend to. It will push more families `way from | :01:16. | :01:19. | |
immigration control, making enforcement harder, not easher. I | :01:20. | :01:26. | |
turn now to one part of the bill were something might emerge, and | :01:27. | :01:31. | |
that is in the first few cl`uses of part one and the provisions for | :01:32. | :01:37. | |
Labour market and forced thdm. It is sad that the Immigration Bill | :01:38. | :01:39. | |
suggests that the new rule hs concerned with enforcing imligration | :01:40. | :01:46. | |
laws. We join our colleagues in supporting amendment 18, is assigned | :01:47. | :01:49. | |
to it ensure the functions of the director are exercised for | :01:50. | :01:52. | |
protecting the victims of L`bour market exploitation. More | :01:53. | :01:58. | |
fundamental is amendment 19, which six to remove the illegal working | :01:59. | :02:03. | |
week. We share concerns that it will have little effect on immigration | :02:04. | :02:07. | |
control, but will have adverse effects. The negative consepuences | :02:08. | :02:11. | |
could undermine the decent work the government has been doing to tackle | :02:12. | :02:17. | |
slavery and trafficking and drive workers further underground and | :02:18. | :02:19. | |
leave them more at risk of exploitation. On this issue, we know | :02:20. | :02:25. | |
that James Ewing's report on domestic workers is with thd | :02:26. | :02:27. | |
government but as yet not available to members. We would question why | :02:28. | :02:33. | |
that is and when we will be able to see it and get to debate it in order | :02:34. | :02:36. | |
to inform what should happen with this bill, should it get a third | :02:37. | :02:39. | |
reading here. Finally, in rdlation to part one of the act, amendment 30 | :02:40. | :02:45. | |
36 to ensure that employers who inadvertently employ someond without | :02:46. | :02:50. | |
the right to work on crimin`lised by the Bill. It does so by not | :02:51. | :02:58. | |
requiring that they have re`sonable cause to believe an employed may not | :02:59. | :03:02. | |
have the right to work. We `re concerned that the current test | :03:03. | :03:05. | |
might catch those who are not the intended target. There are two but | :03:06. | :03:12. | |
that sets of amendments in this first grouping. The first rdlate to | :03:13. | :03:14. | |
how a number of these provisions would be incremented in Scotland. | :03:15. | :03:19. | |
Clauses ten, 11 and 16 all hnclude what I would refer to as Henry VIII | :03:20. | :03:23. | |
clauses, powers to legislatd for Scotland and Northern Ireland and in | :03:24. | :03:28. | |
one case, Wales. There are provisions which set out | :03:29. | :03:33. | |
insignificant detail and ard subject to legislative scrutiny. Th`t is not | :03:34. | :03:38. | |
the case for Scotland. Instdad, the Secretary of State is given sweeping | :03:39. | :03:42. | |
power to legislate in a simhlar way. That power includes thd ability | :03:43. | :03:46. | |
to amend acts of the Scottish parliament without any conshderation | :03:47. | :03:49. | |
of that parliament's view on the matter, and that is despite the fact | :03:50. | :03:52. | |
that liquor licensing, drivdr 's car hire licensing act devolved matters. | :03:53. | :03:59. | |
" and has long been hostile to Henry VIII clauses, and rightly so. These | :04:00. | :04:03. | |
clauses are particularly pernicious for the reasons given, and should be | :04:04. | :04:08. | |
rejected. That can be done by supporting amendment is 47 to 5 , | :04:09. | :04:11. | |
which would remove the power to regular for Scotland in this way, | :04:12. | :04:15. | |
thereby requiring primary legislation and the full scrutiny | :04:16. | :04:19. | |
that entails a star. Altern`tively, amendment 41 requires any stch | :04:20. | :04:23. | |
regulations which required the consent of the Scottish Parliament, | :04:24. | :04:27. | |
again requiring proper scrutiny That is surely only right. Finally, | :04:28. | :04:32. | |
I turn to new clauses 13 and amendment 42. This House witnessed a | :04:33. | :04:35. | |
powerful backbench business debate in September, led by the Honourable | :04:36. | :04:39. | |
members for Sheffield Centr`l, Bedford and Enfield, who I know | :04:40. | :04:45. | |
would want to be here if thdy could and speak on this issue agahn today. | :04:46. | :04:49. | |
On that day, there were strong speeches on all sides of thhs House | :04:50. | :04:57. | |
as it united to tell the government that immigration contention was not | :04:58. | :05:00. | |
to double. We are the only country in the EU without a time lilit. On | :05:01. | :05:03. | |
these benches, we would prefer that we move straight to a posithon where | :05:04. | :05:09. | |
they'll is granted after 28 days as set out in clause amendment 32. | :05:10. | :05:13. | |
Alternatively, we will support new clause 13 to see progress towards | :05:14. | :05:20. | |
that goal. My honourable frhend will be aware that the immigration | :05:21. | :05:22. | |
detention inquiry panel heard evidence from a consultant | :05:23. | :05:27. | |
psychiatrist that those who are detained for over 30 days stffer | :05:28. | :05:30. | |
significantly higher mental health problems than those detained for | :05:31. | :05:33. | |
less than 30 days. Does my honourable friend agree that this | :05:34. | :05:37. | |
evidence reinforces the need for new clause 32? I am grateful to my | :05:38. | :05:42. | |
honourable friend for that intervention. I agree with what she | :05:43. | :05:46. | |
says. It is one of a huge ntmber of reasons that were highlightdd in the | :05:47. | :05:53. | |
debate earlier this year. Does my 'em share my concerns for the | :05:54. | :05:57. | |
well-being of those migrants being detained, and experience described | :05:58. | :06:01. | |
by one man as three years in a cage? The conditions in which migrants are | :06:02. | :06:06. | |
detained without any shred of dignity, would he concurred that the | :06:07. | :06:10. | |
Home Office seems to have forgotten that given rights are universal and | :06:11. | :06:13. | |
not conditional upon immigr`tion status? My honourable friend decked | :06:14. | :06:18. | |
her point powerfully. It is not just about a time limit, but going | :06:19. | :06:22. | |
forward is about conditions and moving away from routine usd of | :06:23. | :06:26. | |
immigration to make it a rare exception rather than almost the | :06:27. | :06:30. | |
normality. In conclusion, there is widespread demand for changd. And if | :06:31. | :06:35. | |
there is one silver line in the dark cloud represented by this bhll, it | :06:36. | :06:52. | |
will be a time-limit on detdntion. Rebecca Harris. As I have mdntioned | :06:53. | :07:02. | |
previously, immigration was the single most important issue for my | :07:03. | :07:05. | |
constituents at the recent dlection and remains so. I am sure mdmbers on | :07:06. | :07:12. | |
all sides of this House werd also find that is the case for | :07:13. | :07:16. | |
themselves. I have spent several weeks sitting on the Immigr`tion | :07:17. | :07:19. | |
Bill. I am fully in support of the bill as the government has drafted | :07:20. | :07:24. | |
it. I feel moved to speak hdre in particular on new clauses ehght and | :07:25. | :07:27. | |
nine dealing with limits on detention. While I appreciate the | :07:28. | :07:30. | |
thinking behind such amendmdnts I cannot support the measure, as | :07:31. | :07:34. | |
introducing a time-limit on detention is a core approach to an | :07:35. | :07:39. | |
important issue. I also belheve new clause 30 Ms Pritchard, as we are | :07:40. | :07:42. | |
awaiting the results of sevdral government reviews into the whole | :07:43. | :07:46. | |
system of attention. The Hole Office already have a policy to safeguard | :07:47. | :07:50. | |
against unnecessary or arbitrary retention of individuals. Ddtention | :07:51. | :07:53. | |
must be used sparingly and for the shortest period possible. However, | :07:54. | :07:57. | |
cases must be assessed on an individual basis. I thank the | :07:58. | :08:08. | |
honourable member for giving way, but she will recognise that whilst | :08:09. | :08:12. | |
that is the principle of thd Home Office, does she not accept that | :08:13. | :08:15. | |
there is powerful evidence that the Home Office is failing to achieve | :08:16. | :08:20. | |
those objectives, by the fact that many people are detained for months | :08:21. | :08:24. | |
and indeed some four years, and therefore a statutory limit could | :08:25. | :08:27. | |
bring a culture change in the approach to the issue? I th`nk the | :08:28. | :08:34. | |
honourable member, but I believe that the Home Office is alrdady in | :08:35. | :08:37. | |
the process of three separate reviews into this process, which | :08:38. | :08:40. | |
makes these you clauses prelature until we have had the full results | :08:41. | :08:50. | |
of more detailed work. I appreciate my honourable friend and her point | :08:51. | :08:55. | |
about the need for views to inform the debate. Does she not sh`re my | :08:56. | :09:00. | |
apartment that as those revhews have been pending for many months, we in | :09:01. | :09:05. | |
the Commons do not have that information as we deliberatdly | :09:06. | :09:09. | |
amendments before us today? I do recognise the frustration at that, | :09:10. | :09:16. | |
but properly conducted revidws take time and we have urgent bushness to | :09:17. | :09:19. | |
do with a lot of measures in this bill. I feel confident that the | :09:20. | :09:25. | |
government will deal with this issue. In instances where | :09:26. | :09:29. | |
individuals are detained whhle their case is investigated, regul`r | :09:30. | :09:33. | |
reviews can be undertaken when sure that such detention remains | :09:34. | :09:38. | |
proportionate. I'm sure that any improvements that can be made will | :09:39. | :09:42. | |
be made by the government. Hn addition to this, detention is | :09:43. | :09:44. | |
always a matter for the judhcially. Cases where an individual h`s been | :09:45. | :09:50. | |
detained are rightly subject to scrutiny by the courts. The | :09:51. | :09:53. | |
judiciary is clear that factors such as risk to the public and an | :09:54. | :09:57. | |
individual's immigration history are key in deciding the timescale for | :09:58. | :10:01. | |
detention. It is correct to have judicial authority to be thd guiding | :10:02. | :10:05. | |
principle in these cases, btt not a random figure in both by | :10:06. | :10:06. | |
politicians. Such a limit allows people to use | :10:07. | :10:24. | |
subvert the rules. They queted refused to go operate with the | :10:25. | :10:27. | |
authorities save in the knowledge that they will be released `fter | :10:28. | :10:34. | |
four weeks. This cannot be the intention of this size. A thme | :10:35. | :10:40. | |
limits could be irresponsible risk to national security. I cannot | :10:41. | :10:45. | |
support these amendments and a urge other members to oppose thel. I beg | :10:46. | :10:56. | |
to move the amendments in mx name. As I go through them I hope it will | :10:57. | :11:00. | |
be helpful to the house by hndicate which of those amendments I am | :11:01. | :11:04. | |
currently intending to have pushed to the vote. Can I start with the | :11:05. | :11:10. | |
labour markets provisions? Le on this side supports the establishment | :11:11. | :11:16. | |
of the director of labour m`rket enforcement. This will provhde | :11:17. | :11:21. | |
strategic leadership which hs much and very welcome. The real hssues in | :11:22. | :11:27. | |
relation to the director resources and focus. In the bill commhttee we | :11:28. | :11:34. | |
heard evidence from Professor Metcalfe, chair of the migr`tion | :11:35. | :11:37. | |
advisory committee. He said he understood the issues of public | :11:38. | :11:43. | |
finances that he did not thhnk the enforcement bodies have enotgh | :11:44. | :11:46. | |
resources. He pointed to thd fact that in the low skilled report, HMRC | :11:47. | :11:53. | |
could be that the visit any given premises once every 250 years and it | :11:54. | :12:01. | |
was the prospect of prosecution every million years. I accept the | :12:02. | :12:07. | |
points that any investigation would be intelligence led untargeted but | :12:08. | :12:12. | |
those figures are starting to point to the problem of resourcing. The | :12:13. | :12:17. | |
gang masters licensing authority investigations dropped from a in | :12:18. | :12:24. | |
2011 .68 in 2014. Clearly wd can't deal with resources here in this | :12:25. | :12:29. | |
debate that amendment in te`m is intended to give a focus to the | :12:30. | :12:35. | |
director to ensure that the functions of the director are | :12:36. | :12:37. | |
exercise for the purpose of protecting the Vic is and to make | :12:38. | :12:42. | |
this explicit on the face of the bill. I should indicate that this | :12:43. | :12:48. | |
follows and mirrors the way the modern slavery act dealt with the | :12:49. | :12:53. | |
functions of the anti-slavery commission established by that act. | :12:54. | :12:57. | |
There is a good precedent for this amendment. It does provide clarity | :12:58. | :13:02. | |
and it avoids the misconception or temptation about this role which is | :13:03. | :13:06. | |
being introduced in Immigration Bill, namely that it should be about | :13:07. | :13:13. | |
labour market enforcement, not immigration and control and the | :13:14. | :13:15. | |
experience of other countrids suggest this is the right focus for | :13:16. | :13:21. | |
this important role. I will turn to the question of illegal working | :13:22. | :13:25. | |
which has been touched alre`dy. In particular, a member 19, whhch | :13:26. | :13:34. | |
admits the new legal working offence and maintains the status quo. - | :13:35. | :13:40. | |
omits. Time and again the point has been made about the exploit`tion of | :13:41. | :13:44. | |
the vulnerable. The migration advisory committee reported in these | :13:45. | :13:52. | |
terms, the combination of noncompliance and insufficidnt | :13:53. | :13:55. | |
enforcement can lead to instances of severe exploitation, partictlarly | :13:56. | :13:59. | |
vulnerable groups such as mhgrants. They on to say we are struck on our | :14:00. | :14:08. | |
visits around the country bx the amount of concern that was dxpressed | :14:09. | :14:11. | |
by virtually everyone we spoke to her by the exploitation of ligrants | :14:12. | :14:15. | |
in low skilled jobs. There hs a great deal of other evidencd to the | :14:16. | :14:21. | |
same effect. What is desper`tely needed is more resources for | :14:22. | :14:27. | |
inspections, her focus on the - on exploitative employers and ` | :14:28. | :14:31. | |
mechanism to encourage employees to have the confidence to come forward. | :14:32. | :14:35. | |
This new provision cuts across that. These provisions are likely to | :14:36. | :14:41. | |
ensure that those who are the most exploited and vulnerable will become | :14:42. | :14:47. | |
more exploited and vulnerable. It will in effect simply strengthen the | :14:48. | :14:52. | |
hand of gang masters over exploited workers. It also fails the test of | :14:53. | :15:00. | |
necessity. There are alreadx criminal provisions relating to | :15:01. | :15:03. | |
those that have breached imligration rules and there is no need to | :15:04. | :15:09. | |
introduce a new criminal offences in relation to employees. They are the | :15:10. | :15:13. | |
most vulnerable, they are the most exploited and we want to give them | :15:14. | :15:17. | |
the confidence to come forw`rd if they do director is to achidve the | :15:18. | :15:22. | |
function set out in the sack. I do intend to push amendment 19 to the | :15:23. | :15:28. | |
votes, but I shall listen to what the Minister has to say. Can I | :15:29. | :15:34. | |
change or a related question to this offence of illegal working `s far as | :15:35. | :15:39. | |
employees concerned? It is ` strict or start offence and I'm totching on | :15:40. | :15:48. | |
amendment 20, an employee who does not have the right immigrathon | :15:49. | :15:51. | |
status who commits an offence, there is no defence at all. To give an | :15:52. | :15:57. | |
example of the injustice th`t is likely to be caused by such a | :15:58. | :16:01. | |
provision, if an employee in good faith relies on his or her dmployer | :16:02. | :16:06. | |
to sponsor him or her and there is something wrong in the procdss that | :16:07. | :16:13. | |
means as a matter of law thd employee is unbeknownst to them | :16:14. | :16:18. | |
does not have the right immhgration status they automatically commit an | :16:19. | :16:24. | |
offence and have no reasonable excuse defence. That can't be right | :16:25. | :16:28. | |
when creating a criminal offence in this field and it is not good enough | :16:29. | :16:34. | |
to the director -- for the Director of Public Prosecutions to s`y that | :16:35. | :16:37. | |
the prosecution needs to wedd out those cases, there needs to be | :16:38. | :16:45. | |
something on the statute. I turned to the provisions on landlords and | :16:46. | :16:53. | |
the right to ransom. The background to these provisions is important as | :16:54. | :17:00. | |
we go through this report stage The 2014 immigration act introdtced a | :17:01. | :17:05. | |
civil penalty scheme in rel`tion to write the rents. It was discussed in | :17:06. | :17:12. | |
this House and there were concerns about what impact it would have in | :17:13. | :17:17. | |
practice, and in particular if there would be discriminatory effdcts | :17:18. | :17:24. | |
Assurances were given about piloting the civil penalty scheme and | :17:25. | :17:26. | |
properly evaluating it before it was ruled out. What we have in this | :17:27. | :17:34. | |
building 2015 is a proposal to extend the civil penalty scheme by | :17:35. | :17:39. | |
introducing a criminal penalty before there has been a full and | :17:40. | :17:43. | |
meaningful evaluation. As w`s mentioned at the second reading of | :17:44. | :17:46. | |
the bill, the joint Council for the welfare of immigrants did c`rry out | :17:47. | :17:51. | |
an evaluation that should alarmingly that 42% of landlords said the right | :17:52. | :17:58. | |
to rent provisions made thel less likely to consider someone without a | :17:59. | :18:01. | |
British passport. At that stage we did not have the advantage of the | :18:02. | :18:05. | |
Home Office evaluation, which is made available in the bill stage. | :18:06. | :18:12. | |
That evaluation was a small and narrow our valuation and on its face | :18:13. | :18:20. | |
in relation to certain aspects of the evaluation the Home Offhce | :18:21. | :18:25. | |
itself said this, we are not sure about the statistical significance | :18:26. | :18:29. | |
of part of the valuation and the sample sizes are too small to draw | :18:30. | :18:36. | |
any robust conclusions. So, we save the assurance in relation to the | :18:37. | :18:41. | |
civil penalty scheme has not been fulfilled and there is no w`rrant | :18:42. | :18:44. | |
for extending it to a criminal sanction. I go onto a relatdd | :18:45. | :18:55. | |
point, and that is amendment 22 This deals with the position of | :18:56. | :19:02. | |
landlords who, as the provisions are currently drafted, automatically | :19:03. | :19:05. | |
commit a criminal offence the moments they are served with notice | :19:06. | :19:11. | |
that they have a tenant without the right to rents. They are | :19:12. | :19:19. | |
criminalised notwithstanding there is a period between receipt of that | :19:20. | :19:22. | |
knowledge, normally by unnoticed, and their best prospect of `ctually | :19:23. | :19:28. | |
getting anybody affected. In other words, if a reasonable, Jack -- | :19:29. | :19:32. | |
objective landlord receives notice and immediately acts upon that he or | :19:33. | :19:38. | |
she still criminalised during the process. There cannot be anx | :19:39. | :19:43. | |
sensible or compelling case for that state of affairs and becausd is | :19:44. | :19:48. | |
great concern to landlords. It puts them in an impossible posithon. I | :19:49. | :19:55. | |
understand the government m`y be considering this provision `nd I | :19:56. | :19:58. | |
will listen carefully to wh`t the Minister says that on the f`ce of it | :19:59. | :20:02. | |
is difficult to see that thdre could ever be a case for a provishon such | :20:03. | :20:11. | |
as that. Link to that is amdndments 23, 24, 25 and 26. They all go to | :20:12. | :20:15. | |
the important position of stmmary eviction. This bill introduces a | :20:16. | :20:28. | |
fast-track process innovative in this field where an notice from the | :20:29. | :20:32. | |
landlord stands as a court order, then there is provision for summary | :20:33. | :20:38. | |
eviction. Some 30 or 40 years ago this House set its face agahnst | :20:39. | :20:43. | |
summary eviction is for verx good reason. There were too many examples | :20:44. | :20:48. | |
of families being put out into the street literally with locks changed | :20:49. | :20:54. | |
and sleeping on the pavement. Everybody agreed that there should | :20:55. | :21:02. | |
be due process before evicthons of individuals and families, | :21:03. | :21:05. | |
particularly those with children. This act cuts through that | :21:06. | :21:09. | |
protection for no good causd and issued in this country in the | :21:10. | :21:13. | |
21st-century Vino group of individuals who for whatever | :21:14. | :21:16. | |
reason, whether renting lawfully or not, are subject to summary eviction | :21:17. | :21:24. | |
proceedings, which we turned our back on a long time ago. Can I then | :21:25. | :21:32. | |
move the immigration detenthon? This has already been touched on. It is a | :21:33. | :21:38. | |
matter of increasing concern to many in this House and beyond. The fact | :21:39. | :21:49. | |
of an indefinite nature of immigrants detention causes anxiety | :21:50. | :21:54. | |
particularly among vulnerable groups. It is the indefinitd nature | :21:55. | :21:58. | |
of the detention that Asda that the stress. There is strong evidence of | :21:59. | :22:04. | |
the impact on varying groups, but particularly on women. I thhnk I am | :22:05. | :22:10. | |
right in saying that the UK is the only country in Europe that does not | :22:11. | :22:13. | |
currently have the time limht of any sort on immigration detention. That | :22:14. | :22:19. | |
has been the subject of enqtiry by the cross-party joint all p`rties | :22:20. | :22:25. | |
are in the group on refugees and the all-party part in the group on | :22:26. | :22:31. | |
migration. They concluded wd believe the United Kingdom has a proud | :22:32. | :22:34. | |
tradition of upholding justhce and the right to liberty. Howevdr, the | :22:35. | :22:41. | |
continued use of indefinite detention puts this proud tradition | :22:42. | :22:46. | |
at risk. Those reforms, suggested by the cross-party joint APPG groupware | :22:47. | :22:54. | |
backed by the House of Commons when the recommendations were debated in | :22:55. | :22:59. | |
September of this year. A motion was passed supporting them. This is an | :23:00. | :23:04. | |
area of increasing concern `nd the position where it justifying | :23:05. | :23:10. | |
indefinite immigration detention is increasingly difficult. Amendment 32 | :23:11. | :23:18. | |
is intended to deal with th`t by introducing a 28 day limit, which | :23:19. | :23:21. | |
many people feel is the right limits. New clause 13 is intended to | :23:22. | :23:30. | |
allow a review by an independently chaired panel to consider the issues | :23:31. | :23:35. | |
and report to Parliament within three months, so therefore hs not | :23:36. | :23:42. | |
premised on a fixed period. It is important that there is progress on | :23:43. | :23:46. | |
these issues. Immigration ddtention is a real cause for concern. This is | :23:47. | :23:53. | |
an opportunity to do somethhng that is necessary in this area. H think | :23:54. | :23:59. | |
the honourable gentleman has just said that new clause 13 did not | :24:00. | :24:03. | |
prescribe a particular length of time, yet if he looks at paragraph a | :24:04. | :24:10. | |
it does specify that it is leading to a 28 day time period. Can you | :24:11. | :24:14. | |
confirm that that is his position? I apologise. What I meant that that | :24:15. | :24:23. | |
was it proposes a review of the time limit rather than the time limit | :24:24. | :24:27. | |
itself, therefore in the nature of the review it would be open to the | :24:28. | :24:32. | |
review to look at other opthons This is an area where I think there | :24:33. | :24:38. | |
are shared concerns across the hows about immigration detention and the | :24:39. | :24:43. | |
indefinite nature of that ddtention. There will be disagreement `s to the | :24:44. | :24:47. | |
precise time limit. If therd is to be a time limit. That is solething | :24:48. | :24:52. | |
to be discussed. The sit back at this stage and simply accept the | :24:53. | :24:57. | |
status quo is not an accept`ble way of proceeding but they will listen | :24:58. | :24:59. | |
to what the Minister has to say Would he agree that one of the | :25:00. | :25:12. | |
values of a time limit is to provide the person detained with sole | :25:13. | :25:17. | |
certainty about what is how annoying while they are being detaindd? We | :25:18. | :25:20. | |
have heard evidence from constituent the difficulty is people get put | :25:21. | :25:25. | |
into detention and they do not know what is going to happen to them and | :25:26. | :25:30. | |
as a consequence, there are mental health issues from that. I `m | :25:31. | :25:34. | |
grateful to the honourable lember and I agree with his point. There is | :25:35. | :25:40. | |
the fact of detention in thd first place which covers a wide r`nge of | :25:41. | :25:43. | |
individuals detained for different reasons. There is the indefhnite | :25:44. | :25:48. | |
nature of that attention whhch adds to the anxiety because most terms of | :25:49. | :25:53. | |
detention for a fixed period which allows the individual to know when | :25:54. | :25:57. | |
they may retain liberty. It is the indefinite nature adding to that. | :25:58. | :26:03. | |
There will be debates as to what the precise time limit should bd. But | :26:04. | :26:10. | |
the sustaining a situation of indefinite detention is no longer | :26:11. | :26:14. | |
acceptable in the 21st-centtry. It is not a position in almost all | :26:15. | :26:20. | |
other countries in Europe and it should not in the position hn this | :26:21. | :26:24. | |
country. I give very much, Ladam Deputy Speaker. Thank you vdry | :26:25. | :26:33. | |
much. There seems to be somdbody who sat with the honourable gentleman | :26:34. | :26:37. | |
and others on the committee a terrible sense of deja vu, to put it | :26:38. | :26:45. | |
politely. Groundhog Day, not to be as polite. We have had a lot of | :26:46. | :26:50. | |
these debates and discussions in committee and I hope that those who | :26:51. | :26:54. | |
did not join me in voting the way I did at committee would at ldast | :26:55. | :27:00. | |
recognise it was a very thotghtful committee and we went through the | :27:01. | :27:05. | |
entire bill at great depth `nd we had a raft of amendments tabled And | :27:06. | :27:11. | |
debated. But I think even the opposition parties ran out of steam, | :27:12. | :27:19. | |
allowing the usual channels to pulse stomps sometime before the committee | :27:20. | :27:26. | |
was tabled dash-mac to all stumps. I hope that in no way suggests we | :27:27. | :27:32. | |
cantered through hastily. The important issues which this will | :27:33. | :27:38. | |
looks to address. My honour`ble friend who is now no longer in place | :27:39. | :27:43. | |
from Castle Point, I thought hit the nail on the head. She along with my | :27:44. | :27:50. | |
honourable friend from Norwhch North in committee said this is probably | :27:51. | :27:56. | |
one of the most important issues this house and this Parliamdnt will | :27:57. | :28:01. | |
deal with. If we get it right, we will engender a sense of | :28:02. | :28:06. | |
understanding of fair play `nd that this place gets it. If we gdt it | :28:07. | :28:15. | |
wrong, we will seem to be even more disengaged from the communities we | :28:16. | :28:22. | |
see to serve. I am very lucky to represent a predominantly rtral | :28:23. | :28:29. | |
constituency which even at ` casual fans of the census returns would | :28:30. | :28:34. | |
suggest immigration would not be an issue, it would not be a debate it | :28:35. | :28:38. | |
would not be raised on the doorsteps and meetings. But I have to say that | :28:39. | :28:45. | |
even in rural North Dorset, it was and it continues to be. With the | :28:46. | :28:54. | |
greatest pleasure. Does the member appreciate H | :28:55. | :28:59. | |
represent a constituency th`t has a significant proportion of pdople | :29:00. | :29:04. | |
from other countries? It was raised once on the doorsteps with le in a | :29:05. | :29:09. | |
year. I would make the point to the honourable gentleman that p`rties | :29:10. | :29:13. | |
like Ukip for example tend to do well in areas with few immigrants | :29:14. | :29:18. | |
and it is perception causing people to have a problem with immigration, | :29:19. | :29:23. | |
rather than reality. Madam Deputy Speaker, this hs | :29:24. | :29:29. | |
noteworthy even for Hansard. The honourable lady and I have found | :29:30. | :29:32. | |
something upon which we agrde when it comes to this issue. What sits at | :29:33. | :29:38. | |
the kernel of this will is to shoot in many respects Ukip's Fox, that | :29:39. | :29:44. | |
the country or the government or Parliament at Westminster or | :29:45. | :29:47. | |
Whitehall has become rather soft on this issue. We just address the | :29:48. | :29:55. | |
first intervention. Dash-macro me just. I represent North Dorset but I | :29:56. | :30:01. | |
have had a first prize in the lottery of life and I am a Welshman. | :30:02. | :30:08. | |
I was hoping for support, btt not! Coming from Cardiff, is verx mixed | :30:09. | :30:13. | |
and culturally diverse city which thank goodness has had very little | :30:14. | :30:20. | |
tension in between communithes. But even back in 2010 in the eldction, | :30:21. | :30:27. | |
it was becoming an issue and irrespective of what the imligrants | :30:28. | :30:30. | |
make up of a community is, people are keen to address it and that is | :30:31. | :30:34. | |
what this bill is about and what these amendments... I will have the | :30:35. | :30:40. | |
honourable lady first. I thank the honourable gentleman. | :30:41. | :30:45. | |
Would he agree that rather than shooting Ukip's Fox, what this | :30:46. | :30:49. | |
Government is doing with thd bill is allowing the party that has one | :30:50. | :30:54. | |
single MP in this place to lake the rules and is pandering to what they | :30:55. | :31:01. | |
were calling for? We are really venturing into the | :31:02. | :31:06. | |
broader aspect of the princhples of the bill rather than these | :31:07. | :31:11. | |
amendments. I am happy for the honourable dense and to respond but | :31:12. | :31:14. | |
if we can move back to the amendment. I fall into you dash mac | :31:15. | :31:21. | |
into my usual trap, I was trying to set a backdrop to the reason why | :31:22. | :31:25. | |
this bill has come about and why these amendments are in my judgment | :31:26. | :31:29. | |
fundamentally wrong. Honour`ble lady has taken me neatly onto my second | :31:30. | :31:36. | |
point and the amendments in her name. I think the position of the | :31:37. | :31:40. | |
separatists is entirely disingenuous. With regard to this | :31:41. | :31:47. | |
issue. The honourable gentldman who moved his new clause 16 said even if | :31:48. | :31:54. | |
it was not if that was passdd but the whole raft of other amendments | :31:55. | :31:59. | |
which the SNP have tabled, they would still not be able to support | :32:00. | :32:04. | |
the bill. And we should not, Madam Deputy Speaker, be unduly strprised | :32:05. | :32:09. | |
by that. Because what we were able to tease out in committee, what we | :32:10. | :32:16. | |
were able to tease out from their questioning of the witnesses we had, | :32:17. | :32:21. | |
is that the members representing Scottish seats in the SMP's interest | :32:22. | :32:29. | |
believe in controlled and unfettered immigration dash-mac the SNP. They | :32:30. | :32:37. | |
believe in an open door polhcy. And moreover, they see on behalf of | :32:38. | :32:40. | |
their friends in the Scottish Parliament to assume to thelselves | :32:41. | :32:46. | |
powers and privileges reserved to this house with regards to the | :32:47. | :32:51. | |
control of immigration and suddenly fire the back door to see it as a | :32:52. | :32:57. | |
new and devolved power. And that is something I think that anybody with | :32:58. | :33:01. | |
a strand of unionism and colmon sense in their body should look to | :33:02. | :33:07. | |
resist, which is why I will vote against those amendments thhs | :33:08. | :33:12. | |
evening. In essence, I think what they are trying to do, Madal Deputy | :33:13. | :33:15. | |
Speaker, at the heart of thdse amendments to which I am spdaking, | :33:16. | :33:24. | |
is to effectively encourage further devolution, further separathon and | :33:25. | :33:32. | |
actually to have a great attention between the regions and countries of | :33:33. | :33:35. | |
the UK. The honourable lady says from a sedentary position whth her | :33:36. | :33:40. | |
customary self-deprecating humour, is, and yes, I mean the SMP. | :33:41. | :33:47. | |
Dash-mac Oz. And on this side of the House, we are going to look to | :33:48. | :33:54. | |
resist this because we see this power, the control of immigration, | :33:55. | :33:59. | |
with incredibly porous borddrs given with incredibly porous borddrs given | :34:00. | :34:08. | |
our coastal nature. It would either suggest that it would, I wotld | :34:09. | :34:13. | |
suggest, be foolish to open a Pandora's box of devolution with | :34:14. | :34:19. | |
regards to immigration issuds. This affects... With the most enormous | :34:20. | :34:23. | |
pleasure, as always. I rather think that he missds the | :34:24. | :34:28. | |
point about the amendment. What is happening is that in various | :34:29. | :34:34. | |
different parts of this ill, there is great and detailed provisions | :34:35. | :34:37. | |
relating to England and Walds and in some cases Northern Ireland and a | :34:38. | :34:41. | |
broad sweeping power for thd Secretary of State to do thd same | :34:42. | :34:45. | |
or without scrutiny in the Scottish or without scrutiny in the Scottish | :34:46. | :34:48. | |
Parliament. If the honourable gentleman does not agree in terms of | :34:49. | :34:52. | |
getting approval from the Scottish Parliament, at least get rid of the | :34:53. | :34:56. | |
regulatory powers. It would have to be legislation and scrutiny in this | :34:57. | :35:00. | |
house rather than a Henry VHII cause. I hear what he says but what | :35:01. | :35:08. | |
I would say in reply is that this is a bill brought forward in a United | :35:09. | :35:12. | |
Kingdom Parliament which has had frantic discussion both at second | :35:13. | :35:18. | |
reading and in committee and one report stage and doubtless `t third | :35:19. | :35:24. | |
reading. And I would suggest that he should be saying to his fridnds who | :35:25. | :35:31. | |
hold ministerial office and other positions of power within Scotland | :35:32. | :35:33. | |
and within the Scottish Parliament that they should always enstre that | :35:34. | :35:40. | |
where they are effectively delivering duties pasta to them | :35:41. | :35:48. | |
dash-mac dash past to them tnder a devolved government, they should | :35:49. | :35:51. | |
make sure how they deliver those policies and put them in pl`ce and | :35:52. | :35:57. | |
on the ground always reflects the national law of the land. And I make | :35:58. | :36:02. | |
the point again which I was bringing to a conclusion before it -, before | :36:03. | :36:12. | |
I gave way, it is simply thhs. That if this clause which creates a | :36:13. | :36:17. | |
devolution on immigration to Holyrood were to be passed, then by | :36:18. | :36:25. | |
its very definition, the Unhted Kingdom government would nedd to | :36:26. | :36:31. | |
find ways of trying to control the movement of people coming from | :36:32. | :36:36. | |
Scotland South into England and possibly from the South to the North | :36:37. | :36:43. | |
as well. Because as I say, we teased out during the committee st`ge both | :36:44. | :36:47. | |
in private session and in the evidence sessions the firm | :36:48. | :36:53. | |
commitment of the Scottish National party to open doors and no veterans | :36:54. | :36:59. | |
to immigration. That is somdthing my constituents in the South of England | :37:00. | :37:02. | |
would be grossly alarmed at. I give way. And I as the honourabld member | :37:03. | :37:07. | |
if he can tell the house anxthing that any of us said that wotld lead | :37:08. | :37:14. | |
him to believe that the SNP supports an open doors, open borders policy? | :37:15. | :37:18. | |
I cannot think of anything, I am sure the honourable member for | :37:19. | :37:22. | |
Paisley cannot think of anything, so what is he referring to? Unlike the | :37:23. | :37:30. | |
noble lord Green, I had no difficulty understanding wh`t she | :37:31. | :37:35. | |
and her honourable friend s`id at any time in committee. The | :37:36. | :37:38. | |
honourable gentleman will know precisely to what I refer. But | :37:39. | :37:48. | |
sometimes, the toner, the whng and a nod, in the direction of tr`vel and | :37:49. | :37:54. | |
both questions and amendments at committee and indeed in amendments | :37:55. | :38:03. | |
today can read one only to `ssume that the SNP, for reasons entirely | :38:04. | :38:09. | |
respectful, and if they wish to deploy them, do not believe in any | :38:10. | :38:16. | |
control of immigration. The narrative coming from the hdartland | :38:17. | :38:21. | |
honourable friend on the colmittee, honourable friend on the colmittee, | :38:22. | :38:26. | |
again said he had nobody during the election campaign raised imligration | :38:27. | :38:31. | |
as an issue on the doorstep. With the greatest pleasure... | :38:32. | :38:39. | |
Thank you. I just wanted to go back to our discussions in committee | :38:40. | :38:42. | |
which were indeed thoughtful and well debated. And I do agred with | :38:43. | :38:49. | |
the member for Castle Point and Norwich North and indeed yotrself | :38:50. | :38:56. | |
from North Dorset regarding the issue on the doorstep. It w`s a | :38:57. | :39:02. | |
number one issue. After the by-election, we were third `nd then | :39:03. | :39:07. | |
had to reflect in our delibdrations. had to reflect in our delibdrations. | :39:08. | :39:16. | |
And I heard one lawyer reprdsenting a freedom of movement block which I | :39:17. | :39:21. | |
felt was disingenuous so it was a number one issue. And the c`seload | :39:22. | :39:25. | |
we were left by the party opposite... The honourable lady is | :39:26. | :39:29. | |
hoping to catch my eye later in the debate. I suggest she makes her | :39:30. | :39:34. | |
intervention at that point. Thank you. The good people of Easley, many | :39:35. | :39:40. | |
of whom I got to know during the by-election at the time, will no | :39:41. | :39:49. | |
doubt breathe is -- a sigh of relief that they have a champion in my | :39:50. | :39:52. | |
friend who gets absolutely that if we are to have a sensible and | :39:53. | :40:00. | |
vibrant and capacious debatd in this country, it is right this house | :40:01. | :40:02. | |
address is it to legislation and so the bill is brought forward by our | :40:03. | :40:08. | |
right honourable friend the Immigration Minister. | :40:09. | :40:21. | |
the first thing I would say is in regards to immigration removal | :40:22. | :40:36. | |
centres and detention. I thhnk that they play a pivotal role in the | :40:37. | :40:42. | |
arsenal available to us as ` country and to those who we charge with | :40:43. | :40:49. | |
managing our borders and our immigration. I have to say, I think | :40:50. | :40:57. | |
the staff working in these centres deserve a huge debt of grathtude. I, | :40:58. | :41:05. | |
in a previous incarnation w`s fortunate to visit quite a few of | :41:06. | :41:14. | |
our IRCs including one at Hdathrow and I was struck by the dedhcation | :41:15. | :41:21. | |
of the staff and I was not convinced that we would be addressing this | :41:22. | :41:26. | |
issue in any sense of away `s these amendments seek to frustratd by | :41:27. | :41:34. | |
Terrington up the rule book in terms of the IRCs and detention. H am | :41:35. | :41:40. | |
extraordinarily grateful for him giving way, in that pivotal role in | :41:41. | :41:44. | |
immigration detention centrds, does he want to defend the detention of | :41:45. | :41:50. | |
pregnant women, people who have been victims of human trafficking, | :41:51. | :41:54. | |
torture or sexual violence, if not, will he suppose my -- support minute | :41:55. | :42:03. | |
clause eight? In reverse order, his first point, I say yes but his last, | :42:04. | :42:10. | |
no. Any woman, pregnant or not, is immaterial to the case, it hs the | :42:11. | :42:14. | |
environment in which people are detained and the care and attention | :42:15. | :42:18. | |
they are given rather than their status. What I would say to my | :42:19. | :42:23. | |
honourable friend, given thd proximity to his constituency, it | :42:24. | :42:28. | |
might even be within his constituency, is that I heard from | :42:29. | :42:36. | |
both staff and from people who were detained that they had seen people | :42:37. | :42:42. | |
destroy their papers, hide their child under the bed because the | :42:43. | :42:46. | |
child could not be touched when the aeroplane was on the tarmac to take | :42:47. | :42:53. | |
them off and away. Those st`ff, in my judgment and my experience and | :42:54. | :43:00. | |
that is from all I can speak is that they approach this with hugd | :43:01. | :43:05. | |
sensitivity, often in difficult circumstances. I ought to think that | :43:06. | :43:12. | |
the people we asked to manage these centres do a good job, for ` point | :43:13. | :43:16. | |
of clarification, my concern about this issue is not because of my | :43:17. | :43:21. | |
proximity to a detention centre but the proximity of some of thdse rules | :43:22. | :43:26. | |
to the ethical code I have concerns. The honourable member mentioned | :43:27. | :43:31. | |
about the fact it was the c`re of the people in those centres, is he | :43:32. | :43:35. | |
aware of the case PA, a pregnant woman delayed in Yalta wood and who | :43:36. | :43:42. | |
the Home Office had to admit was not given the proper antenatal care If | :43:43. | :43:47. | |
you detain pregnant women, listakes will be made and therefore we need | :43:48. | :43:54. | |
to protect ourselves and our ethics by having some rules to exelpt them. | :43:55. | :44:00. | |
I do not want to test your patience or indeed that of the house by | :44:01. | :44:04. | |
straying too far but my honourable friend has raised a valid point I | :44:05. | :44:08. | |
would say this, and I certahnly was aware of that case, I never think it | :44:09. | :44:18. | |
is quite right to build a policy on one incident. Terrible things | :44:19. | :44:22. | |
happen, when people are pregnant, whether they are detained or in | :44:23. | :44:26. | |
their ordinary business. Thdre is medical negligence even if xou are | :44:27. | :44:31. | |
outside prison or a detention centre. Nasty things, upsetting and | :44:32. | :44:35. | |
tragic things happen which ly right honourable friend is right, that | :44:36. | :44:39. | |
should raise questions and lake sure that members, honourable and right | :44:40. | :44:44. | |
honourable in this house ard continually ensuring that the | :44:45. | :44:47. | |
quality and access to the qtality and range of care to those who are | :44:48. | :44:55. | |
detained is wide, deep, quantitative and professional. He is right, but I | :44:56. | :45:02. | |
don't believe that one case or an isolated incident should force us to | :45:03. | :45:06. | |
effectively say that immigr`tion removal centres and the principle of | :45:07. | :45:12. | |
detention is inherently wrong or indeed unethical. As a practising | :45:13. | :45:16. | |
Christian myself, I find no difficulty in reconciling a good | :45:17. | :45:25. | |
quality care in detention and art in my faith, and ethical basis. Talking | :45:26. | :45:31. | |
about his remarks, this is `bout fair play, that issue goes to the | :45:32. | :45:36. | |
heart of these amendments as well. On the issue of pregnant wolen, in | :45:37. | :45:41. | |
the Home Office guidance, not so much an independent case, the Home | :45:42. | :45:45. | |
Office says it considers groups including those who are pregnant, | :45:46. | :45:51. | |
that they are only suitable for detention in very exception`l | :45:52. | :45:54. | |
circumstances. It is whether that needs more attention, that hs the | :45:55. | :45:57. | |
issue we are concerned about, proper fair play for these people. My | :45:58. | :46:02. | |
constituents are concerned `bout fair play, as with those who are | :46:03. | :46:06. | |
concerned with patrolling otr borders. He makes the absoltte | :46:07. | :46:14. | |
point, this has to be about fairness and robust regulations. Proper | :46:15. | :46:18. | |
ministerial oversight and scrutiny of ministerial duties by thhs place. | :46:19. | :46:24. | |
I think that is absolutely the right chain of command. And we all know, | :46:25. | :46:30. | |
whether it be in the health care system, education, the police, Armed | :46:31. | :46:35. | |
Forces or whatever it may h`ppen to be, things go wrong. Regulations not | :46:36. | :46:41. | |
necessarily for those to be followed to the letter. And it is a horrible | :46:42. | :46:45. | |
phrase and we all trot it ott in this house, "lessons will bd | :46:46. | :46:50. | |
learned. " I think my right honourable friend, the Immigration | :46:51. | :46:55. | |
Minister, and I do not say this to be sycophantic, will always ensure | :46:56. | :47:02. | |
that those regulations are fair and that they are applied fairlx. On the | :47:03. | :47:08. | |
subject of fairness, could H say Madam Deputy Speaker, words about | :47:09. | :47:13. | |
workers, both employees and employers, landlords and hotsing. It | :47:14. | :47:21. | |
will be a small sample and the honourable gentleman who spdaks from | :47:22. | :47:24. | |
the opposite front bench and I have discussed this, you can oftdn have a | :47:25. | :47:29. | |
survey which says one thing and you can extrapolate the data, no matter | :47:30. | :47:35. | |
how small or large the sample size is. But the laws and regulations | :47:36. | :47:41. | |
that today govern access to the private rental property market and | :47:42. | :47:45. | |
for those in affordable housing are pretty strict and robust. I think | :47:46. | :47:51. | |
what this says and in conjunction with those clauses of the bhll which | :47:52. | :47:56. | |
ring new responsibilities to both employees and employers is that this | :47:57. | :48:02. | |
is an issue which has becomd, one is tempted to say, not as a chdap | :48:03. | :48:07. | |
knocking political point, btt the quantum became so large it due to | :48:08. | :48:17. | |
the rather shy and deleterious attitude of the party opposhte when | :48:18. | :48:21. | |
in Parliament, that governmdnt and her agencies cannot seek to solve | :48:22. | :48:25. | |
all of these issues and problems. I think that it is why it is perfectly | :48:26. | :48:31. | |
proper to say to a landlord just about to enter into a rental | :48:32. | :48:39. | |
agreement that he or she and his or her agent has made absolutely the | :48:40. | :48:44. | |
most forensic tests and checks possible to ensure the legitimacy | :48:45. | :48:50. | |
and qualification of that individual or family who is seeking | :48:51. | :48:54. | |
accommodation. I see no particular onus on that and in order to avoid | :48:55. | :49:01. | |
the scenario which the honotrable and learn a gentleman from Holborn | :49:02. | :49:07. | |
and St Pancras raises, I wotld have thought that both the advicd given | :49:08. | :49:11. | |
by the residential landlords Association to their members and the | :49:12. | :49:15. | |
advice given to the residential letting agencies will be cldar as to | :49:16. | :49:23. | |
what their duties are. It whll be important to stress to both that | :49:24. | :49:27. | |
they are helping the governlent and the country play a very important | :49:28. | :49:35. | |
role in addressing this isste. That takes me from the right of `ccess to | :49:36. | :49:41. | |
housing to access to work. Dither as an employee or as an employdr. I | :49:42. | :49:49. | |
think it is absolutely right, as contained in the bill and I would | :49:50. | :49:54. | |
say that the amendments addressing these issues are at best | :49:55. | :50:02. | |
mischievous, they are at worst devious. Is trying to fundalentally | :50:03. | :50:10. | |
undermine, I have little or no doubt that employers, whether thex be | :50:11. | :50:18. | |
large or small, usually seek to kick back from any new regulation or | :50:19. | :50:25. | |
guidance from which they have to operate. But that should not be a | :50:26. | :50:32. | |
factor on us imposing them hf we are convinced of their efficacy. In this | :50:33. | :50:38. | |
respect, what is contained hn this bill, its efficacy I am convinced | :50:39. | :50:44. | |
and fundamentally believe that those amendments would seek to undermine | :50:45. | :50:50. | |
it. It is no good, Madam Deputy Speaker, honourable and right | :50:51. | :50:53. | |
honourable members in this house, irrespective of which side of the | :50:54. | :50:57. | |
political divide we fall, wringing our hands against trafficking, | :50:58. | :51:05. | |
wringing our hands against slavery, wringing our hands against forced | :51:06. | :51:12. | |
labour, and then when the opportunity comes to augment | :51:13. | :51:18. | |
previous legislation, for example the rules and the act governing gang | :51:19. | :51:26. | |
masters and we say "no, this is a step too far. " "It is too great an | :51:27. | :51:33. | |
onus on the employer, we must seek to resist this. " In my judgment, | :51:34. | :51:39. | |
that sends such a mixed and confusing message to those dvil | :51:40. | :51:45. | |
individuals, who today, are benefiting in labour and cash terms | :51:46. | :51:51. | |
from forced and end entered labour. If we do not prevail with the | :51:52. | :51:58. | |
clauses in this bill as amended at committee, in my judgment, `nd I | :51:59. | :52:04. | |
state, Madam Deputy Speaker, that it is only in my judgment, the | :52:05. | :52:11. | |
fundamental flaw will be a load the water line. When and if the | :52:12. | :52:16. | |
honourable and learn a gentleman from the official opposition and the | :52:17. | :52:20. | |
honourable gentleman and his comments from the SNP benchds press | :52:21. | :52:26. | |
and the amendments, I will be trotting into the no macro lobby and | :52:27. | :52:31. | |
I hope many of my friends whll be joining me. Madam Deputy Spdaker, I | :52:32. | :52:41. | |
spent five long weeks on thd immigration Bill committee `nd it | :52:42. | :52:45. | |
was an interesting experience. But I found very little I could agree with | :52:46. | :52:51. | |
unfortunately. Along with the members of lazily and Renfrdwshire | :52:52. | :52:55. | |
North, I think we did some pretty forensic questioning, the conclusion | :52:56. | :53:00. | |
I reached was that the motivation behind much of this bill is not as | :53:01. | :53:07. | |
stated. It cannot be becausd much of it will not work. It will not do | :53:08. | :53:12. | |
what it apparently sets out to do. It will impact negatively on anyone | :53:13. | :53:17. | |
who looks, sounds or even sdems not to be British. Thank you, I would | :53:18. | :53:30. | |
say right to rent is a good example of the problem she is highlhghting | :53:31. | :53:34. | |
and the landlords may be too scared to lend to someone who might not | :53:35. | :53:41. | |
seem to be British. Absolutdly, my honourable friend took the words out | :53:42. | :53:46. | |
of my mouth, I was about to say this was the perfect example of this The | :53:47. | :53:49. | |
landlords Association were clear that landlords are fearful of | :53:50. | :53:54. | |
committing a criminal offence by renting to the wrong person | :53:55. | :53:58. | |
inadvertently and it will ldad to them behaving in a racist m`nner, | :53:59. | :54:05. | |
they are their words. It cotld be because they are not white, their | :54:06. | :54:08. | |
surname does not sound Brithsh or because they do not have a passport | :54:09. | :54:13. | |
that they will simply not t`ke them on as tenants. They will not take | :54:14. | :54:17. | |
the risk making it harder for those people to get accommodation and put | :54:18. | :54:21. | |
some of them in danger. Thex have no choice about where they lay their | :54:22. | :54:24. | |
head at night and in some circumstances, with whom. Or they | :54:25. | :54:29. | |
could end up on the street, I do not want that for people who have a | :54:30. | :54:32. | |
right to live here but nor do I want it for people who don't havd the | :54:33. | :54:36. | |
legal right to live here, I don t want that for everyone. If the | :54:37. | :54:41. | |
government were to write a script for a film, it would be a black and | :54:42. | :54:46. | |
white one in more ways than one it would be straightforward, if someone | :54:47. | :54:49. | |
is assumed asylum and we sqteeze the life out of them by forcing them | :54:50. | :54:53. | |
onto the streets and starving them, that they will simply stroll up and | :54:54. | :54:59. | |
give in and go home. We nevdr get to know what happens to them btt in | :55:00. | :55:04. | |
Britain, we all live happilx ever after. All the evidence tells us | :55:05. | :55:08. | |
that is not what happens. I will tell you why, for many people, they | :55:09. | :55:14. | |
have no choice, sleeping on the street in training and freezing cold | :55:15. | :55:18. | |
Britain, going hungry day after day, knowing that you are despisdd by so | :55:19. | :55:22. | |
many people who pass you by is still preferable to returning somdwhere | :55:23. | :55:27. | |
where you have all that and the danger of being raped or evdn | :55:28. | :55:30. | |
murdered. That is what the dvidence tells us, those working with | :55:31. | :55:33. | |
destitute asylum seekers tell us. There is one hour to go for those | :55:34. | :55:44. | |
watching this on television, if they go to committee room 14, thdy will | :55:45. | :55:49. | |
find a fantastic organisation. Sanctuary, with doubled since - | :55:50. | :55:55. | |
with dozens of asylum seekers. I know this was something we did | :55:56. | :56:01. | |
discuss in committee. She rdfers to the term asylum seekers, dods she | :56:02. | :56:06. | |
mean they'll asylum seekers who have claimed asylum or the claims have | :56:07. | :56:11. | |
not been upheld? Asylum seekers are supported through the systel. Thank | :56:12. | :56:16. | |
you for giving me an opporttnity to talk about the language we tse | :56:17. | :56:21. | |
committee says failed asylul seekers, I say refused asyltm | :56:22. | :56:26. | |
seekers. The married -- the majority of those reviews or failed by this | :56:27. | :56:29. | |
Government when the appeal `t court stage. | :56:30. | :56:36. | |
You have used the phrase asxlum seekers. Do you accept this bill is | :56:37. | :56:43. | |
focused at a range of categories where somebody may become illegal | :56:44. | :56:49. | |
and living here? Not specifhcally targeting asylum seekers. I | :56:50. | :56:56. | |
absolutely am aware of that but we have limited time so I have to focus | :56:57. | :56:59. | |
on what I think is the most important impact of this part of the | :57:00. | :57:03. | |
bill will have and that is on the most vulnerable and those asylum | :57:04. | :57:09. | |
seekers who have been refusdd. I just wonder if she can give the | :57:10. | :57:16. | |
House and example of an asylum seeker, a failed asylum seeker, does | :57:17. | :57:21. | |
she believe any asylum seekdr should have failed? | :57:22. | :57:26. | |
I would not use that language about anyone but I understand somd asylum | :57:27. | :57:31. | |
seekers, people look for asxlum and they are not entitled to it. I made | :57:32. | :57:37. | |
that clear on the bill, I al talking about those asylum seekers who do | :57:38. | :57:41. | |
need help and should be enthtled and when they get the opportunity to | :57:42. | :57:47. | |
appeal do tend to win and so it is accepted they did require asylum and | :57:48. | :57:50. | |
we need to give it to them. The point I am making is right to rent | :57:51. | :57:55. | |
or not provide a happy ever after. It will not work and will increase | :57:56. | :58:02. | |
discrimination and racism. Ht should not be fermented in Scotland without | :58:03. | :58:05. | |
the permission of the members of the Scottish Parliament to whom housing | :58:06. | :58:09. | |
is devolved amongst other things. And it should be removed in its | :58:10. | :58:14. | |
entirety from the bill. I whll give way. | :58:15. | :58:21. | |
Her party has often repeated a call for a more relaxed approach to | :58:22. | :58:26. | |
asylum. They have opposed the forced removal of failed asylum sedkers and | :58:27. | :58:30. | |
pledged in the last manifesto to close the only detention centre in | :58:31. | :58:33. | |
Scotland, a King is very much an image problem. -- making thhs. - | :58:34. | :58:40. | |
making this very much an English problem. Many countries across the | :58:41. | :58:46. | |
world do not make much use of detention and the use of thd ways to | :58:47. | :58:55. | |
unable people. Have a project which works successfully to return | :58:56. | :58:58. | |
families when there is no other option, it is not essential always | :58:59. | :59:06. | |
successfully get the amendmdnt successfully get the amendmdnt | :59:07. | :59:10. | |
through and get rid of Right to Rent, there is a specific moment I | :59:11. | :59:14. | |
wish to ask the government to accept because I cannot believe thhs was | :59:15. | :59:18. | |
anything other than an oversight. During the committee, I askdd for | :59:19. | :59:23. | |
more detail on when somebodx providing a roof over it is to check | :59:24. | :59:27. | |
peasant's head becomes liable to criminal prosecution -- a ddstitute | :59:28. | :59:34. | |
person. Many do this as an `ct of compassion as volunteers, if you | :59:35. | :59:38. | |
want to bring in the Christhan faith is good Samaritans. I wanted clarity | :59:39. | :59:44. | |
they would not face court and possibly prisoner for showing a | :59:45. | :59:51. | |
kindness to somebody. I recdived partial assurance, thus amendment | :59:52. | :59:57. | |
46. It is more important now than ever because we will have more | :59:58. | :00:01. | |
people needing this kindness than ever before if this bill gods | :00:02. | :00:10. | |
through. It was one of the greatest reactions to the current refugee | :00:11. | :00:13. | |
crisis which escalated over the summer. Thousands wanted to know how | :00:14. | :00:19. | |
to help. We said on both sides of this House we were so proud of those | :00:20. | :00:25. | |
people. Let them in, they s`id, we will give them homes. Thous`nds | :00:26. | :00:29. | |
offered to open their homes to those in desperate need. At that time the | :00:30. | :00:34. | |
offer was in response to thd mainly Syrian refugees and refugees who | :00:35. | :00:39. | |
have been rented leave to rdmain will not be affected by this bill | :00:40. | :00:42. | |
because accommodation will be provided. I should say not `ffected | :00:43. | :00:50. | |
directly. But the debate has started again and people are looking at | :00:51. | :00:55. | |
asylum seekers already in the UK with fresh eyes, charities `re | :00:56. | :00:59. | |
saying, we have many refused asylum seekers currently destitute, why not | :01:00. | :01:06. | |
home them instead? If they do however and this goes through | :01:07. | :01:09. | |
unamended, those kind, compassionate, generous people could | :01:10. | :01:14. | |
be criminalised. They said the Minister gave the partial | :01:15. | :01:18. | |
reassurance and I will expl`in. If no money changes hands, there is no | :01:19. | :01:22. | |
issue and you can still let a refused asylum seeker or fahled | :01:23. | :01:26. | |
asylum seeker is the members opposite like to say stay at your | :01:27. | :01:30. | |
home if no money is exchangdd. That was welcome news organisations in my | :01:31. | :01:37. | |
city of Glasgow. Unity incltded which does a good job of kedping | :01:38. | :01:43. | |
vulnerable people away from the streets with little funding. But | :01:44. | :01:47. | |
what if you are a householddr who cannot afford that? Rich in | :01:48. | :01:51. | |
compassion but poor in finances It costs money to let another person | :01:52. | :01:57. | |
live in your home, heating `nd lighting costs, food. Let's face it, | :01:58. | :02:01. | |
it even if that is not part of the agreement, you will not sit down to | :02:02. | :02:05. | |
dinner knowing another person under your roof is growing hungry. Some | :02:06. | :02:11. | |
charities will pay a nominal fee to the householder, not profit,making | :02:12. | :02:16. | |
or a commercial rent, to cover the costs. I have had no set re`ssurance | :02:17. | :02:25. | |
these people, where they st`nd. The Minister said exemptions have been | :02:26. | :02:30. | |
made for refugees housing vhctims of trafficking but why not exelpt | :02:31. | :02:35. | |
anybody housing in refused `sylum seeker because otherwise thdy will | :02:36. | :02:40. | |
have to live on the streets? Is the government going to make crhminals | :02:41. | :02:43. | |
of these people still volunteers because they are not making money | :02:44. | :02:46. | |
out of this, is he going to criminalise them for having the | :02:47. | :02:51. | |
decency to share with a str`nger in trouble and not being wealthy enough | :02:52. | :02:54. | |
to cover the increased costs themselves? And what of the | :02:55. | :02:58. | |
charities? Like the actions foundation in Newcastle which looks | :02:59. | :03:06. | |
for philanthropic landlords for asylum seekers to rent at a heavily | :03:07. | :03:12. | |
discounted rent paid for by the charity. Bells -- those landlords | :03:13. | :03:17. | |
will be committing a crimin`l offence. And the charities, they | :03:18. | :03:24. | |
need to know. And did the government intend for that to happen? @bigail | :03:25. | :03:30. | |
housing in Leeds and open doors provide accommodation not in family | :03:31. | :03:34. | |
homes but houses lent by falily owners and empty church buildings. | :03:35. | :03:42. | |
They need to pay a nominal but not commercial rent. Nobody is laking a | :03:43. | :03:47. | |
profit. Dozens of charities and individuals across this grotp - | :03:48. | :03:53. | |
country carry out this work, will they be committing an offence? Those | :03:54. | :03:57. | |
who provide accommodation whll be, it seems. Ahmed and women going to | :03:58. | :04:05. | |
be prosecuted for the doing as the Bible says and not turning the other | :04:06. | :04:11. | |
cheek? Is the government colfortable with imprisoning faith leaddrs for | :04:12. | :04:15. | |
up to five years? I would ask the government to think again otherwise | :04:16. | :04:19. | |
what they are saying to those thousands who responded to the | :04:20. | :04:23. | |
refugee crisis in a manner of which we will all rightly proud is you | :04:24. | :04:27. | |
cannot help. There is a need and we will increase that by making more | :04:28. | :04:31. | |
refused asylum seekers homeless but if you dare to help, we will | :04:32. | :04:37. | |
criminalise you. She is making her point with the | :04:38. | :04:41. | |
same eloquent passion she dhd in committee. But she pointed to | :04:42. | :04:48. | |
evidence about the open door policy and what I perceived the position of | :04:49. | :04:53. | |
the SNP to be, is she aware she has just done that? She has talked about | :04:54. | :04:57. | |
refused asylum seekers who have no right to be here. Being allowed to | :04:58. | :05:01. | |
stay here as long as they lhke based on the philanthropy of individuals | :05:02. | :05:06. | |
which is to be championed and supported, but when people have gone | :05:07. | :05:09. | |
through the process, she must even admit it is then time to go home! | :05:10. | :05:15. | |
The honourable member knows that some people simply cannot go home | :05:16. | :05:18. | |
and he knows it and his govdrnment knows it because even peopld in | :05:19. | :05:22. | |
those circumstances often do not get sent home but to detention centres | :05:23. | :05:26. | |
where they languish for a vdry long time because they cannot be sent | :05:27. | :05:30. | |
home. I am not talking about every single asylum seeker. I am not | :05:31. | :05:35. | |
talking about doing it indefinitely. I say we should not criminalise | :05:36. | :05:39. | |
people who open their homes to people in desperate need. To be | :05:40. | :05:44. | |
clear, I oppose the right to rent in its entirety. I question thd | :05:45. | :05:50. | |
government and its right to override the wishes of the Scottish | :05:51. | :05:53. | |
parliament and I raise a topical issue I hope will be simply an | :05:54. | :05:57. | |
anomaly that the government will put right. | :05:58. | :06:03. | |
It is a pleasure to take part in this part of the deliberations. I | :06:04. | :06:11. | |
want to speak about the amendments in which my name is included, clause | :06:12. | :06:20. | |
number macro, nine, 13 and 32. - clause eight. They are uniqte and | :06:21. | :06:28. | |
may have a cross party feel. I have not had the pleasure of being | :06:29. | :06:32. | |
involved in all the stages of this bill but I reckon this must be a | :06:33. | :06:37. | |
unique aspect that we have cross-party support for amendments | :06:38. | :06:41. | |
in the bill and that has not happened until now. And the Minister | :06:42. | :06:46. | |
has taken notice of that and that is being considered. There is | :06:47. | :06:52. | |
cross-party concern in relation to what my honourable friend t`lked | :06:53. | :06:57. | |
about, which is fair play, `nd we are concerned about that. About | :06:58. | :07:02. | |
ensuring the immigration system stands up to scrutiny from the very | :07:03. | :07:08. | |
beginning to the very end. Ht has fair play within it. That m`tters | :07:09. | :07:14. | |
for those who shout loudest and for those campaigning loudly. Whether it | :07:15. | :07:20. | |
is before elections, in othdr campaigns, throughout the ydar. For | :07:21. | :07:28. | |
those without such a voice `nd who do not even have a vote. And very | :07:29. | :07:33. | |
much what Fairplay should bd about is the other who is not as loud but | :07:34. | :07:42. | |
where we want to uphold fundamental British values of fairness `nd J | :07:43. | :07:45. | |
process. Indeed, one could refer back to the Magna Carta on the issue | :07:46. | :07:53. | |
of detention. And to the right and duty of detaining those when there | :07:54. | :07:57. | |
has been fair and J process and not administrative purposes alone. I | :07:58. | :08:03. | |
concede that has not been the main purpose of the bill from its | :08:04. | :08:08. | |
outset, this is coming at it from another angle, but it will not | :08:09. | :08:13. | |
surprise the Minister these amendments are therefore | :08:14. | :08:16. | |
consideration. It is import`nt when dealing with one aspect of the | :08:17. | :08:22. | |
immigration bill which is ddtention, that we uphold the principlds that | :08:23. | :08:25. | |
have stood this country well for many years. And the rest of the | :08:26. | :08:30. | |
world looks at this, which hs how we handle detention, with fairness And | :08:31. | :08:35. | |
dealing with those detained for administrative reasons and the bar | :08:36. | :08:42. | |
is set higher, that we are proportioned and reasonable and | :08:43. | :08:46. | |
doing things in a limited w`y that means a limited number of pdople | :08:47. | :08:49. | |
remain in detention for a short a time as possible. Regardless of any | :08:50. | :08:55. | |
amendment getting past and hn statute or guidance, we must ensure | :08:56. | :09:01. | |
that visible is applied. Dods the honourable member agree that what | :09:02. | :09:05. | |
unites the parties here is the principal that there should be some | :09:06. | :09:11. | |
measure to limit and reduce the time spent immigration detention | :09:12. | :09:16. | |
centres, to limit it and look to reduce it? | :09:17. | :09:20. | |
I do agree and I look forward to hearing from the Minister in | :09:21. | :09:22. | |
relation to that. The abiding principle which is in many ways the | :09:23. | :09:27. | |
product and should be the product now before we go further, one looks | :09:28. | :09:33. | |
into the Home Office guidance and detention is a last result. It | :09:34. | :09:38. | |
should be used sparingly and it is wanting to ensure it is somdthing | :09:39. | :09:43. | |
for everybody to use and apply throughout the system. The principal | :09:44. | :09:50. | |
IC is important is however people get into this country, by f`ir means | :09:51. | :09:54. | |
or foul means, everybody is treated fairly and with dignity all the way | :09:55. | :10:00. | |
through to maybe their removal and certainly as they remain with us. It | :10:01. | :10:06. | |
may be by force but at everx stage of the time, we need to show we | :10:07. | :10:08. | |
respect their human dignity. It may give it difficult for the | :10:09. | :10:28. | |
Minister to talk about one specific person, but to limit and reduce the | :10:29. | :10:33. | |
amount of time people spend in detention is something diffdrent and | :10:34. | :10:38. | |
it is possible to talk to. H agree, it is important to get the first | :10:39. | :10:42. | |
principles right and we havd had lots of discussions around the | :10:43. | :10:48. | |
instances of timing and maxhmum time, we have had that debate in the | :10:49. | :10:53. | |
all-party enquiry which he was a member of, as the member for | :10:54. | :10:59. | |
Sheffield Central and tribute to Sarah to the, who fought hard about | :11:00. | :11:11. | |
this issue. For enjoying in this campaign -- for joining in this | :11:12. | :11:14. | |
campaign, very much involved in this issue, it is important we do not get | :11:15. | :11:20. | |
caught up on the issue... Bdtween time and time itself, some of us | :11:21. | :11:26. | |
feel we may get to that stage where it needs that statutory timd limit | :11:27. | :11:33. | |
to really ensure that there is some movement to ensure everyone is doing | :11:34. | :11:37. | |
all they can to limit the thme. It is important we listen to the | :11:38. | :11:41. | |
Minister and hear what he h`s to say as I understand the review he is | :11:42. | :11:47. | |
looking at and to go through what is a new clause 13 which I may come to | :11:48. | :11:51. | |
in my remaining remarks. And to see how we want to achieve what we are | :11:52. | :11:57. | |
all saying is the principles that have been outlined. It is ilportant | :11:58. | :12:01. | |
that we recognise there is work out the happening in relation to | :12:02. | :12:07. | |
detention and a review into the conditions of detention is | :12:08. | :12:13. | |
important. We wanted it sooner, the home affairs select committde that I | :12:14. | :12:19. | |
sit on wanted it to happen before we got into this process we ard going | :12:20. | :12:24. | |
through now, I appreciate the government is looking at it very | :12:25. | :12:28. | |
carefully and treating it whth the respect it is deserved. But I also | :12:29. | :12:35. | |
welcome the indications there is further comprehends every vhew that | :12:36. | :12:44. | |
goes to the heart of a new clause 13 but it is important we look at it in | :12:45. | :12:51. | |
this hill. There is a danger that detention centres do not get enough | :12:52. | :12:56. | |
attention, but it can be solething out of sight and out of mind, over | :12:57. | :13:03. | |
the years, 30,000 people held in 11 immigration centres, apart from the | :13:04. | :13:10. | |
circumstances that sometimes lead to litigation, it does not get the | :13:11. | :13:14. | |
attention it needs. Denny is to be action one way or another where we | :13:15. | :13:23. | |
get to the point that detainees are much clearer as to when thex are | :13:24. | :13:29. | |
likely to be released. I sat in a debate we had on a backbench | :13:30. | :13:36. | |
business motion debate, that everything first people want, they | :13:37. | :13:42. | |
ended up in prison after how they dealt with that case, they want to | :13:43. | :13:46. | |
know what is the earliest stage of release and we need to give some | :13:47. | :13:51. | |
greater clarity and expectation At least expectations of the sxstem, we | :13:52. | :13:56. | |
have gatekeepers in place at the right time and various revidw | :13:57. | :14:02. | |
possibilities so there is not the possibility of this in definite | :14:03. | :14:08. | |
detention and a sense of push and pull to ensure people are therefore | :14:09. | :14:17. | |
as limited a time as possible. These new clauses are framed around the | :14:18. | :14:23. | |
all-party group enquiry abott refugees and immigration, wd were | :14:24. | :14:28. | |
able to report before the election but more substantively in the motion | :14:29. | :14:34. | |
to achieve something that h`s not happened before, a unanimous | :14:35. | :14:38. | |
resolution supporting the principles and recommendations bind thhs | :14:39. | :14:43. | |
enquiry. We are concerned about maximum time limit but also the | :14:44. | :14:47. | |
outcomes here. The outcomes that go across conditions of treatmdnt and | :14:48. | :14:54. | |
go to the time and numbers that are in detention. We want to ensure we | :14:55. | :14:59. | |
see action, there is a concdrn about the copper coated piece of work the | :15:00. | :15:03. | |
Minister knows it more than anyone in this house but there is the issue | :15:04. | :15:10. | |
and aspect about foreign national offenders and that is why the new | :15:11. | :15:16. | |
clause nine, my name is there, we will recognise there is an hssue of | :15:17. | :15:23. | |
public protection. That needs to be handled but it is not an excuse for | :15:24. | :15:27. | |
not handling it because it hs complex and difficult, we mtst be | :15:28. | :15:34. | |
able to handle it better. The fact that we are talking about a quarter | :15:35. | :15:41. | |
of immigration detainees ard foreign national offenders of one form or | :15:42. | :15:44. | |
another means it is not good enough to rely on the issues around public | :15:45. | :15:54. | |
protection and we should do better. The issue was mentioned, it is | :15:55. | :15:57. | |
almost arbitrary to have an indefinite time of detention, it is | :15:58. | :16:06. | |
not fair, there are also thd drives of cost. The immigration bill no | :16:07. | :16:13. | |
doubt has gone through an assessment on cost and one of the factors is | :16:14. | :16:19. | |
the cost. We have had the ptblic spending review and the Homd Office | :16:20. | :16:23. | |
is still looking at the isste of cost and it must be a driver for | :16:24. | :16:29. | |
what the cost of one person is in detention, it is something like | :16:30. | :16:33. | |
?36,000 a year to have them in detention. There must be better ways | :16:34. | :16:41. | |
to spend that money. I wantdd, Madam Deputy Speaker, draw attenthon to | :16:42. | :16:49. | |
clause eight, the new clausd eight because it is important awax from | :16:50. | :16:53. | |
the stats to look at the individual categories of the people we are | :16:54. | :16:56. | |
talking about. We can somethmes stereotype them in the wrong way. | :16:57. | :17:00. | |
This goes to the heart of the issue and the concerns the enquirx had. We | :17:01. | :17:07. | |
seek to exempt pregnant womdn and people who have been granted | :17:08. | :17:13. | |
asylum, it was raised by my honourable friend for North Dorset | :17:14. | :17:19. | |
in the debate and as I said in the intervention, the issue herd as with | :17:20. | :17:22. | |
others is that it is alreadx there in the guidance to do these things, | :17:23. | :17:27. | |
it is how we make sure it rdally happens and does not get lost in | :17:28. | :17:33. | |
guidance. It identifies the vulnerable groups of people, | :17:34. | :17:37. | |
pregnant women, those with serious medical conditions or mental | :17:38. | :17:40. | |
illness, those with serious disabilities, those victims of human | :17:41. | :17:44. | |
trafficking, no one would stggest it is immaterial about pregnant women, | :17:45. | :17:53. | |
but it is material and they can only be suitable for detention in | :17:54. | :17:57. | |
exceptional circumstances. What we heard in our enquiry is that | :17:58. | :18:02. | |
guidance is not properly applied and implemented. Those protections are | :18:03. | :18:06. | |
limited and it is all too complicated that we see those | :18:07. | :18:11. | |
victims of trafficking make their way to detention centres for an | :18:12. | :18:16. | |
intolerable amount of time `nd are traumatised again by what they have | :18:17. | :18:20. | |
been through and they feel simile under abuse and trauma, we heard | :18:21. | :18:26. | |
from many people, this is rdlevant to this new clause eight, when she | :18:27. | :18:33. | |
arrived at the IRC is, she was asked if she had been to any traula, she | :18:34. | :18:38. | |
said that she had been throtgh trafficking but she was still issued | :18:39. | :18:44. | |
into detention and she said she was released, half are released like and | :18:45. | :18:50. | |
she has now been recognised as a victim of human trafficking. She is | :18:51. | :18:55. | |
one amongst many where we nded to recognise the screening process is | :18:56. | :18:58. | |
not doing enough. It is not surprising when there are l`nguage | :18:59. | :19:02. | |
issues and people under tratma that when they find themselves in | :19:03. | :19:06. | |
detention they are not likely to speak freely and frankly about what | :19:07. | :19:10. | |
the situation is. This new clause eight challenges the governlent | :19:11. | :19:15. | |
about whether we are doing dnough and do we need to go further and we | :19:16. | :19:23. | |
have been informed by the Stephen Shore recommendation. One fhnal | :19:24. | :19:26. | |
point about the new clause dight, we also heard that in terms of the | :19:27. | :19:31. | |
exceptional circumstance rule for detaining pregnant women, wd heard | :19:32. | :19:38. | |
that the Home Office, there was a team inspector at HM prisons | :19:39. | :19:44. | |
Inspectorate, while looking into pregnant woman, he said thex had not | :19:45. | :19:49. | |
found the exceptional circulstances in the paperwork to justify it in | :19:50. | :19:53. | |
the first place, they almost fail at the first hurdle because it is not | :19:54. | :19:59. | |
taken further. We need to protect the most vulnerable people, the | :20:00. | :20:01. | |
other people we must be carhng about, to make sure they have the | :20:02. | :20:05. | |
FairPlay so they are treated properly. I sense we will look back | :20:06. | :20:14. | |
in history at these times and the numbers detained in immigration and | :20:15. | :20:22. | |
wonder how we tolerated for so long so many people being detaindd who | :20:23. | :20:29. | |
were victims of torture and trafficking and indeed pregnant | :20:30. | :20:32. | |
women. Finally on the new clause 13, an amendment coalescing a lot of | :20:33. | :20:38. | |
people around the house, it is moderate in its recommendathons it | :20:39. | :20:44. | |
is saying what the all-partx group has said and the backbench business | :20:45. | :20:50. | |
motion says and what the hotse resolved to do should indeed | :20:51. | :20:53. | |
happen. That is what the hotse has said quite clearly and unanhmously | :20:54. | :20:57. | |
and that is what it is seekhng to do. I will wait to hear frol the | :20:58. | :21:03. | |
Minister to see exactly how we are going to do what I think is now a | :21:04. | :21:11. | |
front bench view as well across the house that if one looks at the new | :21:12. | :21:21. | |
clause 13, that there is a scope to coalesce bind this. That is the | :21:22. | :21:29. | |
reality we must, here we ard, thank you. Something prepared earlier we | :21:30. | :21:38. | |
all agree, this is what I w`nt to hear from the Minister, we do agree | :21:39. | :21:41. | |
that we will indeed look at how we can reduce the number of people | :21:42. | :21:46. | |
detained. We will make sure we put in place procedures, qualit`tive | :21:47. | :21:50. | |
guidance, to make sure we fhnd a way to minimise the length of thme an | :21:51. | :21:54. | |
individual is detained but we also make sure we put in place gtidance | :21:55. | :21:59. | |
and whatever way that we have more effective form of detention that | :22:00. | :22:05. | |
meets the objectives of this place. " And that we have in place | :22:06. | :22:11. | |
procedures that are effective to decisions for those detained and we | :22:12. | :22:15. | |
continue to detain. That is what I want to achieve. Some would say it | :22:16. | :22:20. | |
still needs a statutory timd limit but let us see what the Minhster | :22:21. | :22:25. | |
says and how that time fits into this bill in the other placd | :22:26. | :22:30. | |
following the report and no doubt the over affairs select comlittee | :22:31. | :22:35. | |
will be listening and also see an update from that comprehenshve | :22:36. | :22:38. | |
review before we go too far down the line in the other place. Either way, | :22:39. | :22:43. | |
can we at least get through the procedures in this bill and make | :22:44. | :22:48. | |
sure we have many less people in immigration detention, many are | :22:49. | :22:50. | |
there for too long and many people who have fair play and respdct for | :22:51. | :23:00. | |
their dignity. Before I addressed the three amendments which H turn my | :23:01. | :23:05. | |
attention to, I want to makd two brief points. The first is hn | :23:06. | :23:08. | |
response to the member for North Dorset and the honourable mdmber on | :23:09. | :23:14. | |
the Labour benches who reminded the house that we should not be going | :23:15. | :23:18. | |
over continually the issues that were discussed in full detahl at the | :23:19. | :23:23. | |
committee stage. I want to lake a gentle point, I would love to have | :23:24. | :23:28. | |
been a part of the Bill comlittee and I do think and I know ntmber two | :23:29. | :23:33. | |
-- nobody can assuage my concerns here, it is not for this pl`ce but | :23:34. | :23:41. | |
on an issue of such importance and reserved in this Parliament, I think | :23:42. | :23:44. | |
it is important to re-emphasise the point that there should be regional | :23:45. | :23:48. | |
representation on a Bill colmittee, at least Northern Ireland, be at my | :23:49. | :23:54. | |
party or any of the others, should have representation on such a | :23:55. | :23:59. | |
committee so we can scrutinhse and get involved in these important | :24:00. | :24:03. | |
discussions. The second thing Madam Deputy Speaker, I am delighted to | :24:04. | :24:07. | |
see the Minister of State for Northern Ireland on the front bench | :24:08. | :24:11. | |
earlier in this debate becatse I hope to grab hold of him before we | :24:12. | :24:16. | |
get to the second round of amendments. I said I was thdre as a | :24:17. | :24:27. | |
member as a Welsh member. I am sure the people of Wales are delhghted | :24:28. | :24:33. | |
and I am very grateful for the intervention, and across thd main | :24:34. | :24:37. | |
parties, the three main parties in this chamber, that there is | :24:38. | :24:42. | |
representation, whether the SNP are present or not for Scotland, England | :24:43. | :24:47. | |
and Wales, it is important they were represented but Northern Irdland is | :24:48. | :24:53. | |
the point I wanted to make. I look forward to contributing on the | :24:54. | :24:56. | |
second round of amendments `nd hopefully we have a chance to | :24:57. | :25:01. | |
discuss them, on the three amendments I want to turn mx | :25:02. | :25:05. | |
attention to, amendments 18, 19 and 20. | :25:06. | :25:14. | |
I do not reach the final conclusion of the honourable member in that he | :25:15. | :25:23. | |
the bill, think many of his the bill, think many of his | :25:24. | :25:28. | |
arguments about the amendments put down were persuasive and powerful. | :25:29. | :25:32. | |
And I do hope they have been listened to by members in this | :25:33. | :25:38. | |
chamber. For me, while I do believe some of the amendments are worthy of | :25:39. | :25:42. | |
support, I do see considerable benefit in the thrust of thhs bill | :25:43. | :25:47. | |
and from that perspective, we will be supporting some amendments but | :25:48. | :25:53. | |
the overall thrust of the bhll has our support as well. Turning to | :25:54. | :26:01. | |
amendment 18 specifically, on the Director for Labour market `nd, | :26:02. | :26:04. | |
there is a persuasive argumdnt about putting in legislation, guidance for | :26:05. | :26:10. | |
this directive. We are not considering a huge directivd, the | :26:11. | :26:19. | |
creation of a large body. This is a large body of work. And the issue of | :26:20. | :26:27. | |
immigration is so big in thd United Kingdom, I do think it would be a | :26:28. | :26:30. | |
mistake for this Parliament not to insert in this bill a provision | :26:31. | :26:37. | |
outlining some direction and guidance and the key functions we | :26:38. | :26:41. | |
expect of the directive. From that perspective, this amendment is well | :26:42. | :26:44. | |
made and the point from the honourable member for some Pancras, | :26:45. | :26:51. | |
you referred to the anti-sl`very Commissioner and through thd Modern | :26:52. | :26:54. | |
Slavery Bill went to an exalple where such direction was given for | :26:55. | :27:00. | |
the core functions. But the example goes further and it can be found in | :27:01. | :27:06. | |
the children and families act for the Commissioner and many examples | :27:07. | :27:10. | |
where this House has deemed it appropriate to impart on an | :27:11. | :27:14. | |
individual functions we expdct of them in the direction of thdir work | :27:15. | :27:19. | |
and wish them well having rdceived the approval of this House. So | :27:20. | :27:23. | |
amendment 18 is something wd can support. Clause 19 one removal of | :27:24. | :27:31. | |
the offence for illegal work is not something I believe we have lovely | :27:32. | :27:38. | |
lend our support to. -- we could lend our support to. I recognise the | :27:39. | :27:42. | |
thrust of this but it is important to the government has the powers | :27:43. | :27:47. | |
available to them to ensure those working in this country do so | :27:48. | :27:52. | |
legally and those who do not recognise there are penaltids and | :27:53. | :27:57. | |
consequences for not doing to the legislation of this land. Btt that | :27:58. | :28:02. | |
naturally brings as to amendment 20. I think there is incredible strength | :28:03. | :28:08. | |
behind amendment 20. And thd insertion of a defence for somebody | :28:09. | :28:11. | |
who find through no fault of their own themselves in a situation where | :28:12. | :28:17. | |
they get coerced, exploited and enslaved to provide Labour. I think | :28:18. | :28:24. | |
it is important and I made this point at second reading, we should | :28:25. | :28:30. | |
insert a defence to that offence. Many in this chamber, when they talk | :28:31. | :28:36. | |
of slavery will hark back to the good old days of William Wilberforce | :28:37. | :28:43. | |
and as a country, we have htge heritage and a proud tradithon of | :28:44. | :28:47. | |
standing against slavery. Btt when he got involved in anti-slavery | :28:48. | :28:52. | |
movements in 1787, he was preceded by a Belfast man called Tholas | :28:53. | :28:59. | |
McCabe in 1786 who at the thme when there was the creation of a company | :29:00. | :29:03. | |
with slave ships in Belfast, you disrupted their meeting where the | :29:04. | :29:08. | |
agreements were to be signed and he declared, make God with othdr hand | :29:09. | :29:13. | |
of any man that signed the declaration and create this company. | :29:14. | :29:18. | |
-- with the hand. He started a revolution in Belfast which | :29:19. | :29:24. | |
facilitated to the rest of the UK in anti-slavery and it is a tr`dition | :29:25. | :29:29. | |
we should proudly remembered today. Will he agree that not only did we | :29:30. | :29:33. | |
get involved in the abolition of slavery, but the United Kingdom took | :29:34. | :29:38. | |
advantage of the slave tradd and benefited from Ed and we sthll unfit | :29:39. | :29:45. | |
from it today from what we hnherited -- from it? The reason for ly focus | :29:46. | :29:51. | |
on anti-slavery is we have ` proud tradition of standing against those | :29:52. | :29:54. | |
who exploit and standing for those exploited. The point you make is it | :29:55. | :30:00. | |
still continues, the point H make is that in today's debate focusing on | :30:01. | :30:04. | |
amendment 20, we should not lose sight of compassion this cotntry has | :30:05. | :30:11. | |
had an should have and that is why I support the amendment 20. And the | :30:12. | :30:16. | |
member for North Dorset I rdfer to all the time made reference to the | :30:17. | :30:20. | |
compassion at the heart of the Minister for immigration. I do not | :30:21. | :30:29. | |
doubt that one bit. But I do believe the small insertion of a defence | :30:30. | :30:32. | |
would be much more preferable than what was suggested at committee | :30:33. | :30:37. | |
stage in resting this decishon with the discretion of the Director of | :30:38. | :30:41. | |
Public Prosecutions. If we `s the supreme Parliament of this country | :30:42. | :30:47. | |
cannot insert a defence and asked the DPP in circumstances whdre he | :30:48. | :30:50. | |
should exercise discretion, what direction should he use in doing so? | :30:51. | :30:56. | |
I do believe it is our role in Parliament to say should | :30:57. | :30:59. | |
circumstances arise where somebody has been exploited, they ard a | :31:00. | :31:04. | |
enslaved in this country, the Director of Public Prosecuthons | :31:05. | :31:08. | |
should look at and see what we as parliamentarians intend to be the | :31:09. | :31:14. | |
defence against the offence of illegal working ship that shtuation | :31:15. | :31:19. | |
arise. I don't think that is an owner is insertion for government to | :31:20. | :31:27. | |
consider. -- own arrest. But given the responses to date have hndicated | :31:28. | :31:32. | |
discretion should present and defences exist already in the modern | :31:33. | :31:37. | |
slavery act as was suggested at second reading stage, if thdre is no | :31:38. | :31:43. | |
actual reticence or resistance to the prospect of a defence, why not | :31:44. | :31:49. | |
make provision for it? I look further to the further amendments | :31:50. | :31:55. | |
and contributing at that st`ge. But that is where we as a party stand on | :31:56. | :32:06. | |
these amendments. New members regarding immigration | :32:07. | :32:11. | |
detention. To exempt certain persons from detention. New clause nine and | :32:12. | :32:20. | |
associated amendment 32. Looking to provide a time limit. And ndw clause | :32:21. | :32:26. | |
13 in the name of my honour`ble friend the member for Enfield and | :32:27. | :32:30. | |
many other MPs across the House about putting a review about the | :32:31. | :32:37. | |
issue of the role of immigr`tion detention in the role of imligration | :32:38. | :32:41. | |
control in the UK. Before I mention those, one sentence. The melbers put | :32:42. | :32:47. | |
forward I the SNP have got nothing to do with separation. They come | :32:48. | :32:50. | |
from an acute sense that thd direction of travel with thhs when | :32:51. | :32:55. | |
two which is to make it harder for people here illegally to be in this | :32:56. | :32:58. | |
country pushes against not just things we would agree are wrong but | :32:59. | :33:05. | |
also against our compassion. I think the SNP right to ask this House | :33:06. | :33:10. | |
have we got that balance right? And make strong points in committee and | :33:11. | :33:15. | |
is today about those measurds. Madam Deputy Speaker, there is such a | :33:16. | :33:19. | |
focus on immigration detenthon in these amendments because we are | :33:20. | :33:22. | |
looking at a history where we had a lack of control of immigrathon and | :33:23. | :33:26. | |
detention in this country. @ long period that we allowed a culture of | :33:27. | :33:31. | |
disbelief to grow within thd process of immigration detention sahd the | :33:32. | :33:38. | |
people caught within it had no way of managing their rights within the | :33:39. | :33:45. | |
system. It is absolutely right we look for a fundamental change. | :33:46. | :33:48. | |
Immigration detention has moved from a part of what we do in immhgration | :33:49. | :33:52. | |
to being a substantive and default position in the process of | :33:53. | :33:57. | |
immigration and control. In doing that, the focus has become, let s | :33:58. | :34:03. | |
look tough rather than, let's be effective. What would be nice to | :34:04. | :34:06. | |
hear today from the Minister is that he gets that. But what he is | :34:07. | :34:11. | |
focusing on is an effective way to achieve what the people of this | :34:12. | :34:14. | |
country want, and effective and compassionate removal of people who | :34:15. | :34:17. | |
have no right to be here but standing up for things we w`nt to | :34:18. | :34:22. | |
protect. Which is a sense of compassion, a sense of valuds. And I | :34:23. | :34:26. | |
fear that in what we proposd today, some of these amendments, if they do | :34:27. | :34:31. | |
not get depressed and we do not hear a sufficient response, the victims | :34:32. | :34:34. | |
will continue to be the British sense of compassion and justice when | :34:35. | :34:41. | |
we manage immigration. Can I thank him for the contribution | :34:42. | :34:46. | |
he is making and my honourable friend for Enfield Southgatd. To | :34:47. | :34:50. | |
underline the sense of efficiency and effectiveness is at the heart of | :34:51. | :34:53. | |
the work we undertake here `nd the broad review currently in process. | :34:54. | :34:59. | |
And certainly come he makes important points around | :35:00. | :35:02. | |
vulnerability and he knows the Stephen Shaw review will focus on | :35:03. | :35:08. | |
that and we will return to this House before committee stagd in the | :35:09. | :35:12. | |
House of Lords to respond to that report and to allow further detailed | :35:13. | :35:17. | |
examination, I hope. I am very pleased that the review | :35:18. | :35:22. | |
will be available for the Lords to review and put amendments down and I | :35:23. | :35:26. | |
can assure the Minister that should those amendment be put down and | :35:27. | :35:30. | |
return to this House to enstre we exempt regnant women and victims of | :35:31. | :35:35. | |
torture and rape, able support amendments at that time if the | :35:36. | :35:39. | |
Stephen Shaw review has not done sufficiently. There is no point | :35:40. | :35:45. | |
going over our concern that report has not been available, we should | :35:46. | :35:50. | |
wait on our lordships. I know right now women will be in yours would | :35:51. | :35:53. | |
detention centre who have bden victims of torture or rape. And we | :35:54. | :35:59. | |
know in the last year, 100 women were pregnant and put into the | :36:00. | :36:04. | |
detention centre, this is not a couple of cases, this is a | :36:05. | :36:08. | |
significant amount. It points to why new clause eight is present. There | :36:09. | :36:16. | |
are limits on the ability of the Minister control the action on the | :36:17. | :36:20. | |
ground. The procedures cannot perfect on paper but impact is, they | :36:21. | :36:25. | |
are failing and falling down and that is why it clause eight to | :36:26. | :36:30. | |
restrict the types of peopld that might fall foul of those processes | :36:31. | :36:34. | |
is present. Is this not more about the hntegrity | :36:35. | :36:39. | |
of the system and how it is supervised rather than introducing a | :36:40. | :36:44. | |
new clause? That is a very good point as part of | :36:45. | :36:48. | |
the evidence that has been built up by case after case in this | :36:49. | :36:52. | |
parliament is what the Home Office saying -- is saying is the case is | :36:53. | :36:58. | |
pay to be not the case. And front and centre of examples of that is | :36:59. | :37:02. | |
Yarlswood. We have had the procedures of gods that shotld be of | :37:03. | :37:07. | |
a certain type and that has not been that which has besmirched m`ny | :37:08. | :37:11. | |
people working in centres who do a good job -- the gods. Also hn | :37:12. | :37:16. | |
procedures of care, that is not followed either. My honourable | :37:17. | :37:22. | |
friend is quite right there is an issue and that is why we waht to | :37:23. | :37:26. | |
hear what the ministers will be likely to say. I want to give way | :37:27. | :37:33. | |
some other member of the group for Sheffield Central can give way. I | :37:34. | :37:40. | |
feel and I hope the Minister has been listening to the work of your | :37:41. | :37:44. | |
party group, the unanimous view of the House of Commons that change | :37:45. | :37:48. | |
needs to be made along the line to the recommendations -- the `ll-party | :37:49. | :37:53. | |
group. He has heard Allah grant speeches from the SNP and the Labour | :37:54. | :37:58. | |
benches and the frontbenchers - eloquent speeches. I feel the | :37:59. | :38:02. | |
Minister is one step away from reassuring the House and I hope you | :38:03. | :38:06. | |
will take that step and I alluded to it a moment ago. I understand the | :38:07. | :38:12. | |
concerns about putting in thme limits for an individual or for even | :38:13. | :38:17. | |
a category of people. But that is different from the intent of the | :38:18. | :38:22. | |
all-party report which is a recognition by the Home Offhce that | :38:23. | :38:26. | |
the use of detention and imligration is overblown and that he thd | :38:27. | :38:32. | |
Minister will look to reducd and limit the overall amount of time in | :38:33. | :38:36. | |
detention in this country. Hf we could hear that, I think melbers on | :38:37. | :38:45. | |
all sides would be reassured. Thank you, Madam Deputy Spe`ker and | :38:46. | :38:48. | |
I am delighted to follow thd honourable member for Bedford. I | :38:49. | :38:54. | |
think his view represents the all-party consensus on this as does | :38:55. | :38:59. | |
the range of support from both sides for new clause 13. They will | :39:00. | :39:03. | |
severely reduce the remarks I was going to make because I am keen the | :39:04. | :39:07. | |
Minister should have an opportunity to respond to them but I want to | :39:08. | :39:12. | |
underline the range of support for the engagement in the enquiry which | :39:13. | :39:17. | |
I was privileged to be vice,chair of, led by Sarah Tevet which the | :39:18. | :39:23. | |
honourable member has referred to. We had members of all partids from | :39:24. | :39:32. | |
both houses, a depth of expdrience reflected in a former warlord, a | :39:33. | :39:36. | |
former chief inspector of prisons, and we were unanimous having heard | :39:37. | :39:41. | |
evidence over eight months. But the introduction of a time when an | :39:42. | :39:46. | |
indefinite detention was ovdrdue -- time-limit. It was reflected in the | :39:47. | :39:51. | |
will of this House when we debated it on September the 10th and new | :39:52. | :39:59. | |
clause 13 looks to bring thd will of the House into this Bill, it is not | :40:00. | :40:03. | |
a controversial proposal. It will end this country into line with most | :40:04. | :40:09. | |
of the other countries in Etrope. And it is not a party list called | :40:10. | :40:15. | |
oppose or because the concerns we have over the growth of the | :40:16. | :40:20. | |
detention is something that happened under successive governments -- | :40:21. | :40:25. | |
party political proposal. It is something that needs to be | :40:26. | :40:29. | |
addressed. I would share just one of the many stories we heard. | :40:30. | :40:41. | |
I spoke to a young man from the disputed territory between Cameroon | :40:42. | :40:49. | |
and Nigeria, the was traffic at 16 where he was beaten, raped `nd | :40:50. | :40:54. | |
tortured. He managed to esc`pe and make his way to Heathrow ushng a | :40:55. | :40:57. | |
false passport because he w`s desperate. That passport was | :40:58. | :41:01. | |
discovered on arrival and hd was detained, we asked how long he had | :41:02. | :41:05. | |
been detained and he said it was three years. Three years in an | :41:06. | :41:11. | |
immigration removal centre. That detention conflicts with thd three | :41:12. | :41:15. | |
stated aims of the Home Offhce, those being trafficked should not be | :41:16. | :41:19. | |
detained, those who have bedn tortured should not be detahned and | :41:20. | :41:24. | |
those should be detained for the shortest period. In the new clause | :41:25. | :41:27. | |
13, we want to address the will of the house with that issue. Ht is not | :41:28. | :41:36. | |
simply a case of the impact of indefinite detention has on those | :41:37. | :41:39. | |
detained and we heard powerful evidence on the affects on lental | :41:40. | :41:43. | |
health and that sense of hopelessness when you don't know how | :41:44. | :41:48. | |
long you will be held for. Laking as they said, detention was in prison. | :41:49. | :41:54. | |
It is also expensive, costing the taxpayer more than ?36,000 per year. | :41:55. | :41:59. | |
We recognise that is the recommendation to introduce a time | :42:00. | :42:04. | |
limit will need a fundament`l culture change and a reliance on | :42:05. | :42:11. | |
methods other than detention to manage the process. We lookdd at | :42:12. | :42:15. | |
other countries which are doing this successfully. In the United States, | :42:16. | :42:20. | |
Australia, some people are puick to hold up Australia as a model of a | :42:21. | :42:26. | |
hardline immigration policids, they are developing for more effdctive | :42:27. | :42:31. | |
policies in terms of immigr`tion and in the UK, a Coalition Government | :42:32. | :42:41. | |
reduced -- produced the famhly returns process. There was no | :42:42. | :42:45. | |
increase in app scalding. There are powerful arguments at every level to | :42:46. | :42:51. | |
see a shift in policy and I hope that in his response, the Mhnister | :42:52. | :42:57. | |
will commit to seeking to lhmit and reduce the time people are spending | :42:58. | :43:03. | |
in detention. Thank you Mad`m Deputy Speaker and can I thank all of the | :43:04. | :43:08. | |
honourable and Right Honour`ble members for their contributhons on a | :43:09. | :43:11. | |
range of issues this afternoon which have highlighted the concerns, | :43:12. | :43:17. | |
passion and interest that so many people have shown throughout the | :43:18. | :43:20. | |
consideration of this bill. I think that so many people have shown | :43:21. | :43:22. | |
throughout the consideration of this bill. I over the last hour `nd 5 | :43:23. | :43:26. | |
minutes has underlined the hnterest and focused and it is important the | :43:27. | :43:30. | |
house has been able to debate in this way. I want to start mx | :43:31. | :43:35. | |
comments in relation to this issue of immigration detention whhch has | :43:36. | :43:38. | |
been one of the key elements of the debate we have had. I want to | :43:39. | :43:44. | |
underline at the outset that the Home Office has a policy to | :43:45. | :43:48. | |
safeguard against unnecessary or arbitrary detention, the prdsumption | :43:49. | :43:54. | |
is in favour of liberty, cases must be considered on their individual | :43:55. | :43:59. | |
circumstances, detention must be used sparingly and for the shortest | :44:00. | :44:03. | |
period necessary. And I think in saying that, it goes to the heart of | :44:04. | :44:08. | |
some of the elements that are contained in the new clause 13 which | :44:09. | :44:15. | |
has been put forward by my friend, the member for Enfield Southgate. It | :44:16. | :44:19. | |
is about a system that is efficient and effective but also treats those | :44:20. | :44:28. | |
within it with dignity and respect. I would just like to finish this and | :44:29. | :44:32. | |
then I will allow some interventions, I want to set out | :44:33. | :44:36. | |
that the Home Office is conducting detailed analysis of the purposes | :44:37. | :44:43. | |
behind that, going to that policy that I have underlined and looking | :44:44. | :44:47. | |
at the checks and balances hn the system to see we have a mord | :44:48. | :44:52. | |
efficient and effective process to see that people are removed more | :44:53. | :44:58. | |
swiftly, speedily and how this sits within an overall framework of | :44:59. | :45:02. | |
removal. I think it is accepted in this house that detention does play | :45:03. | :45:07. | |
an important role in seeing that we manage immigration and managing | :45:08. | :45:11. | |
people for that removal but it has to be with removal at its focus | :45:12. | :45:16. | |
Yes, there will be certain groups, foreign national offenders, some | :45:17. | :45:21. | |
cases where it might be nathonal security cases where detenthon might | :45:22. | :45:25. | |
be needed for a slightly longer period but always with that focus | :45:26. | :45:30. | |
that there is the realistic prospect of detention taking place. So I can | :45:31. | :45:35. | |
say to the house that we will be coming back to the house in the New | :45:36. | :45:42. | |
Year, the intent is before the bill has passed through both houses, | :45:43. | :45:45. | |
setting out a broader piece of work that we are currently undertaking as | :45:46. | :45:49. | |
well obviously, in respect of Stephen Shaw on issues of | :45:50. | :45:53. | |
vulnerability that go to sole of the other amendments and we intdnd to | :45:54. | :45:59. | |
respond to that and lay that before the house before the ul starts is | :46:00. | :46:04. | |
committee session in the Hotse of Lords and setting out proposals for | :46:05. | :46:08. | |
a new detained fast track which I suspended because I was not | :46:09. | :46:11. | |
satisfied that the necessarx safeguards were in place. It is that | :46:12. | :46:17. | |
sense of how we construct an efficient and effective detdntion | :46:18. | :46:22. | |
policy and it goes to the issues I highlighted of considering cases on | :46:23. | :46:25. | |
the merits but using detenthon sparingly and for the shortdst | :46:26. | :46:31. | |
period necessary, consistent with our policy and having that tpheld. I | :46:32. | :46:38. | |
am grateful to the Minister, does he agree that the issues in cl`use 13, | :46:39. | :46:47. | |
does he agree with me having set out the policy as carefully as he did | :46:48. | :46:51. | |
that it is consistent with the principle we should seek to limit | :46:52. | :46:55. | |
and reduce the time spent in immigration detention. As I said in | :46:56. | :46:59. | |
my comments, the current Hole Office policy is to see that detention must | :47:00. | :47:02. | |
be used sparingly and for the shortest period necessary. This is | :47:03. | :47:07. | |
why I think the work we are doing to have a more efficient and effective | :47:08. | :47:12. | |
system and consistent with our obligations is absolutely consistent | :47:13. | :47:15. | |
with those themes that are redolent in paragraphs the two E of the new | :47:16. | :47:21. | |
clause 13, where I draw the difference that I think there should | :47:22. | :47:25. | |
be a 28 day time period does not advance that. I think that hs a | :47:26. | :47:29. | |
blunt instrument that does not take into account the range of dhfferent | :47:30. | :47:35. | |
circumstances that I here for foreign national offenders, those | :47:36. | :47:40. | |
who may not be compliant in issues we put upon them and there hs a | :47:41. | :47:45. | |
case-by-case basis. I do undertake to the house that it is precisely | :47:46. | :47:48. | |
with that efficiency and effectiveness focused that we are | :47:49. | :47:52. | |
conducting our review and whll be reverting to the house as I have | :47:53. | :47:57. | |
outlined. I know there are ` number of other points that have bden | :47:58. | :48:01. | |
highlighted during this deb`te, in relation to the right to rent, the | :48:02. | :48:04. | |
right to rent scheme this fhxed the access migrants have two finding | :48:05. | :48:14. | |
rental properties, it has not proven difficult or burdensome for | :48:15. | :48:19. | |
landlords but it has led to illegal migrants being apprehended, this | :48:20. | :48:23. | |
game has been in place for one year and is working as intended. The | :48:24. | :48:28. | |
government published a paper on the right to rent scheme, this found no | :48:29. | :48:31. | |
hard evidence of discrimination or any barriers to local residdnts | :48:32. | :48:37. | |
having access to the local rental sector. Removing that would take | :48:38. | :48:42. | |
away something, the provisions relating to this bill over tenancies | :48:43. | :48:47. | |
are to make it easier for the majority of reputable landlords to | :48:48. | :48:51. | |
evict illegal migrant tenants and crackdown further on those landlords | :48:52. | :48:56. | |
who do so much to damage thd sector. The offences will allow the | :48:57. | :49:02. | |
prosecution of those who have knowingly rented to illegal migrants | :49:03. | :49:07. | |
and those who had reasonabld cause to believe that they were rdnting to | :49:08. | :49:13. | |
illegal migrants. We think that is the right approach but a conviction | :49:14. | :49:17. | |
will only be possible when ht is proven to the criminal threshold | :49:18. | :49:21. | |
beyond reasonable doubt. Thdse offences are not designed to catch | :49:22. | :49:24. | |
out a landlord who has made a genuine mistake. There are concerns | :49:25. | :49:38. | |
that people are not evicted without adequate notice or sufficient | :49:39. | :49:44. | |
safeguards in place. But thdre are safeguards that already exist, the | :49:45. | :49:47. | |
Secretary of State will onlx serve notices when she was happy that the | :49:48. | :49:53. | |
migrant is here unlawfully `nd taken the circumstances into accotnt. If | :49:54. | :49:57. | |
there are barriers to them leaving the UK due to matters beyond their | :49:58. | :50:03. | |
control, they will be allowdd to remain. We talked about charities, | :50:04. | :50:11. | |
we created what we regard it significant loophole, it cotld lead | :50:12. | :50:17. | |
to endless quibbling about what is meant by exceeding the cost | :50:18. | :50:20. | |
significantly and what would constitute costs. I did respond to | :50:21. | :50:23. | |
this in committee to give assurance on a number of aspects, and how so | :50:24. | :50:30. | |
many of the shelters would fall outside of the provisions. Our | :50:31. | :50:33. | |
concern is that rogue landlords would take advantage of that and we | :50:34. | :50:38. | |
would not want to create such a loophole. During the debate in | :50:39. | :50:44. | |
committee, there were strong support from also hides about the creation | :50:45. | :50:47. | |
of the directorate which I think has been mentioned today, the dhrector | :50:48. | :50:51. | |
role has been set out in thd bill and they will set out the strategy | :50:52. | :50:55. | |
to avoid exhortation and noncompliance across the spdctrum | :50:56. | :50:58. | |
but there is a difference bdtween the role of the director and that of | :50:59. | :51:03. | |
the anti-slavery Commissiondr. When you look at all of the aspects of | :51:04. | :51:11. | |
enforcement strategy, we will continue to reflect to see that it | :51:12. | :51:16. | |
is appropriately framed. I would say the issue on resources, we will | :51:17. | :51:22. | |
increase HMRC's budget by ?4 million around the issues of a national | :51:23. | :51:28. | |
minimum wage and the director will analyse the available funds across | :51:29. | :51:31. | |
all of the different aspects for which he or she would have | :51:32. | :51:36. | |
responsibility for. I know on the issue of the offence that some have | :51:37. | :51:42. | |
raised concerns about this but I would say the government only wants | :51:43. | :51:48. | |
to prosecute, no one would want to prosecute those who had been forced | :51:49. | :51:52. | |
to travel here for the profht of others, that goes to the he`rt. That | :51:53. | :51:58. | |
is why it is not aimed at vhctims of slavery, in regard to the SNP | :51:59. | :52:06. | |
amendments, we have maintained that the matter at heart here ard | :52:07. | :52:12. | |
reserved and it is not appropriate to accept the amendments th`t have | :52:13. | :52:17. | |
been put forward to. A proposed new clause 16 would amend them than | :52:18. | :52:22. | |
social arrangements for those seeking financial detriment, we | :52:23. | :52:26. | |
believe these provisions ard already covered in the bill instancd of | :52:27. | :52:32. | |
related safeguards, we belidve they are sufficient. In relation to a | :52:33. | :52:37. | |
review and overseas domestic workers, I can say to the house that | :52:38. | :52:43. | |
that will be published shortly and will no doubt be subject to further | :52:44. | :52:46. | |
consideration at this stage. But I do reiterate to members the | :52:47. | :52:51. | |
consideration that we have given to this bill and how we have rdflected | :52:52. | :52:55. | |
on the number of the points and I hope with the assurances I have | :52:56. | :53:02. | |
given that members will be listening to press their amendments to the | :53:03. | :53:08. | |
vote. Does the member wish to withdraw clause 16? Withdraw and new | :53:09. | :53:19. | |
clause 16? Is it the pleasure of the house that new clause 16 be | :53:20. | :53:26. | |
withdrawn? New clause 16 is withdrawn. Order, order, under the | :53:27. | :53:36. | |
programme order, the Starmer to formally move amendment 19, that | :53:37. | :53:44. | |
amendment 19 should be made. On the contrary, no. Division, cle`r the | :53:45. | :53:49. | |
lobby. As many as are of the opinion, say | :53:50. | :55:32. | |
"aye". To the contrary, "no." For the eyes, Sue Heymann and Jdff | :55:33. | :55:34. | |
Smith. Simon Newton for the noes. The ayes to the right 256. The noes | :55:35. | :01:55. | |
to the left 312. The ayes to the right to hundred and | :01:56. | :09:10. | |
56. Noes to the left 312. -, 15 . The noes have it, the noes have it. | :09:11. | :09:16. | |
On Loch! We now come to amendment 35. Mr Stuart McDonald to move | :09:17. | :09:21. | |
formally. I move formally. The question is | :09:22. | :09:26. | |
that amendment 35 be made. @s many as are of the opinion, say "aye . To | :09:27. | :09:34. | |
the contrary, "no.". Division! Clear the lobby! | :09:35. | :12:40. | |
The question is, should amendment 35 be made? Tell us for the ayds. Tell | :12:41. | :12:52. | |
us for the noes. Order! Order! The ayes to the | :12:53. | :21:18. | |
right, 257, the nose to the left, 309. | :21:19. | :21:28. | |
The ayes to the right, 257, the noes to the left, 309, the noes have it. | :21:29. | :21:44. | |
The noes have it. Unlock. Wd now come to government new clause three, | :21:45. | :21:50. | |
with which it would be convdnient to consider government new clatses four | :21:51. | :21:57. | |
to seven, 11, amendment 29, government amendment five and six | :21:58. | :22:05. | |
amendments 31, 40, 32, 42, government amendment is 8-12, | :22:06. | :22:10. | |
government amendments three to 7, new clauses two, ten, 14 and 15 and | :22:11. | :22:21. | |
amendments 39 and 36. Government amendments three and four and | :22:22. | :22:30. | |
amendments 27, 28, 34, one, 37 and 38. Minister to move governlent new | :22:31. | :22:40. | |
clause three, Mr James brokdn jaw. Madam Deputy Speaker, I beg to move | :22:41. | :22:45. | |
to clause three, we turn in this part of the debate to amendlents and | :22:46. | :22:50. | |
new clauses concerning the `sylum system and the arrangements made for | :22:51. | :22:54. | |
the support of failed asylul seekers who the courts agreed do not need | :22:55. | :23:00. | |
our protection. The crisis hn Syria and Evans in the Middle East, North | :23:01. | :23:03. | |
Africa and beyond have seen an unprecedented numbers of migrants | :23:04. | :23:07. | |
and asylum seekers in Europd, some have reached the UK via northern | :23:08. | :23:12. | |
France including many unaccompanied asylum seekers and children. There | :23:13. | :23:19. | |
are now nearly 1000 unaccompanied asylum seeking children in the care | :23:20. | :23:26. | |
of Kent council. I would like to put on my record, my thanks to `ll of | :23:27. | :23:31. | |
those in Kent and all of thd officers and those engaged hn the | :23:32. | :23:34. | |
way they have responded to this challenge. In our judgment, a | :23:35. | :23:40. | |
national response is requirdd. Additional funding has been made | :23:41. | :23:45. | |
available to local authorithes who take on responsibilities for | :23:46. | :23:47. | |
unaccompanied asylum seeking children from Kent, we hope the | :23:48. | :23:51. | |
dispersal arrangements put hn place will remain voluntary. However we | :23:52. | :23:58. | |
have tabled new clauses, 3.27 and government amendments five `nd six | :23:59. | :24:03. | |
to underpin the voluntary dhsposal arrangements and possibly to enforce | :24:04. | :24:08. | |
them, but we see this as a backstop power. We want the transfer of | :24:09. | :24:13. | |
unaccompanied asylum seeking children from one county to another. | :24:14. | :24:21. | |
Providing information about children in their con, that this will inform | :24:22. | :24:29. | |
the transfer arrangements, dnabled the Secretary of State to look at | :24:30. | :24:38. | |
written reasons for refusing an unaccompanied asylum seekers trial. | :24:39. | :24:43. | |
To enable the provisions to be extended across the UK by rdgulation | :24:44. | :24:48. | |
subject to the draft procedtre informed by further dialogud with | :24:49. | :24:53. | |
the devolved administrations. We take our responsibility -- we take | :24:54. | :24:59. | |
our responsibilities seriously for unaccompanied asylum seekers | :25:00. | :25:02. | |
children, we want more of an equitable distribution across the | :25:03. | :25:06. | |
country and the welfare of vulnerable children would continue | :25:07. | :25:07. | |
to be safeguarded. Under the education regulathons 2011 | :25:08. | :25:22. | |
governing access to student loans in England, British citizens including | :25:23. | :25:24. | |
those returning to the UK from overseas and most other grotps must | :25:25. | :25:28. | |
restrict three years ordinary residence before they qualify and we | :25:29. | :25:33. | |
think that is the right benchmark for migrant workers with lilited | :25:34. | :25:40. | |
life to remain or an outstanding stay. So it may encompass p`yment of | :25:41. | :25:47. | |
student tuition fees for migrant care leavers who do not need student | :25:48. | :25:51. | |
support regulations. Those payments normally are at the International | :25:52. | :25:57. | |
student rates ranging from ?12, 00 to ?15,000 payday in most c`ses and | :25:58. | :26:02. | |
even can place significant pressure on local authority budgets. The | :26:03. | :26:11. | |
actress chicks access to local authority support for those without | :26:12. | :26:15. | |
immigration status and schedule nine simplifies this. Eight to 16 makes | :26:16. | :26:21. | |
technical improvements to those provisions. There is a UK whde | :26:22. | :26:27. | |
framework so the regulations may make equivalent changes across the | :26:28. | :26:32. | |
UK. This will be informed bx further dialogue with the devolved | :26:33. | :26:36. | |
administrations. A number of other amendments have been grouped in this | :26:37. | :26:41. | |
particular debate and so perhaps I can make initial comments btt | :26:42. | :26:46. | |
reflect and respond further in the light of the comments made. | :26:47. | :26:51. | |
Amendments 29 and 40 would reverse the reforms made by scheduld eight | :26:52. | :26:54. | |
the support provided to failed asylum seekers and other illegal | :26:55. | :26:59. | |
migrants. These reflect a clear difference of principle which I | :27:00. | :27:04. | |
think was clear throughout the debate during the course of | :27:05. | :27:08. | |
committee stage. It is not appropriate for public monex to be | :27:09. | :27:12. | |
used to support illegal migrants including failed asylum seekers who | :27:13. | :27:15. | |
can leave the UK and should do so. Schedule eight will limit the | :27:16. | :27:21. | |
availability of such support consistent with our international | :27:22. | :27:24. | |
obligations and remove incentives for those to remain in UK whth | :27:25. | :27:29. | |
lawful basis. The system of support in the immigration and Asyltm act to | :27:30. | :27:34. | |
discharge obligations to asxlum seekers in our judgment is often | :27:35. | :27:38. | |
used to support those whose cases have failed and who have no lawful | :27:39. | :27:43. | |
basis to remain in the UK. On the 31st of March 2015, we provhded | :27:44. | :27:48. | |
support to an estimated 15,000 failed asylum seekers and their | :27:49. | :27:51. | |
dependents and that cost an estimated ?73 million. We bdlieve | :27:52. | :27:56. | |
this is wrong in principle `nd that is why those who have children with | :27:57. | :28:01. | |
them when a claim is rejectdd will no longer be treated as thotgh they | :28:02. | :28:05. | |
are still asylum seekers and will not be other doubles for support | :28:06. | :28:11. | |
under the act. -- eligible. Section four will be repealed and stpport is | :28:12. | :28:16. | |
only offered if there is a genuine obstacle preventing their ddparture | :28:17. | :28:21. | |
when the appeal rights are exhausted. I know there was a great | :28:22. | :28:24. | |
deal of discussion during the committee in respect of the 200 | :28:25. | :28:30. | |
pilot. Points were made George the committee as to why that cotld be | :28:31. | :28:35. | |
provided in evidence as to why this approach might not work. I tnderline | :28:36. | :28:42. | |
why there is a difference. Firstly, the onus is on the Home Offhce to | :28:43. | :28:47. | |
show families now not cooperating is removed. And under the 1999 act a | :28:48. | :28:54. | |
family has to show a genuind obstacle to their departure at the | :28:55. | :28:57. | |
point they have exhausted appeal rights. The 2005 pilot involved a | :28:58. | :29:05. | |
wildly correspondence based process and the new approach involvds a | :29:06. | :29:08. | |
manager process of involvemdnt and engagement with you for a tdam | :29:09. | :29:13. | |
following the end of the appeal recess to discuss their sittation | :29:14. | :29:17. | |
and the consequences of not leaving the UK -- process. And when we deem | :29:18. | :29:23. | |
circumstances have changed, it is recognised tax payers should not | :29:24. | :29:27. | |
support illegal migrants who could and should leave the UK. Under the | :29:28. | :29:33. | |
bill, asylum seekers refuse support under section 95 and they whll | :29:34. | :29:38. | |
retain their right of appeal. That is extended to those who refuse | :29:39. | :29:47. | |
support and a fresh asylum claim. There is no right of appeal to those | :29:48. | :29:51. | |
failed asylum seekers because they said genuine obstacles prevdnt their | :29:52. | :29:56. | |
departure from the UK when they have exhausted their appeal rights | :29:57. | :30:00. | |
against the refusal of asyltm. Examples of genuine obstacld would | :30:01. | :30:04. | |
be where medical evidence shows the person is unfit to travel or there | :30:05. | :30:08. | |
is evidence an application for the necessary travel documents has been | :30:09. | :30:13. | |
submitted and is still outstanding. These are straightforward m`tters of | :30:14. | :30:16. | |
fact which do not require a right of appeal, I give way. | :30:17. | :30:21. | |
Would he agree that when it comes to children, if parents will not | :30:22. | :30:28. | |
because they cannot return, those children face genuine obstacles to | :30:29. | :30:35. | |
returning and those obstaclds are in effect their parents and we should | :30:36. | :30:38. | |
support those children becatse they have absolutely no choice? | :30:39. | :30:47. | |
Absolutely, we had detailed and considerate debate in committee | :30:48. | :30:51. | |
which she was party to. It hs besides the white family returns | :30:52. | :30:57. | |
process around this so we assist and work with families to help their | :30:58. | :31:02. | |
return and she will record the debates we had around the stpport | :31:03. | :31:08. | |
that can still be made available by local authorities in respect of | :31:09. | :31:11. | |
destitution cases. There is the potential for support still to be | :31:12. | :31:16. | |
available. As we still move as part of that process to assist f`milies | :31:17. | :31:20. | |
in their entirety with the appropriate safeguards to sde they | :31:21. | :31:24. | |
are returned if the family do not have the right to remain in the UK. | :31:25. | :31:29. | |
And the appeal statistics on Asylum support do not give a picture. In | :31:30. | :31:38. | |
August 20 37% of appeals were dismissed, 41% were allowed. In many | :31:39. | :31:42. | |
cases, because the person only provided in their appeal thd | :31:43. | :31:45. | |
evidence required for support to be granted. Many of the remainder were | :31:46. | :31:50. | |
admitted for reconsideration and withdrawn and many cases in the | :31:51. | :31:53. | |
light of new evidence provided in appeal. Few appeals related to | :31:54. | :31:57. | |
whether there was a practic`l obstacle to departure from the UK | :31:58. | :32:01. | |
and the previous chief inspdctor of borders and immigration found in his | :32:02. | :32:06. | |
July 2014 report that 89% of refusal is reasonable based on the dvidence | :32:07. | :32:10. | |
available at that time. Amendments 42 to 45 versus the support for | :32:11. | :32:19. | |
adult migrant care leavers. Under leaving Keleti Station. Even though | :32:20. | :32:22. | |
that applications and appeals have been refused. These changes are | :32:23. | :32:28. | |
wrong in principle. Public loney should not be used to support | :32:29. | :32:31. | |
illegal migrants including failed asylum seekers who can and should | :32:32. | :32:36. | |
leave the UK. The amendments create obvious incentives for unaccompanied | :32:37. | :32:40. | |
children to come to the UK `nd often use dangerous travel routes | :32:41. | :32:42. | |
controlled by smugglers and traffickers. We speak here of | :32:43. | :32:49. | |
adults. If asylum claims have been refused, automatic access to further | :32:50. | :32:53. | |
support from the local authorities should cease at that point. The bill | :32:54. | :32:57. | |
makes appropriate provision for support before they leave the UK. A | :32:58. | :33:02. | |
member two allows a mission to work when an outstanding claim h`s been | :33:03. | :33:05. | |
outstanding after six months and remove the caveat any delay must not | :33:06. | :33:10. | |
of the making of the asylum seeker and lift restrictions on thd | :33:11. | :33:14. | |
employment available. As we debated, we do not consider this to be | :33:15. | :33:19. | |
sensible, we met our public commitment to side straightforward | :33:20. | :33:24. | |
asylum claims before April 2014 by March the 31st 2015 and to decide | :33:25. | :33:29. | |
straightforward claims after April 2014 within six months. Abott 8 % of | :33:30. | :33:35. | |
cases are straightforward. We judged this policy strikes the right | :33:36. | :33:38. | |
balance and of a claim remahns undecided after 12 months for | :33:39. | :33:41. | |
reasons outside their control, the person can apply for permission to | :33:42. | :33:46. | |
work and our judgment of thhs is fair and reasonable and consistent | :33:47. | :33:51. | |
with EU law. The Minister talks about making | :33:52. | :33:55. | |
regulations and about skill requirements. Would he not `gree the | :33:56. | :34:01. | |
bill should recognise the dhstinct skills requirements of Wales in | :34:02. | :34:05. | |
dealing with asylum claims `nd able the Welsh government to provide | :34:06. | :34:08. | |
input into Home Office and immigration policy? I am afraid I do | :34:09. | :34:15. | |
not, on the basis immigration is a reserved matter. But the honourable | :34:16. | :34:22. | |
lady made the aware that thd migration advisory committed does | :34:23. | :34:26. | |
analyse issues around differences between the countries of thd UK and | :34:27. | :34:30. | |
regional differences. And so for example in relation to Scotland | :34:31. | :34:34. | |
there is a separate Scottish shortage occupation list. There is | :34:35. | :34:38. | |
an ability to reflect variations across the UK in assessing the | :34:39. | :34:43. | |
evidence and in terms of assessing policy. I do want to come onto | :34:44. | :34:50. | |
clause 11 which would widen the scope for refugee family retnion. I | :34:51. | :34:54. | |
am aware of the calls from the refugee Council and others for this. | :34:55. | :34:59. | |
We recognise families may bdcome fragmented because of the n`ture of | :35:00. | :35:04. | |
complex and persecution and the speed and manner in which those | :35:05. | :35:08. | |
often flee their country of origin. Our policy allows immediate family | :35:09. | :35:12. | |
members and a person with ldft cash with refugee life or humanitarian | :35:13. | :35:19. | |
detect action -- protection like a spouse or partner and 18 who formed | :35:20. | :35:23. | |
part of the family unit before the sponsor fled their country to | :35:24. | :35:27. | |
reunite in the UK. Immigrathon rules allow for the sponsorship of other | :35:28. | :35:33. | |
family members. Some EU countries require up to two years lawful | :35:34. | :35:37. | |
residence before a refugee becomes eligible and impose time | :35:38. | :35:41. | |
restrictions on how quickly family members must apply once the sponsor | :35:42. | :35:48. | |
becomes eligible. Have granted over 21,000 family reunion visas over | :35:49. | :35:53. | |
five years -- we have. Widening the criteria would not be practhcal or | :35:54. | :35:57. | |
sustainable, it would be a significant factor potentially. On | :35:58. | :36:06. | |
how the UK may be viewed in terms of different jurisdictions as to where | :36:07. | :36:12. | |
to make asylum claims and undermine the wider asylum strategy. H would | :36:13. | :36:18. | |
also underlined that some h`ve said, have we implemented the Dublin | :36:19. | :36:21. | |
Regulation is? In our judgmdnt, we have. The challenge is to gdt family | :36:22. | :36:26. | |
members to make claims withhn the EU to establish links operating within | :36:27. | :36:31. | |
Dublin and that is often an impediment in the way of sole of | :36:32. | :36:35. | |
those who may be entitled and need to make that claim in the ET | :36:36. | :36:39. | |
country. I will give way to the honourable lady. Would he not accept | :36:40. | :36:43. | |
the definition of family is incredible tight and cruel for those | :36:44. | :36:49. | |
with siblings and children over 18 and he says it is not effichent or | :36:50. | :36:54. | |
effective but it is one of the most effective ways to grant mord refugee | :36:55. | :36:58. | |
status to people who will not put a big pressure onto services because | :36:59. | :37:01. | |
they will be looked after to a great extent by their families. | :37:02. | :37:07. | |
I recognise the manner in which she advances her point. Our judgment is | :37:08. | :37:10. | |
that the policy is struck in the right basis, that we do havd family | :37:11. | :37:15. | |
resettlement and in certain circumstances, older relatives may | :37:16. | :37:23. | |
exist, there may be issues relating to illness and medical need that | :37:24. | :37:26. | |
allow for greater flexibility within the rules. From our standpohnt on | :37:27. | :37:31. | |
the steps we are taking in respect of resettlement, it is about that | :37:32. | :37:35. | |
assessment of former abilitx and how that is very much prevalent in the | :37:36. | :37:40. | |
approach we take through thd camps and how we deal with resettlement. I | :37:41. | :37:46. | |
know the right honourable l`dy has put her name to this amendmdnt and I | :37:47. | :37:50. | |
would be delighted to give way. Can I press on the cases being dxcluded | :37:51. | :37:56. | |
by the rules we have? A casd raised with me for example of a falily of | :37:57. | :37:59. | |
refugees from Syria who are here but have a 19-year-old daughter, they're | :38:00. | :38:04. | |
younger children are here, ` 19-year-old daughter still hn | :38:05. | :38:09. | |
Lebanon unable to join them even though she is still a refugde from | :38:10. | :38:13. | |
Syria because she is over 18. That surely feels wrong, and as ` result | :38:14. | :38:18. | |
they worry they may have to pay people smugglers and traffickers to | :38:19. | :38:24. | |
try and get her to the UK, with huge risk and breaking the law as well. | :38:25. | :38:31. | |
As she knows, the current regulations are framed in a way that | :38:32. | :38:34. | |
allows for resettlement of children under the age of 18 and the judgment | :38:35. | :38:39. | |
is that is the right framing of this. If adults looking for | :38:40. | :38:46. | |
protection, they can use thd normal routes through claiming asylum in | :38:47. | :38:49. | |
other countries and we do not think resettlement should be extended the | :38:50. | :38:56. | |
armed current framework. A appreciate, there are exceptions | :38:57. | :38:59. | |
that can reside around this especially when we have seen cases | :39:00. | :39:03. | |
where there may be older relatives who have illness and the rules can | :39:04. | :39:09. | |
operate in a way that does `llow officers to take those factors into | :39:10. | :39:15. | |
account. Clearly, cases are examined on a case-by-case basis and looking | :39:16. | :39:19. | |
at whether life outside the rules may be a prep work. But I ghve way | :39:20. | :39:25. | |
again. What is the option for that 19-year-old? So many other similar | :39:26. | :39:29. | |
cases, where do she go? Does she get a vote to Greece and live there The | :39:30. | :39:34. | |
Dublin arrangement is not working. You arrived in Greece and Italy It | :39:35. | :39:41. | |
is not working. What does hd say to that 19-year-old? We think the | :39:42. | :39:45. | |
Dublin arrangement is the rhght approach to provide answers to see | :39:46. | :39:55. | |
across the EU. To deal with the important issues of what sole have | :39:56. | :39:59. | |
coined asylum shopping, the ability to choose what jurisdiction you | :40:00. | :40:05. | |
claim asylum within. The kex element is that we get a stable Syrha. Those | :40:06. | :40:11. | |
in the camps see that futurd and get support there and that is why our | :40:12. | :40:15. | |
response in relation to hum`nitarian protection, the ?1.1 billion this | :40:16. | :40:20. | |
Government has committed absolutely matters and that is not simply about | :40:21. | :40:25. | |
direct humanitarian protecthon, it is about ensuring we look at | :40:26. | :40:28. | |
education and we get that sdnse of hope and purpose and we end up with | :40:29. | :40:32. | |
a stable Syria where people can return as quickly as possible. | :40:33. | :40:42. | |
New clause to macro hopes to extend the number of foreign national | :40:43. | :40:54. | |
offenders to return to their country. We have statistics that | :40:55. | :40:57. | |
showed 5991 foreign national offenders were removed from the UK | :40:58. | :41:02. | |
in the last year, the proposed change would mean the Secretary of | :41:03. | :41:06. | |
State would be required to sign a deportation order for a fordign | :41:07. | :41:08. | |
criminal if they receive a sentence of six months. It is alreadx time | :41:09. | :41:17. | |
for them to consider 12 months if they would not cause harm. She would | :41:18. | :41:23. | |
take action in any case where she would discern that it was conducive | :41:24. | :41:30. | |
for the nation to do so. Turning to new clauses ten and 12, I would make | :41:31. | :41:37. | |
the point that while I recognise perhaps the intention behind the | :41:38. | :41:41. | |
amendments, we may not judgd they are appropriate. It it wants to | :41:42. | :41:47. | |
amend those with criminal s`nctions who have entered without legal | :41:48. | :41:51. | |
authority but there are crilinal sanctions and removal and | :41:52. | :41:52. | |
deportation powers to deal with illegal migrants. The act of 19th | :41:53. | :41:57. | |
and the one in particular cdnts at various criminal actions for illegal | :41:58. | :42:08. | |
migrants including overstayhng. I am very grateful to my right honourable | :42:09. | :42:13. | |
friend, does he accept that in 013, the last year I got the statistics, | :42:14. | :42:19. | |
there were only 72 convictions in both the Magistrates' Court and the | :42:20. | :42:22. | |
Crown Court for all of thesd offences under section 24, does he | :42:23. | :42:27. | |
think that shows whether thd government is taking it serhously | :42:28. | :42:32. | |
enough. The point that I highlight to the honourable gentleman, as I | :42:33. | :42:36. | |
hope I indicated, I pay tribute to him in the way he has sought to | :42:37. | :42:41. | |
advance these issues and to underline the need for us to retain | :42:42. | :42:46. | |
focus on the removal of those who are not here with lawful authority | :42:47. | :42:49. | |
and address those who have thoughts to come in to the UK through | :42:50. | :42:55. | |
clandestinely means. The most effective way to deal with that to | :42:56. | :43:00. | |
having an effective process for removal which is why we are | :43:01. | :43:03. | |
legislating on the way we are with this bill and a number of dhfferent | :43:04. | :43:08. | |
means and to highlight some of the work we debated in the prevhous | :43:09. | :43:13. | |
section of the report stage around the work we are undertaking to | :43:14. | :43:17. | |
ensure we have a speedy and more efficient and effective use of | :43:18. | :43:21. | |
detention and how that plays into a more effective process for removal | :43:22. | :43:27. | |
more generally. There are mdasures there but I think his points are | :43:28. | :43:31. | |
driving more fundamentally towards seeing that we have more efficient | :43:32. | :43:34. | |
and effective removal which is something I absolutely shard with | :43:35. | :43:40. | |
him. New clause 12... Daehlh I am very grateful for him giving way, | :43:41. | :43:46. | |
going back to clause two, which related to the deportation of | :43:47. | :43:49. | |
non-British citizens who have committed offences it, I am | :43:50. | :43:54. | |
persuaded by his response to the new clause proposed by my honourable | :43:55. | :43:57. | |
friend, could he advise the house about the issues, a limited number | :43:58. | :44:03. | |
of countries for which it is Jimmy difficult to us to deport pdople in | :44:04. | :44:08. | |
the circumstances, our moves we have seen with Jamaican prison rdlevant | :44:09. | :44:14. | |
to this decision or how those countries progress. He makes an | :44:15. | :44:23. | |
important point. The issue of prisoner conditions is one that is | :44:24. | :44:29. | |
relevant and transfer agreelents and bilateral arrangements we h`ve in | :44:30. | :44:33. | |
place, there is work across government in respect to thd return | :44:34. | :44:36. | |
of foreign national offenders in particular, which I know was a point | :44:37. | :44:44. | |
of issue for our honourable friend for Enfield Southgate, it is that | :44:45. | :44:49. | |
work across government of not only the Home Office but ministers from | :44:50. | :44:55. | |
the Foreign Office and the linisters of justice and looking at these | :44:56. | :44:59. | |
issues in the round to see what measures and mechanisms are | :45:00. | :45:04. | |
available to us to enhance that process. I think he is right to | :45:05. | :45:09. | |
frame the point he did in the way that he did and I can certahnly | :45:10. | :45:13. | |
assure him and our honourable friend that it is that joined up approach | :45:14. | :45:17. | |
that we are taking across government to use the measures available to us | :45:18. | :45:23. | |
to enhance returns. New clatse 260 create a system requiring non-UK | :45:24. | :45:27. | |
nationals including EU nationals seeking leave to enter and remain in | :45:28. | :45:31. | |
the UK to retain legal authority to remain in the UK. I agree whth much | :45:32. | :45:36. | |
of my honourable friend's thinking but in our judgment, it is seeking | :45:37. | :45:40. | |
to curtail the free movement of EU citizens in the UK under exhsting | :45:41. | :45:45. | |
treaty rights. I'm not sure legislation is the right wax to | :45:46. | :45:49. | |
approach is, the immigration act 2014 limits the factors which draw | :45:50. | :45:53. | |
is illegal migrants to the TK and tough domestic reforms to ensure | :45:54. | :45:58. | |
controls and access to benefits and services including the NHS `nd | :45:59. | :46:01. | |
social housing are among thd tightest in Europe. We belidve the | :46:02. | :46:08. | |
way to bring about real change is through effective negotiation with | :46:09. | :46:10. | |
the European Union. My honotrable friend will be well aware of the | :46:11. | :46:17. | |
letter that the prime ministers sent to the president of the European | :46:18. | :46:20. | |
Council setting out that approach and the broader stance we sdek to | :46:21. | :46:27. | |
take. New clause 14 allows the Secretary of State to amend the | :46:28. | :46:29. | |
minimum income requirements for sponsoring a non-EU national partner | :46:30. | :46:35. | |
at any -- and any pending children to the UK, this would underline the | :46:36. | :46:39. | |
impact of the minimum incomd threshold which the courts have | :46:40. | :46:43. | |
agreed correctly reflects the public interest in control immigration to | :46:44. | :46:49. | |
safeguard the British econoly rather than them becoming a burden. They | :46:50. | :46:59. | |
can still access income rel`ted benefits but at that level ht would | :47:00. | :47:03. | |
not be sufficient to prevent burdens on the taxpayer once they h`d full | :47:04. | :47:08. | |
access to welfare benefits, it would also provide less support for the | :47:09. | :47:12. | |
migrant partners integration into society and that is not an `dequate | :47:13. | :47:17. | |
basis for sustainable familx migration. Could he clarify his | :47:18. | :47:24. | |
position on the rules which prevent potential income from a spotse not | :47:25. | :47:32. | |
being taken into account, that income is not a burden on the | :47:33. | :47:36. | |
taxpayer, why is it still the government position that such income | :47:37. | :47:42. | |
should be excluded? As I thhnk I have indicated, it is to crdate that | :47:43. | :47:45. | |
long-term stable position on what may be considered a burden. I would | :47:46. | :47:52. | |
certainly underline to the gentleman that we continue to look at the | :47:53. | :47:58. | |
continued roles and what is and what isn't taken into account. I am happy | :47:59. | :48:03. | |
to reflect further in respect to the specific point is he is | :48:04. | :48:07. | |
highlighting. We have had this approach challenged in the courts | :48:08. | :48:16. | |
and the monetary threshold has been upheld but I want to ensure that we | :48:17. | :48:22. | |
continue to analyse and expdrience in evidence in respect of this but | :48:23. | :48:26. | |
our judgment in how we assess what is and what is not counted hs right | :48:27. | :48:30. | |
but we will continue to reflect upon that. New clause 15 requires the | :48:31. | :48:35. | |
Secretary of State to amend the rules for non-dependent rel`tives. | :48:36. | :48:44. | |
Again, this would represent a significant dilation of the reforms | :48:45. | :48:49. | |
of 2012, the room for adult dependent relatives was reformed | :48:50. | :48:52. | |
because of the significant NHS and social care costs which can be | :48:53. | :48:56. | |
associated with these cases. It now provides for those in need of care | :48:57. | :49:00. | |
but not for those who would simply prefer to live in the UK. The family | :49:01. | :49:05. | |
immigration rules we reformdd in the last parliament are having the right | :49:06. | :49:09. | |
impact in our judgment and restoring confidence in this part of the | :49:10. | :49:12. | |
immigration system and personal care needs can be met in some cotntries | :49:13. | :49:16. | |
of origin, it is not right to allow them to travel to this country for | :49:17. | :49:24. | |
that purpose. Is it not the case that many of the frictions that are | :49:25. | :49:30. | |
created between immigrants `nd settled communities come about | :49:31. | :49:34. | |
because of the fear of abusd of the health and care system and having a | :49:35. | :49:38. | |
clear framework where the lhmits of what we will and will not accept our | :49:39. | :49:43. | |
explicit will go some way to calm the nerves of the hosting | :49:44. | :49:49. | |
communities about new entrants to their areas? I thank my honourable | :49:50. | :49:52. | |
friend and I think that is what we have done. And also confidence in | :49:53. | :49:56. | |
the public more generally as to where costs should lie and | :49:57. | :50:01. | |
understandable concerns over access to health care. On ensuring that is | :50:02. | :50:09. | |
framed rightly and that is why we introduced the immigration `nd | :50:10. | :50:13. | |
health surcharge during the course of the last Parliament. Amendment 39 | :50:14. | :50:17. | |
seeks to restrict the power immigration officers had to examine | :50:18. | :50:21. | |
someone in other countries. The Solicitor General, who was `longside | :50:22. | :50:24. | |
me on the Treasury bench during the consideration of this ill in | :50:25. | :50:29. | |
committee, the power to exaline some in country is essential, qudstioning | :50:30. | :50:32. | |
persons where officers have been alerted they have been seen climbing | :50:33. | :50:37. | |
out of lorries on motorways were at service stations and are suspected | :50:38. | :50:42. | |
of coming into the UK. Officers do not conduct speculative spot checks. | :50:43. | :50:48. | |
The officer must have inforlation that causes them to question whether | :50:49. | :50:52. | |
someone has the right to be in the UK as set out in the 1987 c`se of | :50:53. | :50:59. | |
Singh and Hammond, this reflects the judgment and conducting and in | :51:00. | :51:04. | |
country examination, immigr`tion officers must have a reason`ble | :51:05. | :51:08. | |
suspicion that a person is `n immigration offender and thdy must | :51:09. | :51:12. | |
be able to justify that reasoning. If it is limited only to thd point | :51:13. | :51:18. | |
of entry, the ability to two conduct operations would be hampered or it | :51:19. | :51:24. | |
could risk unnecessary arrests. Turning to government amendlents | :51:25. | :51:27. | |
three and four, these minor and technical amendments replacd the | :51:28. | :51:33. | |
term strip search with full search to allay concerns that the person is | :51:34. | :51:37. | |
completely naked during such a search when this is not the case. | :51:38. | :51:42. | |
The term "full search" or adequately reflects the nature of the power. | :51:43. | :51:49. | |
The amendment to remove the possibility of these searchds, where | :51:50. | :51:54. | |
they are searching for nationality documents. As my right honotrable | :51:55. | :51:59. | |
and learn at friend these are listed general said in committee, the | :52:00. | :52:04. | |
reality of detention is that quite often that a low clothing is where | :52:05. | :52:10. | |
items may be concealed. It lay therefore be necessary to rdmove the | :52:11. | :52:17. | |
clothes of the detainees to locate documentation and other itels. Of | :52:18. | :52:22. | |
course, such a power must bd governed by appropriate safdguards | :52:23. | :52:25. | |
and used only where necessary and the power may not be exercised in | :52:26. | :52:30. | |
the presence of another det`ined person all someone of the opposite | :52:31. | :52:34. | |
sex, removing the ability altogether would create an easy way for | :52:35. | :52:44. | |
detainees to thwart removal efforts. Clause 34, it allows human right | :52:45. | :52:50. | |
claims and to petition cases to be certified to require an appdal to be | :52:51. | :52:53. | |
brought from outside the UK where to do so would not cause seriots harm. | :52:54. | :53:01. | |
Clause 34 extends that power to apply to all human rights claims, | :53:02. | :53:05. | |
the effect Amendment 27 would be to remove clause 34 from the bhll, | :53:06. | :53:09. | |
extending the power to all human rights claims is a government | :53:10. | :53:13. | |
manifesto commitment and buhlds on the success of section 94 bd | :53:14. | :53:17. | |
introduced by the immigration act in 2014 and has resulted in ovdr 2 0 | :53:18. | :53:22. | |
foreign national offenders being deported before their appeal. The | :53:23. | :53:27. | |
Court of Appeal considered two cases concerning the operation of this | :53:28. | :53:30. | |
power and held that the govdrnment is generally entitled to proceed on | :53:31. | :53:34. | |
the basis that an out of cotntry appeal is fair and an effective | :53:35. | :53:40. | |
remedy. This amendment would prevent the government from meeting its | :53:41. | :53:42. | |
manifesto commitment over this successful power which has been | :53:43. | :53:47. | |
recently endorsed by the Cotrt of Appeal. Amendment 28 is abott the | :53:48. | :53:54. | |
best interests of children. Including best interest assdssments | :53:55. | :53:59. | |
of children. This amendment is unnecessary, the intention hs to | :54:00. | :54:03. | |
make sure that before any ddcision to certify is made, the best | :54:04. | :54:08. | |
interest of any child affected by the situation is considered but | :54:09. | :54:14. | |
section 55 of the citizenshhp act of 2009 already imposes a statttory | :54:15. | :54:18. | |
duty on the Secretary of St`te to consider the best interest of any | :54:19. | :54:22. | |
child affected by a decision to certify. In any case, when the | :54:23. | :54:27. | |
Secretary of State is aware there is a child involved that might be | :54:28. | :54:30. | |
affected by her decision, the Secretary of State would consider | :54:31. | :54:34. | |
the best interests of that child as a primary consideration in deciding | :54:35. | :54:39. | |
whether to satisfy. That is supported by published guid`nce -- | :54:40. | :54:42. | |
certify, and would take into account the situation of the case. @n | :54:43. | :54:47. | |
language requirements and ddvolved administrations, there are ` couple | :54:48. | :54:52. | |
of amendments, one and 34 that relate to part seven, to ensure that | :54:53. | :54:59. | |
the public receives help, advice from puppet services in fludnt, | :55:00. | :55:04. | |
spoken English. In Scotland, it only applies to reserved matters, consent | :55:05. | :55:08. | |
is not required for such application but consultation is approprhate and | :55:09. | :55:12. | |
I am grateful for the Scotthsh Government for considering the draft | :55:13. | :55:14. | |
process and its implementathon. We should consider extension to | :55:15. | :55:27. | |
Northern Ireland but in rel`tion to amendment one, it is defecthve | :55:28. | :55:30. | |
because it does need to be limited to reserve powers as it is to | :55:31. | :55:36. | |
Scotland. We need to give ftrther thought on how best to achidve the | :55:37. | :55:39. | |
intent behind this and it is our intention to return to this in the | :55:40. | :55:48. | |
other place. I hope those comments, the new clauses in the name of the | :55:49. | :55:53. | |
Home Secretary will be incltded within the bill. | :55:54. | :55:59. | |
You clause three, transfer responsibility for relevant | :56:00. | :56:02. | |
children. The question is the new govdrnment | :56:03. | :56:07. | |
clause three B read a second time. Keir Starmer. | :56:08. | :56:13. | |
Thank you. Can I say in rel`tion to the new government clauses hntended | :56:14. | :56:17. | |
to help local authorities stch as Kent deal with unaccompanied | :56:18. | :56:24. | |
children, we support them. Whichever relevant to clauses, the fedling is | :56:25. | :56:31. | |
clear there is a need and they should be supported. That is the | :56:32. | :56:36. | |
extent of the agreement we will reach in this part of the ddbate. I | :56:37. | :56:42. | |
will now turn to amendment 29 which deals with the removal of stpport | :56:43. | :56:48. | |
for certain categories of mhgrants. Madam Deputy Speaker, this removal | :56:49. | :56:53. | |
is wrong in principle. And very likely to be had to predict. All the | :56:54. | :57:02. | |
evidence on this is one way. Support for families facing removal is the | :57:03. | :57:06. | |
best means of ensuring they believe. All the evidence shows that | :57:07. | :57:13. | |
and by support, I mean in these circumstances not only support in | :57:14. | :57:17. | |
the terms set out in the bill at the support by way of help with | :57:18. | :57:21. | |
obstacles, documents and with advice. It is those families | :57:22. | :57:29. | |
supported in that brought mx -- in the Broadway that will be most | :57:30. | :57:33. | |
likely to leave and the objdctive is achieved by having that support By | :57:34. | :57:38. | |
contrast, withdrawing support had the opposite effect. Let's call a | :57:39. | :57:45. | |
spade a spade. Withdrawing support here for this category of mhgrants | :57:46. | :57:50. | |
is a threat and it is a thrdat of destitution. And that is effectively | :57:51. | :57:57. | |
to become a means of enforchng immigration rules. All the dvidence | :57:58. | :58:02. | |
suggests it is counter-prodtctive. The Minister mentioned the 2005 | :58:03. | :58:09. | |
pilot, confident I think th`t I would go to it myself. Therd was a | :58:10. | :58:19. | |
pilot in 2005 at the proposhtion withdrawing support, threatdning | :58:20. | :58:25. | |
destitution is likely to encourage people to leave and to alter | :58:26. | :58:31. | |
behaviour. The results of that pilot were evaluated in 2006 and they were | :58:32. | :58:39. | |
very clear. There were 116 families in the pilot, 1 family left as a | :58:40. | :58:48. | |
result of the withdrawal of support. 12 look for help with documdnts 32 | :58:49. | :58:55. | |
families went underground. @nd nine were removed from the schemd because | :58:56. | :59:00. | |
an analysis, their claims should not have been refused. It was considered | :59:01. | :59:05. | |
a complete failure. It is not a pilot is ten years ago, it ht has | :59:06. | :59:10. | |
been practised since then and successive and different government | :59:11. | :59:16. | |
powers have accepted destitttion should not be a means of reloval | :59:17. | :59:24. | |
because it is counter-productive. The Minister says the situation is | :59:25. | :59:30. | |
different for two reasons. The first is that under the proposed | :59:31. | :59:33. | |
arrangements, families would now have to prove there was no genuine | :59:34. | :59:41. | |
obstacle, I was a genuine obstacle to removal. I am not sure how far | :59:42. | :59:48. | |
that advances the argument, the idea the onus is on the family now to | :59:49. | :59:51. | |
show a genuine obstacle makds it less likely they will go underground | :59:52. | :59:57. | |
if support is withdrawn. Thdre simply is no rational link between | :59:58. | :00:02. | |
those two propositions. And the second difference he points to is | :00:03. | :00:08. | |
the process now will be highway not by way of correspondence but in a | :00:09. | :00:13. | |
more engaged manner. But th`t is hard to see how that welcomd change | :00:14. | :00:19. | |
will make a difference to the results of the 2005 pilot. Hn the | :00:20. | :00:25. | |
end, this withdrawal with c`use that will cause hardship, it distressed, | :00:26. | :00:33. | |
anxiety and it will be entirely counter-productive -- distrdss. That | :00:34. | :00:37. | |
is a problem with this bill, if it is tested against its objective it | :00:38. | :00:44. | |
does not meet the objective. If it is tested in relation to silply | :00:45. | :00:50. | |
making the UK appear to beal -- to be more hostile, that is thd only | :00:51. | :00:53. | |
sense in which the government is only able to advance these | :00:54. | :00:58. | |
provisions. Destitution and the 21st-century simply should not be a | :00:59. | :01:03. | |
means of enforcement of immhgration rules or any other rules and that | :01:04. | :01:08. | |
what lies behind these provhsions. And in relation to children in | :01:09. | :01:14. | |
particular, I think the House would accept children should not be | :01:15. | :01:17. | |
subjected to at first results and impacts because of the decisions of | :01:18. | :01:23. | |
their parents and this will visit that adverse impact on children | :01:24. | :01:27. | |
Because they will come withhn the provision to remove support from | :01:28. | :01:35. | |
them. And that led in the Bhll committee to great debate about | :01:36. | :01:37. | |
whether this would simply transferred the burden from one | :01:38. | :01:42. | |
government department to local authorities. Who in truth and in | :01:43. | :01:47. | |
reality not going to be abld to stand by and watched destittte | :01:48. | :01:52. | |
children in their authority unassisted and one helped. So this | :01:53. | :01:58. | |
is wrong, Madam Deputy Speaker, in principle and it is also | :01:59. | :02:00. | |
counter-productive and not ` provision that in the 21st-century | :02:01. | :02:04. | |
we should be having anything at all to do with. Let me turn bridfly to | :02:05. | :02:09. | |
the question of appeals. Beginning with the narrow issue of appeals on | :02:10. | :02:15. | |
the question of support. Amdndments 31, 40 and 30 intends to rehnstate | :02:16. | :02:22. | |
the right of appeal against Home Office decisions on support so this | :02:23. | :02:26. | |
is where the Home Office has made a decision on support and it hs | :02:27. | :02:32. | |
thought that decision is wrong. At the moment, the rate of error is | :02:33. | :02:38. | |
very high. I think those in the household were not at 20 -- at Bill | :02:39. | :02:43. | |
committee would be astonishdd to know it is 60% in some cases. And | :02:44. | :02:50. | |
those other decisions which will not be able to be put right on ` simple | :02:51. | :02:56. | |
appeal. At the Bill committde stage, the response of the Minister was | :02:57. | :03:02. | |
that the long judicial revidw process would remain a remedy and I | :03:03. | :03:04. | |
failed to understand then and now how it could sensible or cost | :03:05. | :03:10. | |
efficient to remove a simpld right of appeal with a high rate of | :03:11. | :03:16. | |
success and rely on the much more expensive judicial review bx | :03:17. | :03:21. | |
different principles. When xou have an error rate of 60%, it is simply | :03:22. | :03:25. | |
unacceptable to withdraw a right of appeal. At both in relation to this | :03:26. | :03:35. | |
error rate and other arrow freights, -- error rates, the argument that | :03:36. | :03:44. | |
some cases that are changed are changed because of addition`l | :03:45. | :03:48. | |
information from the individual is no answer because the rate of 6 % | :03:49. | :03:52. | |
and in relation to general `ppeals of 40, 42%, is very high, there is | :03:53. | :03:58. | |
no evidence to suggest the lajority of them are cases without | :03:59. | :04:03. | |
information. And whether thd individual has been advised about | :04:04. | :04:08. | |
what information they make `vailable or not, they should not be punished | :04:09. | :04:12. | |
by the withdrawal of support where it is inappropriate. The wider point | :04:13. | :04:25. | |
is amendments 27 and 28. Thhs deals with the extension of appeals to a | :04:26. | :04:32. | |
wider category of individual people who will be removed first bdfore | :04:33. | :04:36. | |
appealed. There is a general point to make that while it may bd some | :04:37. | :04:44. | |
court cases say these provisions will be, do not extinguish the right | :04:45. | :04:50. | |
of appeal, there is no question they do inhibit the right of appdal. And | :04:51. | :04:59. | |
the success rate under the current arrangement is instructed. That is a | :05:00. | :05:07. | |
success rate of between 40% and 42%. So cases where individuals have been | :05:08. | :05:13. | |
removed only to succeed in their appeal. I accept there will be some | :05:14. | :05:20. | |
within that group who may wdll have succeeded earlier, had diffdrent | :05:21. | :05:25. | |
information be made available to the authorities. But for a varidty of | :05:26. | :05:31. | |
reasons, that may have happdned including the advice they h`ve been | :05:32. | :05:36. | |
given. To remove first before appeal materially inhibits their rhght of | :05:37. | :05:39. | |
appeal and it certainly shotld not be expanded. And members 27 and 28 | :05:40. | :05:48. | |
-- are members 27 and 28 in short before a decision is made to certify | :05:49. | :05:53. | |
a claim, the best interests of any child must be considered, a specific | :05:54. | :05:57. | |
provision to deal with a very real problem rather than the gendral | :05:58. | :06:04. | |
provision which is already hn place. And it is materially import`nt for | :06:05. | :06:08. | |
the children who will be impacted by the extension of these rules on | :06:09. | :06:16. | |
appeal. Madam Deputy Speaker, I will spend time on the family | :06:17. | :06:24. | |
reunification issues. The -, the immigration rules at the molent | :06:25. | :06:30. | |
they are narrowly drawn and we have had an example of the injustice they | :06:31. | :06:37. | |
can and do operate. Clause one is intended to remedy this. I `m | :06:38. | :06:44. | |
sympathetic to it but we have put forward new clause 11 which is a | :06:45. | :06:50. | |
wider review of the refugee family reunification rules and it has the | :06:51. | :06:55. | |
advantage of covering the f`ilure to implement the Dublin three | :06:56. | :06:59. | |
commensurate and it has the advantage of looking at an option | :07:00. | :07:05. | |
for allowing British citizens to sponsor close family members -- | :07:06. | :07:13. | |
convention. And it looks at options for extending the criteria for | :07:14. | :07:18. | |
family reunion in the way envisaged by clause one. Thank you, M`dam | :07:19. | :07:25. | |
Deputy Speaker. I look to speak to my two ndw and | :07:26. | :07:36. | |
clauses and can I say to thd Minister thank you for tellhng me | :07:37. | :07:39. | |
the reasons he does not support my new clauses although he is generous | :07:40. | :07:44. | |
enough to say he agrees with the principles behind them. The second | :07:45. | :07:54. | |
of my new clauses, clause 12, is a new clause which could well be a | :07:55. | :08:00. | |
blueprint for what happens `fter the country decides to leave thd | :08:01. | :08:04. | |
European Union in the forthcoming referendum. Because that new clause | :08:05. | :08:10. | |
sets out the way in which pdople will be able to stay in this | :08:11. | :08:16. | |
country, people already in this country would be able to obtain the | :08:17. | :08:22. | |
right of a residence here and would set out some associated rulds to | :08:23. | :08:29. | |
ensure people without the rhght of residence would be the subjdct of | :08:30. | :08:35. | |
criminal sanctions against them Before coming to that in more | :08:36. | :08:39. | |
detail, can I refer first to new clause ten? Some of the background | :08:40. | :08:48. | |
to this. This new clause is modelled very much -- modelled very luch on a | :08:49. | :08:54. | |
Private members Bill which H have brought forward on a couple of | :08:55. | :08:57. | |
occasions for debate in this House. The illegal immigrants crimhnal | :08:58. | :09:04. | |
sanctions bill. This bill h`d the privilege of being the subjdct of an | :09:05. | :09:10. | |
opinion poll which was condtcted by the noble lord, Lord Ashcroft, in | :09:11. | :09:18. | |
June 2013. And the findings of that opinion poll where that 86% | :09:19. | :09:27. | |
supported the provisions of this bill and only 9% were against them. | :09:28. | :09:31. | |
So this is a new clause which strikes a chord with the Brhtish | :09:32. | :09:38. | |
people. And the reason I have brought it forward again is because | :09:39. | :09:45. | |
despite previous debates, it seems that assist X -- the statistics | :09:46. | :09:51. | |
showing how many people get prosecuted and or convicted for | :09:52. | :09:57. | |
offences under section 24 a of the 1971 Immigration Act, those | :09:58. | :10:01. | |
statistics are going in the wrong direction. In 2009, the number of | :10:02. | :10:07. | |
people proceeded against and convicted in the Magistrates' Courts | :10:08. | :10:11. | |
and the Crown Court for offdnces against section 24 was the giddy | :10:12. | :10:16. | |
number of 158. By 2013, the last year for which I | :10:17. | :10:34. | |
have the figures, the number of people convicted in a Distrhct Court | :10:35. | :10:37. | |
had fallen to six and the ntmber convicted in the Crown Court had | :10:38. | :10:46. | |
fallen to 66, making a total of 72 convictions for a widespread range | :10:47. | :10:53. | |
of criminal offences against our laws relating to immigration. This | :10:54. | :11:02. | |
means that we have section 24 a of the immigration act not being | :11:03. | :11:09. | |
enforced effectively. And mdanwhile, this bill is talking in clatse eight | :11:10. | :11:16. | |
about adding a new section to section 24 so it will be section 24 | :11:17. | :11:21. | |
B which introduces the defence of illegal working -- the offense of | :11:22. | :11:28. | |
people working in immigration control. One wonders whether | :11:29. | :11:35. | |
actually this offense as well, if it is an forced as the more sit -- | :11:36. | :11:41. | |
enforced as much as the mord serious offences, whether it will do | :11:42. | :11:46. | |
anything in substance or if it is more of a presentational issue by | :11:47. | :11:51. | |
the government so that they can show they are doing something about this | :11:52. | :11:57. | |
to try and win public support on that basis. I hope there will be | :11:58. | :12:02. | |
time for my right honourabld friend to respond to this debate and | :12:03. | :12:06. | |
explain Hani people he thinks are going to be subject to a prosecution | :12:07. | :12:15. | |
under the new section 24 be on the offence of illegal working `nd how | :12:16. | :12:23. | |
he can explain why there ard so few prosecutions under the existing 24 | :12:24. | :12:29. | |
a. It is always much easier Madam Deputy Speaker to go for thd people | :12:30. | :12:35. | |
with resources and those trxing hardest to run businesses often | :12:36. | :12:40. | |
small businesses, so we havd clause nine of this bill penalising them | :12:41. | :12:46. | |
for employing illegal workers although they are already to an | :12:47. | :12:53. | |
extent subject to civil pen`lties, in the 2013-14, there were 2150 | :12:54. | :13:01. | |
civil penalties for such offences. Obviously, employment of illegal | :13:02. | :13:07. | |
workers, where those workers are themselves illegal in 's, you would | :13:08. | :13:13. | |
think the first port of call would be to sanction the illegal hmmigrant | :13:14. | :13:23. | |
's rather than those they dtped into employing them. It might be that | :13:24. | :13:28. | |
some of these fences are designed to deal with people who are in the | :13:29. | :13:32. | |
United Kingdom with permisshon but subject to immigration control but | :13:33. | :13:39. | |
that reinforces my concern. If we are trying to introduce new | :13:40. | :13:44. | |
sanctions against those who are here lawfully but subject to immhgration | :13:45. | :13:46. | |
control much surely we should be even harder on those who ard here | :13:47. | :13:55. | |
unlawfully and are trying to avoid any immigration controls. That is | :13:56. | :14:02. | |
the background to the new clause ten and what it does, it does not just | :14:03. | :14:08. | |
re-enact the provisions of section 24 of the immigration act btt it | :14:09. | :14:17. | |
includes more specific proposals which were set out in the ndw clause | :14:18. | :14:23. | |
ten subsection four that anx person convicted of an offence unddr | :14:24. | :14:28. | |
subsection one shall be subject to a deportation order unless thd | :14:29. | :14:31. | |
Secretary of State deems such a deportation to be against the public | :14:32. | :14:36. | |
interest. For the purposes of subsection two of the deportation | :14:37. | :14:40. | |
order guide deemed to be in the public interest, unless a | :14:41. | :14:44. | |
certificate of the country has been submitted by the Secretary of State | :14:45. | :14:52. | |
to the court. Another probldm with the enforcement of our immigration | :14:53. | :14:56. | |
laws is that too few people are being deported and too few people | :14:57. | :15:03. | |
are being subject to deport`tion orders and one of the reasons for | :15:04. | :15:08. | |
this Madam Deputy Speaker, hs that if a person is prosecuting ,- | :15:09. | :15:16. | |
prosecuted and the authorithes seek to deport them, there is a right to | :15:17. | :15:21. | |
appeal against deportation `nd all that entails. Quite often, the | :15:22. | :15:30. | |
authorities would prefer not to deport a person or seek to deport | :15:31. | :15:35. | |
them but would prefer to allow them to lie low. So there is a pdrverse | :15:36. | :15:41. | |
incentive for people to lie low in our system as we know that there may | :15:42. | :15:47. | |
be half a million illegal ilmigrant is currently in the country and that | :15:48. | :15:54. | |
is very much a ballpark figtre. Against the numbers of half a | :15:55. | :16:00. | |
million illegal migrants, the prosecution and conviction of 7 in | :16:01. | :16:07. | |
2013 seems paltry in the extreme. And one is entitled to ask the | :16:08. | :16:13. | |
government" can we take you seriously? " When you are doing so | :16:14. | :16:17. | |
little to deal with those pdople who are here illegally and deter others | :16:18. | :16:24. | |
who may be tempted to come here illegally. That is why I thhnk we | :16:25. | :16:32. | |
need to have a new offense of the in the United Kingdom without legal | :16:33. | :16:37. | |
authority. That offense means that the prosecution does not have to | :16:38. | :16:43. | |
prove how the person came into the United Kingdom, their mere presence | :16:44. | :16:49. | |
in the United Kingdom withott legal authority makes them guilty of an | :16:50. | :16:53. | |
offence. And there is anothdr practical side to this, he said at | :16:54. | :17:00. | |
the moment that if someone jumps out at the back of a lorry on a motorway | :17:01. | :17:07. | |
or in a lay-by or a service station and members of the public are | :17:08. | :17:12. | |
concerned and call the police, the invariable practice of the police is | :17:13. | :17:21. | |
actually to say to the potential illegal migrants "you should not be | :17:22. | :17:28. | |
here, you must go and report to the Home Office in Croydon." Thdy do not | :17:29. | :17:33. | |
arrest them and prosecute them, the reason I am told they don't arrest | :17:34. | :17:40. | |
them is because they do not think that the powers of prosecuthon which | :17:41. | :17:44. | |
are currently in the immigr`tion act are adequate to ensure that it is | :17:45. | :17:51. | |
worth their while. So inste`d of having the hassle of arresthng | :17:52. | :17:56. | |
someone on the a 31 in my constituency who has come in | :17:57. | :18:01. | |
illegally and has dumbed on the back of a lorry, instead of arresting | :18:02. | :18:04. | |
that person and prosecuting them, the message being sent out so often | :18:05. | :18:11. | |
by the police is that you should not be here, be on your way and leave | :18:12. | :18:17. | |
the country. It is almost a similar situation Madam Deputy is bhgger to | :18:18. | :18:21. | |
the situation I witnessed on the island of costs when I was there | :18:22. | :18:26. | |
about a month ago where I could see people from our border forcd on | :18:27. | :18:37. | |
secondment, they were dealing with lots of migrants who had cole across | :18:38. | :18:45. | |
the water from Turkey, a distance of 3.5 kilometres and all that was | :18:46. | :18:49. | |
happening to these migrants is that they were being processed, they were | :18:50. | :18:56. | |
not being sent back to Turkdy, they were not being told they must be | :18:57. | :19:02. | |
subject to any sanctions, all that they were being told is thex should | :19:03. | :19:07. | |
not be in Greece and they should leave as soon as possible. Which is | :19:08. | :19:12. | |
a completely farcical situation and frankly a waste of resources of | :19:13. | :19:18. | |
border force people to be engaged when they do not have any powers to | :19:19. | :19:22. | |
do anything about the illeg`l migrants coming into the European | :19:23. | :19:30. | |
Union and into the Schengen area. Those officers would be better | :19:31. | :19:35. | |
employed serving our own shores and borders. Madam Deputy Speakdr, that | :19:36. | :19:42. | |
is the background to new cl`use ten, I hope that the government will | :19:43. | :19:49. | |
start doing a lot more prosdcuting and taking the offense of bding here | :19:50. | :19:58. | |
in the United Kingdom withott legal authority much more seriously than | :19:59. | :20:05. | |
seems to happen at the moment. We know that another reason whx people | :20:06. | :20:10. | |
are so attracted to the United Kingdom is that we do not h`ve any | :20:11. | :20:15. | |
system of identity cards so people think once they have got in here | :20:16. | :20:20. | |
unlawfully that they can lid low, sometimes for many years and carry | :20:21. | :20:26. | |
on below the radar while sthll being illegal migrants. Turning to new | :20:27. | :20:37. | |
clause 12, this new clause would repeal section seven of the | :20:38. | :20:41. | |
immigration act 1988 and th`t Madam Deputy Speaker is the section of the | :20:42. | :20:46. | |
act which effectively gives European Union citizens who are not citizens | :20:47. | :20:52. | |
of the United Kingdom rights equivalent to citizens of the United | :20:53. | :20:58. | |
Kingdom in relation to residents in this country. That goes to the heart | :20:59. | :21:02. | |
of the issue of free movement of people across European Union | :21:03. | :21:07. | |
borders. I don't think that there is a case to be made any longer for | :21:08. | :21:14. | |
allowing EU citizens to havd a special status compared with other | :21:15. | :21:20. | |
citizens from other parts of the world who may have, in our view a | :21:21. | :21:25. | |
greater than entitlement to be in the country and whose presence in | :21:26. | :21:30. | |
this country might be more conducive to the national interest. This was a | :21:31. | :21:38. | |
subject that was much discussed yesterday by the Scottish affairs | :21:39. | :21:42. | |
committee when it met in Abdrdeen and was discussing the subjdct of | :21:43. | :21:50. | |
post-study work visas. It bdcame apparent during that discussion that | :21:51. | :21:56. | |
because of the extraordinarx status that students from the European | :21:57. | :22:02. | |
Union have that it was making it much more difficult for Scottish | :22:03. | :22:09. | |
universities to recruit people from outside the European Union from | :22:10. | :22:12. | |
foreign countries, many of whom might make very good undergraduates | :22:13. | :22:20. | |
or graduate students in the fine Scottish universities. This, I think | :22:21. | :22:27. | |
is relevant to that, the issue of free movement. I can understand why | :22:28. | :22:32. | |
my right honourable friend would not want to anticipate the result of the | :22:33. | :22:38. | |
forthcoming referendum and `ccept new clause 12 but what this does is | :22:39. | :22:45. | |
set out how we would be abld to assure people who are already in the | :22:46. | :22:48. | |
United Kingdom that they will be able to stay in the United Kingdom | :22:49. | :22:53. | |
in the event that the peopld of the United Kingdom decide to vote to | :22:54. | :22:59. | |
leave the European Union and it sets out the basis on which that can be | :23:00. | :23:04. | |
done. Subsection two of new clause 12 talks about the European | :23:05. | :23:12. | |
communities act of 1972 and the reason that is included is because | :23:13. | :23:17. | |
without that, the new clausd would be no good tree in the same way as | :23:18. | :23:27. | |
the amendment relating to women s sanitary products and VAT, because | :23:28. | :23:33. | |
it did not actually include the provision to exclude the provisions | :23:34. | :23:40. | |
of the pink and in the act of 1 72. That is why -- provisions of the | :23:41. | :23:57. | |
European Community act. This is about the grounds of web | :23:58. | :23:59. | |
applications can be granted or refused and appeal arrangemdnts and | :24:00. | :24:05. | |
adjudications, it sets out ` timescale within which such a | :24:06. | :24:12. | |
registration certificate scheme would become operative. The result | :24:13. | :24:17. | |
of that would be that we wotld know who is in our country. It is a | :24:18. | :24:24. | |
pretty basic question, who hs in our country who is not currentlx a | :24:25. | :24:27. | |
United Kingdom citizen and the government is in no position to | :24:28. | :24:34. | |
answer that question. This, by the use of registration certificates, we | :24:35. | :24:38. | |
would be able to ensure that we were not burdening UK citizens whth some | :24:39. | :24:42. | |
identity card system but those who are not UK citizens would only be | :24:43. | :24:49. | |
able to exercise their privhlege of continuing to be in the United | :24:50. | :24:54. | |
Kingdom if they had a registration certificate showing they had a right | :24:55. | :24:56. | |
of residence in our country. There is no point having a command, | :24:57. | :25:17. | |
so in the subsection it specifies that no one can be here without that | :25:18. | :25:29. | |
certificates. If anyone attdmpted to enter after that date would be | :25:30. | :25:33. | |
guilty of an offence. Then we set out the penalties that would apply | :25:34. | :25:41. | |
and any person convicted of such an offence would be subjected to a | :25:42. | :25:45. | |
deportation order, unless cdrtified to be against the public interest. | :25:46. | :25:52. | |
Madam Deputy Speaker, in my submission that would significantly | :25:53. | :25:59. | |
tighten up the immigration rules that we have got and actually, it | :26:00. | :26:08. | |
would make life much easier for employers and particularly small | :26:09. | :26:11. | |
employers. If a person was not able to establish they were a Brhtish | :26:12. | :26:15. | |
citizen when applying for work, they've will be able to ask that | :26:16. | :26:20. | |
person to reduce their registration certificate demonstrating a right of | :26:21. | :26:27. | |
residence. And why not? We would also be able to ensure people who | :26:28. | :26:31. | |
were not entitled to be herd were deported. One of the other offences | :26:32. | :26:41. | |
of having new criminal offences as set out in new clauses ten `nd 2, | :26:42. | :26:48. | |
quite often people would choose to leave voluntarily rather th`n face | :26:49. | :26:52. | |
those criminal sanctions, and I know that my right honourable frhend is | :26:53. | :26:56. | |
keen to ensure that as many people as possible leave the United Kingdom | :26:57. | :27:00. | |
voluntary if they are not entitled to be here. These two new clauses | :27:01. | :27:05. | |
will give them an extra incdntive to go because they would be able to | :27:06. | :27:13. | |
avoid prosecution if they wdre to leave the United Kingdom. Almost a | :27:14. | :27:20. | |
type of plea bargain, and that would reduce the administrative costs as | :27:21. | :27:31. | |
well. So, it seems to me we can t be complacent about the situathon we | :27:32. | :27:36. | |
are in at the moment. We have record levels of net migration. Far in | :27:37. | :27:39. | |
excess of what the government pledged in the Conservative Party | :27:40. | :27:45. | |
manifesto. We have got record numbers of people who are in our | :27:46. | :27:49. | |
country illegally. There ard record numbers of people in this country | :27:50. | :27:53. | |
about whom we know nothing, and so it seems to me this is a golden | :27:54. | :27:59. | |
opportunity in this bill thhs evening to rectify some of those | :28:00. | :28:09. | |
lagoons in our law and set out a framework where we can oper`te in | :28:10. | :28:13. | |
the future and minimise the number of people who are here illegally and | :28:14. | :28:21. | |
in breach of our immigration rules. I want to speak about new clause one | :28:22. | :28:29. | |
and new clause 11, which ard focused on the response we should h`ve two | :28:30. | :28:33. | |
the refugee crisis and the way in which the family reunion rules for | :28:34. | :28:38. | |
refugees are not working. The background to this is that the | :28:39. | :28:43. | |
European refugee crisis is showing no signs of easing. Nearly 0 million | :28:44. | :28:48. | |
refugees have travelled to our continent this year. 700,000 people | :28:49. | :28:53. | |
have travelled through Greece. In the final weeks of November, almost | :28:54. | :28:58. | |
3000 people were arriving on the tiny island of Lesbos everyday, even | :28:59. | :29:06. | |
in the cold. We still have ` huge number of refugees stuck in the | :29:07. | :29:13. | |
Balkans, in often harsh conditions. Refugee camps on the border with | :29:14. | :29:19. | |
Greece and thousands more, hncluding unaccompanied children. Othdr | :29:20. | :29:24. | |
countries in Europe are doing more than we are and I have conthnually | :29:25. | :29:28. | |
urged the government to do lore for us to do our bit to support | :29:29. | :29:35. | |
refugees, not just those in the camps, but those who have fled to | :29:36. | :29:39. | |
Europe as well. Tomorrow thd Prime Minister will make an argumdnt that | :29:40. | :29:43. | |
says Britain should not stand back and let other countries shotlder the | :29:44. | :29:50. | |
entire security burden when it comes to dealing with what is happening in | :29:51. | :29:54. | |
Syria. It will be a powerful point for him to make, but what follows is | :29:55. | :29:59. | |
that we should not stand back and allow other countries to take so | :30:00. | :30:05. | |
much more, shouldering the burden of responding to the refugee crises | :30:06. | :30:09. | |
when we are not doing enough to have as well. This year from Syrha | :30:10. | :30:13. | |
written will take just 1000 refugees, and yet 3000 arrive in | :30:14. | :30:28. | |
Lesbos still each day. The linister when he spoke talked about `sylum | :30:29. | :30:36. | |
shopping. In fact, we have only got 25,000 asylum seekers in Brhtain | :30:37. | :30:43. | |
last year and at a time when there are 700,000 in Germany, how can he | :30:44. | :30:47. | |
seriously talk about asylum shopping? In fact, what we `re | :30:48. | :30:52. | |
talking about is families who have been split up by a terrible refugee | :30:53. | :30:56. | |
crisis who simply want to bd together. Families that havd been | :30:57. | :31:04. | |
ripped apart by a bloody and brutal civil war in Syria. Torn parents | :31:05. | :31:08. | |
from children, brothers frol sisters. I have met Syrian children | :31:09. | :31:14. | |
on their own in refugee camps. 1 and 12 euros desperate to bd | :31:15. | :31:17. | |
reunited with their families, but our current rules make it h`rd to | :31:18. | :31:23. | |
reunite the families of reftgees split up by the crisis. The British | :31:24. | :31:29. | |
Red Cross are currently supporting an Iraqi refugee who will hopefully | :31:30. | :31:33. | |
be reunited with his family. One of his daughters is disabled and is | :31:34. | :31:39. | |
entirely dependent on her mother, but she is over 18 so she is not | :31:40. | :31:46. | |
eligible to come to the UK tnder the current rules for refugee f`milies. | :31:47. | :31:51. | |
She is stuck in Iraq and thd strain of being the sole carer is taking | :31:52. | :31:58. | |
its toll on her mother. Another case is a 15-year-old boy whose parents | :31:59. | :32:03. | |
were killed in the war. His brother has been granted status in the UK. | :32:04. | :32:07. | |
He is not registered, but h`s had his fingerprints taken in Greece. He | :32:08. | :32:15. | |
is not eligible to stay herd and has been told to return to Greece where | :32:16. | :32:20. | |
he has no prospects. He is hn Italy living with another family `nd his | :32:21. | :32:27. | |
brother is worried about hil being exploited by banks of traffhckers, | :32:28. | :32:34. | |
something that is happening too many refugee children. When I was in | :32:35. | :32:38. | |
Calais a few weeks ago, I mdt a single mother with two small | :32:39. | :32:42. | |
children. Her husband she thought had been killed in an Assad jail. | :32:43. | :32:48. | |
They were living in a small caravan and tents in the mart in Calais | :32:49. | :32:55. | |
They had left Syria and been supported for a while by her | :32:56. | :33:00. | |
father-in-law. He could no longer afford to support them. She told me | :33:01. | :33:05. | |
her own father and brother were in Britain. That is why she had paid | :33:06. | :33:09. | |
money to people traffickers to travel across Europe to join her | :33:10. | :33:15. | |
only remaining family to support her here in Britain. The ministdr from | :33:16. | :33:22. | |
the bench says what about Dtblin? That is a good point. In so many | :33:23. | :33:29. | |
cases, Dublin three should be an opportunity for families to be | :33:30. | :33:32. | |
reunited, but it isn't and ht is not working. There were quite a few | :33:33. | :33:37. | |
people I spoke to in Calais who would probably have a case tnder | :33:38. | :33:44. | |
that arrangement, but there was no process for them to apply. They were | :33:45. | :33:48. | |
being told that the French sieges and bureaucracy would not allow it. | :33:49. | :33:54. | |
That is why this clause is hmportant because it urges the ministdr to | :33:55. | :34:07. | |
look at the way the Dublin three RB looked at and also the huge risks | :34:08. | :34:17. | |
that people are taking. Why are they translate desperately to get to | :34:18. | :34:20. | |
Britain? In many of those c`ses they told me it was because they have | :34:21. | :34:24. | |
family in Britain and they were people who ought to have refugee | :34:25. | :34:28. | |
status. Their claims were not being assessed and they will not `ctually | :34:29. | :34:35. | |
able to map what they were doing was taking risks and being stuck in the | :34:36. | :34:49. | |
cold northern France winter. I really would urge him to review | :34:50. | :34:54. | |
Dublin three and the weight it is not just working in practicd for too | :34:55. | :34:58. | |
many of the refugees who ard fleeing terrible conflict. It is trte as | :34:59. | :35:06. | |
well but for many refugee f`milies when they have been hit by crisis, | :35:07. | :35:13. | |
persecution and war, they h`d may have -- they may have lost their | :35:14. | :35:20. | |
closest family members. Thex may not have the family members that the | :35:21. | :35:24. | |
rules cover and their nearest relative may be a brother or sister | :35:25. | :35:30. | |
or someone who is not coverdd by the existing rules he has. That it is -- | :35:31. | :35:39. | |
that is why it is important to look at the wider families of refugees. | :35:40. | :35:44. | |
Clause one should make it e`sier to reunite refugee families and whose | :35:45. | :35:51. | |
family members are already refugees here in Britain. But will cover the | :35:52. | :35:57. | |
19-year-old I raised with hhm in Beirut. To cover the disabldd child | :35:58. | :36:05. | |
over 18, but still needs her parents in the same way. It is not ly | :36:06. | :36:10. | |
objective to rewrite the wider immigration rules are those who are | :36:11. | :36:14. | |
not refugees, I just want to concentrate on those who ard | :36:15. | :36:19. | |
refugees. I recognise new clause one is not the simplest way to do it | :36:20. | :36:23. | |
because it is primary legislation and this would be better de`lt with | :36:24. | :36:31. | |
through immigration rules, `nd it would also need further changes to | :36:32. | :36:38. | |
make sure this was focused on refugees whose families werd in | :36:39. | :36:45. | |
conflict. Nevertheless, it hs to focus on Minister's attention on the | :36:46. | :36:49. | |
plight of refugees whose falilies are being separated and who need to | :36:50. | :36:53. | |
be reunited and we should as part of our support for refugees and family | :36:54. | :37:00. | |
values that we hold their to make more of an attempt to reunite those | :37:01. | :37:07. | |
families. I think it would `lso be the best way for us to incrdase the | :37:08. | :37:11. | |
number of refugees we in Brhtain take. The Prime Minister set a | :37:12. | :37:18. | |
target for 20,000 over the next five years, but we know only 1000 of | :37:19. | :37:22. | |
those will be here before Christmas if the government's targets are met, | :37:23. | :37:27. | |
but they need to go beyond that The refugee crisis is not going away and | :37:28. | :37:31. | |
this seems to be the simplest and fairest way to provide more support | :37:32. | :37:35. | |
for those who already have family here. Family who could support | :37:36. | :37:42. | |
them. We cannot make the debate about Syria and about securhty. It | :37:43. | :37:51. | |
has to be about refugees and compassion. I know the government | :37:52. | :37:56. | |
has done much to help refugdes in the region and I have praisdd them | :37:57. | :38:01. | |
for that, but it is not an alternative to us doing our bit to | :38:02. | :38:05. | |
reunite families. There are so many ways in which the government can do | :38:06. | :38:10. | |
this. We have set out a serhes of ways in new clause one and 01. I | :38:11. | :38:16. | |
have always wanted to do thhs on a cross-party basis. I would trge him | :38:17. | :38:25. | |
in the Sainsbury to look more at -- in the same spirit to look lore at | :38:26. | :38:39. | |
what he can do. Thank you, Lr Deputy Speaker for allowing me to speak | :38:40. | :38:42. | |
this evening. I am sure both sides of the house, my honourable friend | :38:43. | :38:49. | |
's who I have been on their bills committee with, would agree it was a | :38:50. | :38:56. | |
thoughtful and informative debate. I was extremely pleased to be part of | :38:57. | :39:00. | |
that Bill committee and likd my honourable friend 's from C`stle | :39:01. | :39:08. | |
Point and North Dorset referred to earlier, over the last 12 months it | :39:09. | :39:14. | |
has been a big issue for my constituency and the people of my | :39:15. | :39:19. | |
constituency on the thousands of doors I have not on and it has not | :39:20. | :39:26. | |
been very often where I havd not knocked on the door and people have | :39:27. | :39:29. | |
wanted to raise this issue with me in my constituency. So I was | :39:30. | :39:34. | |
extremely pleased to be on that Bill 's committee and listen to the | :39:35. | :39:41. | |
debates, but also to hopefully increase my knowledge of certain | :39:42. | :39:47. | |
aspects of the bill that was being brought forward. One thing that has | :39:48. | :39:53. | |
been quite evident over the debate prior to this and from what has been | :39:54. | :39:59. | |
already said here, we often confuse all the different categories within | :40:00. | :40:09. | |
immigration. We have asylum seekers, refugees, non-EU immigration and | :40:10. | :40:13. | |
European immigration, but so often I hear both sides of the housd talk | :40:14. | :40:17. | |
about them as one rather th`n the different measures that are required | :40:18. | :40:20. | |
to tackle the different catdgories within immigration. I often feel it | :40:21. | :40:25. | |
is quite frustrating and nine my constituents also feel that | :40:26. | :40:28. | |
frustration when we have thdse debates. | :40:29. | :40:34. | |
Immigration is not a static thing, changed by different factors | :40:35. | :40:40. | |
affecting world migration, the economy, what we have seen this | :40:41. | :40:44. | |
summer with the terrible pictures we have seen around refugees. Therefore | :40:45. | :40:50. | |
it is right the UK adapts its it is right the UK adapts its | :40:51. | :40:56. | |
policies, and reflects currdnt stark-macro the current picture and | :40:57. | :41:01. | |
pressures, and the current pressures happening at any one time. Ht is | :41:02. | :41:07. | |
this government introducing new bills to tackle this measurds. This | :41:08. | :41:15. | |
Bill, and some of the amendlents are focused that tackling illeg`l | :41:16. | :41:22. | |
immigration. As I have menthoned, representing Rochester and Stroud, | :41:23. | :41:27. | |
in Medway, in the county of Kent, we have been, over recent months, over | :41:28. | :41:35. | |
recent years, on the front line of the images we have seen arotnd | :41:36. | :41:41. | |
people trying to obtain entry to the UK, 3 clandestinely routes. Attempts | :41:42. | :41:46. | |
of desperate people putting their lives at risk to get into the | :41:47. | :41:52. | |
country. This has brought obviously significant pressures to thd county. | :41:53. | :41:58. | |
Not only would seems we havd seen around Operation Stack, but has | :41:59. | :42:05. | |
broad damage to the county. The thing I'm most pleased about today, | :42:06. | :42:09. | |
talking about the amendments is the government amendments, around | :42:10. | :42:18. | |
unaccompanied minors. The county of Kent, this summer, has seen a great | :42:19. | :42:24. | |
increase in the amount of unaccompanied adults arriving into | :42:25. | :42:33. | |
social services, at a local level, social services, at a local level, | :42:34. | :42:40. | |
and we'll note at the moment we have trouble recruiting social workers, | :42:41. | :42:46. | |
and we have a great pressurd on social care, from a domestic point | :42:47. | :42:50. | |
of view. It has led to great pressures, not only in the county of | :42:51. | :42:56. | |
Kent, but also in my constituency of Rogerstone Stroud -- Rochester and | :42:57. | :43:06. | |
Stroud. I welcome the gunmen's new clauses brought here. Familx reunion | :43:07. | :43:14. | |
clauses, that the opposition have put forward, unfortunately H cannot | :43:15. | :43:21. | |
support. The new clause one and 11 particularly. It is right when | :43:22. | :43:34. | |
individuals are able and have followed the correct procedtres to | :43:35. | :43:38. | |
enter the country, absolutely right they are supported. Absolutdly | :43:39. | :43:42. | |
right, that's when the meastres have been exhausted, that the Brhtish | :43:43. | :43:47. | |
taxpayer should not be pickhng up the burden of looking at thdse | :43:48. | :43:58. | |
failed asylum seekers. I did thank my right honourable friend, who has | :43:59. | :44:00. | |
broke this forward. I was vdry interested to hear when he said the | :44:01. | :44:08. | |
cast of the British taxpayer is 73 million, or estimated to be that | :44:09. | :44:14. | |
amount. Following on from that, going back to what I said about | :44:15. | :44:19. | |
unaccompanied minors. Currently as the new clause is laid out, it could | :44:20. | :44:29. | |
eventually be seen as a way of jumping the rules. For example, if | :44:30. | :44:38. | |
you do have unaccompanied mhnor he comes here, going by the proposed | :44:39. | :44:42. | |
amendment, they would be able to sponsor their parents to cole into | :44:43. | :44:49. | |
the UK. Absolutely, we don't want to separate families. However, it is | :44:50. | :44:53. | |
right that people who followed the correct procedure should be able to | :44:54. | :44:58. | |
do that, and should not be seen as a way of trying to jump those rules, | :44:59. | :45:06. | |
and obtain entry in a click away. This clause sends the wrong | :45:07. | :45:11. | |
message, and I think people within my constituency will have bden | :45:12. | :45:16. | |
troubled by, or have some concern, should I say, how about somd of the | :45:17. | :45:23. | |
debate and things being said, not necessarily in this debate, but | :45:24. | :45:33. | |
prior to where we are now. To say, I am absolutely in support of the | :45:34. | :45:39. | |
amendment, the government alendments outlined earlier, and I look forward | :45:40. | :45:44. | |
to making my vote later on this evening. Thank you very much Mr | :45:45. | :45:54. | |
Deputy Speaker, I moved for the amendments of myself and my | :45:55. | :45:58. | |
honourable friend. We believe that some of the most opinion parts of | :45:59. | :46:03. | |
this Bill, in provisions and supports, I agree with | :46:04. | :46:06. | |
administrators a disagreement of principle. It would seek to provide | :46:07. | :46:17. | |
the destitution of children and must be opposed. These amendments are | :46:18. | :46:21. | |
counter-productive, and show a criminal lack of care. We oppose | :46:22. | :46:38. | |
amendments 30 and 31, rights of appeal against decisions of | :46:39. | :46:42. | |
support. Our own amendments, number 40, families of minor children | :46:43. | :46:46. | |
receive support until they leave the country. The minister referred to | :46:47. | :46:50. | |
the pilot carried out by thd last Labour government, but I thhnk it is | :46:51. | :46:54. | |
of relevance to what has bedn proposed today. Similar proposals | :46:55. | :46:58. | |
were abandoned because of the results of the pilot, interdsting to | :46:59. | :47:03. | |
look at the comments made about that project by the joint committee on | :47:04. | :47:07. | |
human rights, saying section nine pilot, it has caused considdrable | :47:08. | :47:11. | |
hardship, and has not encouraged all discouraged families from ldaving | :47:12. | :47:19. | |
the UK. We believe it is incompatible with the princhples of | :47:20. | :47:22. | |
common humanity and international human rights law, and has no place | :47:23. | :47:28. | |
in Humane Society. We recomlend section nine be repealed at the | :47:29. | :47:31. | |
earliest opportunity, and wd believe should happen to the equivalent | :47:32. | :47:36. | |
provisions in this Bill. Mr Deputy Speaker, if the gunmen has children | :47:37. | :47:40. | |
in its sights it has those who arrived as children and you are now | :47:41. | :47:46. | |
young adults. Young people who are care leaders are prime targdts. That | :47:47. | :47:53. | |
is why we have tabled amendlents 42-45, Young people in local | :47:54. | :47:57. | |
authority care are able to `ccess leaving care support under the | :47:58. | :48:04. | |
Children Act of 1999. They `lso removed amendments provided by | :48:05. | :48:10. | |
section nine, to young people who are not asylum seekers, and do not | :48:11. | :48:12. | |
have the lead to remain when they reach the age of 18. At 44, it | :48:13. | :48:18. | |
enables local authorities to provide legal care and support to young | :48:19. | :48:23. | |
people who do not have leavd to remain and are not asylum sdekers. | :48:24. | :48:29. | |
45 provides this active state to make funding available to local | :48:30. | :48:33. | |
authorities to meet the duthes set out in the Children Act of 0989 for | :48:34. | :48:41. | |
care leaders. Amendments 39 and 36 brings back to what we said in | :48:42. | :48:43. | |
relation to the first grouphng of amendments. In which we seek to rein | :48:44. | :48:52. | |
in. These include the powers for detainee custody officers and prison | :48:53. | :48:57. | |
custody officers to strip sdarch detained people for anything that | :48:58. | :49:01. | |
could be possible evidence. Very broadly defined power. The Linister | :49:02. | :49:07. | |
points out that amendments three and four change the name of search from | :49:08. | :49:13. | |
strip twofold. They do not hn any essential way change the extent of | :49:14. | :49:16. | |
the powers, to all intensivd, as far as I can understand it, strhp search | :49:17. | :49:23. | |
powers. It is for this reason that provision for the gender of the | :49:24. | :49:26. | |
person during the search is made in clause 25, so clause eight. | :49:27. | :49:30. | |
Amendment 36 would remove the proposed power, to search ddtainees | :49:31. | :49:39. | |
nationality, or the purpose for nationality, or the purpose for | :49:40. | :49:43. | |
travelling to the UK, or whdre the person is proposing to go. We have | :49:44. | :49:48. | |
sought Titans scheduled two paragraph two of the act, | :49:49. | :49:51. | |
extensively power dealing pdople arriving to the UK, for the purposes | :49:52. | :49:56. | |
of determining whether should have been given leave to enter or remain. | :49:57. | :50:00. | |
This power has been used by the Home Office for conducting speculative | :50:01. | :50:04. | |
spot checks, including consdnsual interviews. It would limit the power | :50:05. | :50:13. | |
to examination on the point of very Daly entry. It is better for | :50:14. | :50:19. | |
intrusive the powers -- better for intrusive powers to be drawn | :50:20. | :50:26. | |
altogether. The other group this week still attack is that pdople | :50:27. | :50:30. | |
should be leaving the UK before their appeal against the Hole Office | :50:31. | :50:33. | |
decision has been heard. Amdndment 27, with support from Labour and SNP | :50:34. | :50:40. | |
members remove the offending clause 34, extending powers of | :50:41. | :50:45. | |
certification, meaning no longer deport first and appeal latdr. | :50:46. | :50:49. | |
Remove first, appeal later parole. These provisions are just m`dness. | :50:50. | :50:55. | |
People have to give up jobs and studies, give up family lifd while | :50:56. | :50:58. | |
appeals are ongoing. Separation of family until the appeal is | :50:59. | :51:03. | |
determined, falling lengthy and unknown periods. All of this against | :51:04. | :51:08. | |
the backdrop of ongoing criticism of the Home Office decision in the | :51:09. | :51:17. | |
ombudsman's report. 42% of migration, and entry clearance | :51:18. | :51:22. | |
appeals were successful. In 2013-14, the figures were 48 and | :51:23. | :51:27. | |
48%. Thousands of people having to leave for several months because of | :51:28. | :51:33. | |
Home Office mistakes. The d`nger is the appeals will not be pursued | :51:34. | :51:38. | |
given the costs of pursuing an appeal as a privately paying client | :51:39. | :51:44. | |
from open seas. -- overseas. Home Office is this text state that only | :51:45. | :51:51. | |
24% of those moves under thd current provisions, deport first appeal | :51:52. | :51:55. | |
later go through their appe`ls. Does he agree this tends to suggdst I | :51:56. | :52:00. | |
extending provisions, it will make it much harder, probably impossible | :52:01. | :52:03. | |
for the majority of these appeals the go-ahead? Isn't inherently | :52:04. | :52:10. | |
unfair to hold appeals when the person is not there to make there | :52:11. | :52:15. | |
own case. I agree entirely with what my honourable friend has sahd. The | :52:16. | :52:19. | |
government is attempting not to cut net migration by limiting the class | :52:20. | :52:23. | |
of people he can come, but laking it nearly impossible for peopld to | :52:24. | :52:27. | |
exercise the legitimate rights estate. That is scraping thd barrel | :52:28. | :52:33. | |
of immigration control meastres I want to test the House's ophnion of | :52:34. | :52:39. | |
that. We also regard as uttdrly unnecessary part seven provhsions on | :52:40. | :52:43. | |
the English language. Amendlent 34 shows part seven will not come into | :52:44. | :52:48. | |
force in Scotland without consent of the Scottish Parliament. We have | :52:49. | :52:53. | |
faith that our public authorities will determine whether the worker | :52:54. | :52:57. | |
have the skills for the job including speaking is. And ht would | :52:58. | :53:02. | |
deal with the problems, as with any other complaint. It is a cldar | :53:03. | :53:06. | |
example of immigration data and tokenism. -- Theatre. Many lembers | :53:07. | :53:13. | |
have made brave attempts to bring a silver lining to the cloud provided | :53:14. | :53:19. | |
by this grim immigration Bill. Bringing an expansion of thd range | :53:20. | :53:22. | |
of people qualifying for refugee, family or union. I've writtdn | :53:23. | :53:28. | |
questions, asked questions hn this chamber, and I'm happy to provide my | :53:29. | :53:32. | |
backing to such attempts. In the face of the most dreadful rdfugee | :53:33. | :53:35. | |
crisis since the Second World War, this is a sensible option wd can all | :53:36. | :53:43. | |
support. Broader family rool union -- when union means people get to | :53:44. | :53:47. | |
come here. This is the logical place for them, because they have family | :53:48. | :53:52. | |
support. They will have health, integration, they can pay for their | :53:53. | :53:55. | |
own flight. Little trouble for the gunmen for the taxpayer, yot can | :53:56. | :53:59. | |
extend the hand of friendshhp to those fleeing dreadful war `nd | :54:00. | :54:04. | |
persecution. The three amendments in the name of the right honourable | :54:05. | :54:10. | |
member bring some out of thd darkness. Provision to work for | :54:11. | :54:14. | |
those seeking asylum, and w`iting six months for the decision. This is | :54:15. | :54:19. | |
recognised by my colleagues as a positive step forward, and has our | :54:20. | :54:25. | |
backing. We recognise the clause as a step forward, in relation to the | :54:26. | :54:32. | |
financial obligations for f`mily reasons. Creating thousands of Skype | :54:33. | :54:38. | |
families, children only abld to diminish the parent over thd | :54:39. | :54:45. | |
Internet. Clause 15 provide clauses removing that unnecessary criteria, | :54:46. | :54:59. | |
and give full support. They will be particularly necessary, if the | :55:00. | :55:03. | |
garment refuses to get a proper time-limit on detention. Sole of the | :55:04. | :55:07. | |
most vulnerable are least aware of their rights, including automatic | :55:08. | :55:13. | |
bail hearings, meaning they're not attained unnecessarily. Fin`lly Mr | :55:14. | :55:17. | |
Deputy Speaker, Amendment 38 makes provision for a detainee to be | :55:18. | :55:22. | |
furnished with an address f`cility is a -- if applying for appdal. | :55:23. | :55:31. | |
Suggesting a person coming `t a detention can only get support when | :55:32. | :55:33. | |
they have been granted bail. I urge all members to support this. | :55:34. | :55:48. | |
I appreciate the opportunitx to address the house once again. It is | :55:49. | :55:54. | |
a pleasure to follow the honourable gentleman because I do belidve that | :55:55. | :55:59. | |
what he has said has been thoughtful and thought-provoking. Therd is one | :56:00. | :56:06. | |
amendment that rests on the order paper in my name, although H can't | :56:07. | :56:15. | |
take entire credit for it. H may move from it, given the early | :56:16. | :56:24. | |
indications. Part seven refdrs to object services employing English | :56:25. | :56:32. | |
speakers with a number of exceptions if jobs are outside mainland UK I | :56:33. | :56:38. | |
had the opportunity to raisd this issue during the second isste of | :56:39. | :56:44. | |
this bill and the first obsdrvation I made at that stage was I `m amazed | :56:45. | :56:49. | |
that it is not a requirement already. I can't think of any | :56:50. | :56:53. | |
engagement I have had with `ny public servant in this country who | :56:54. | :56:58. | |
is unable to speak our langtage fluently and further to that I made | :56:59. | :57:03. | |
the point that I hope in my contributions in this chambdr and | :57:04. | :57:09. | |
elsewhere I am able to speak English just as every other resident in | :57:10. | :57:13. | |
Northern Ireland, but yet the bill excludes part seven and the | :57:14. | :57:23. | |
provisions of part seven. Cdrtainly. Even in other areas of publhc life, | :57:24. | :57:34. | |
there are councillors who whll not be able to pass the test of fluent | :57:35. | :57:45. | |
English. Was grateful for that intervention, it is a wonderful | :57:46. | :57:47. | |
tenet of our democracy that if people wish to choose an individual | :57:48. | :57:55. | |
irrespective of their linguhstic gymnastics, choosing a person to | :57:56. | :58:01. | |
represent them and they are satisfied that they can represent | :58:02. | :58:04. | |
them properly, it is a gift. When it comes to public servants, it should | :58:05. | :58:13. | |
be a requirement and it shotld be a requirement in Northern Ireland as | :58:14. | :58:18. | |
well. When making those points, I think it is fair to recognise what | :58:19. | :58:24. | |
the minister outlined in his opening remarks to this trance of | :58:25. | :58:31. | |
amendments, that there are implications for devolved | :58:32. | :58:36. | |
institutions and administrations. What has been replicated for the | :58:37. | :58:45. | |
Scottish devolution, should have formed part of our amendment. If my | :58:46. | :58:54. | |
amendment is defective, I whll take it on board, but the principle is | :58:55. | :59:00. | |
one that is well worth pursting I heard the minister outlined that | :59:01. | :59:03. | |
there would be an intention to look at this issue again in the other | :59:04. | :59:15. | |
place and I welcome that. As I indicated in my initial | :59:16. | :59:17. | |
contribution, there are isstes of drafting that need further `ttention | :59:18. | :59:23. | |
to make this consistent with other nations of the UK, but is something | :59:24. | :59:28. | |
that we intend to return to in the laws. I am grateful for that | :59:29. | :59:33. | |
indication, but whilst we are on that topic, and if there is further | :59:34. | :59:39. | |
work for the other place, then I turn our attention to schedtle 1 | :59:40. | :59:43. | |
which relates to Maritime enforcement. Another point that was | :59:44. | :59:47. | |
made during second reading through this house was the particul`r | :59:48. | :59:54. | |
failure to make any reference to the Belfast Harbour police. I think at | :59:55. | :59:58. | |
that stage the minister took on board that they are properlx | :59:59. | :00:04. | |
constituted and mandated legitimate authority within Belfast. They are a | :00:05. | :00:10. | |
private police force, but they look after the security of the port and | :00:11. | :00:14. | |
that is an area that could helpfully be inserted in the bill shotld the | :00:15. | :00:21. | |
facility arise in another place and have the government was Matt | :00:22. | :00:26. | |
backing, but if we are intent in pursuing the thrust of the | :00:27. | :00:31. | |
immigration bill and the protections that arise from the Maritimd | :00:32. | :00:36. | |
provisions, I think that will be an important consideration in that | :00:37. | :00:42. | |
place. We have got the Belf`st Harbour police, but I do want to | :00:43. | :00:52. | |
raise a couple of instances and issues that relate to immigration in | :00:53. | :00:57. | |
general. The UK border agency in particular and it does relate to | :00:58. | :01:03. | |
amendments, so I will not stray too far from that. There is a skeleton | :01:04. | :01:15. | |
operation of UKBA in Northern Ireland. You could be forgiven for | :01:16. | :01:23. | |
thinking that UKBA operate on the mainland only. When I think of the | :01:24. | :01:30. | |
ferry links from my constittency in north Belfast over to the | :01:31. | :01:44. | |
constituency of Dumfries and Galloway, should someone be | :01:45. | :01:46. | |
travelling from our part of the United Kingdom to the mainl`nd, UKBA | :01:47. | :01:53. | |
are waiting for them in Scotland. Should someone wish to get on the | :01:54. | :02:00. | |
vessel in Belfast, they will not be searched, interrogated or qtestion | :02:01. | :02:05. | |
at all. Should they go on as a foot passenger they will go throtgh more | :02:06. | :02:10. | |
invasive security, but the `nalysis, screening and protection dods not | :02:11. | :02:17. | |
rest in Belfast and that is an omission and should be lookdd at. If | :02:18. | :02:24. | |
I could mention the case of a particular woman who is a wonderful | :02:25. | :02:27. | |
character. She sought asylul in Belfast. She received great | :02:28. | :02:34. | |
assistance from Belfast Central Mission, the method it -- Mdthodist | :02:35. | :02:44. | |
church in central Belfast. She is either a failed asylum seekdr or | :02:45. | :02:50. | |
refused asylum seeker, but she is someone who sought asylum and was | :02:51. | :02:56. | |
turned down. She had to spend time in a detention centre that hs held | :02:57. | :03:06. | |
within a police station. It is not the most welcoming or invithng place | :03:07. | :03:11. | |
to be and that is just a consequence of our history. Someone det`ined for | :03:12. | :03:16. | |
immigration purposes in Northern Ireland are detained in what looks | :03:17. | :03:21. | |
like a military compound with security lighting, cameras, high | :03:22. | :03:25. | |
fences. When she was deportdd, she was deported back to the cotntry | :03:26. | :03:33. | |
where she entered the UK. She was removed to Dublin and after that she | :03:34. | :03:37. | |
got on the Ulster bus and p`id a pounds 50 and was back withhn | :03:38. | :03:42. | |
Belfast within two hours. Stbsequent detection, she was then bought to | :03:43. | :03:50. | |
Yarl's Wood. Another case, which is a point that was made by thd Right | :03:51. | :03:57. | |
Honourable Lady for Pontefr`ct. Rather focus on the 19-year,old that | :03:58. | :04:05. | |
rests in Beirut and is a strange from her family, I want to raise the | :04:06. | :04:26. | |
situation regarding an Indi`n lawyer... He would gel for ten years | :04:27. | :04:35. | |
and was reported that to India on release his family, who relhed on | :04:36. | :04:40. | |
him, were left in Northern Hreland and his young children who were | :04:41. | :04:44. | |
going through the education system were not in a position to up sticks | :04:45. | :04:50. | |
and leave yet. Their father was never in a position to come back. I | :04:51. | :04:54. | |
would be grateful if the Minister could consider these cases `nd find | :04:55. | :05:09. | |
a way where we can be more compassionate. The family unit needs | :05:10. | :05:17. | |
to be held together as best as possible. My experience as ` member | :05:18. | :05:30. | |
of the built committee has not alter the Mayan opinion. -- authored my | :05:31. | :05:51. | |
opinion. Witnesses said this bill lazz evidence base, which is not | :05:52. | :06:05. | |
true. -- lacked evidence base. We had evidence for a number of | :06:06. | :06:16. | |
organisations that were shocked In giving evidence, a representative | :06:17. | :06:22. | |
from the Georgian Society s`id that the ramifications of the bill are | :06:23. | :06:41. | |
serious. -- the Children's Society. Even Lord Green, with whom H | :06:42. | :06:48. | |
disagree with most things, said that asylum seekers whose childrdn had | :06:49. | :06:53. | |
been refused should be treated differently. Most reasonabld people | :06:54. | :07:12. | |
would accept that we have responsibly to those who have had | :07:13. | :07:16. | |
their asylum application turned down. Close 37 in schedule dight | :07:17. | :07:34. | |
should be removed. -- clausd 37 The government have tried to silplify | :07:35. | :07:42. | |
the system, although they h`ve moved from two sets of regulations to | :07:43. | :07:48. | |
four. That is not really silplifying it. There will be gaps in the system | :07:49. | :08:01. | |
where support will not be offered to vulnerable families. There was a 1 | :08:02. | :08:11. | |
-year-old boy who died and his mother died two days later because | :08:12. | :08:26. | |
of the lack of support. The changes being proposed create a fin`ncial | :08:27. | :08:39. | |
and administrative problem. I know that local authorities are not happy | :08:40. | :08:45. | |
with the level of consultathon from central government. Absolutdly. The | :08:46. | :08:55. | |
bill proposes to remove support from those that are due to be deported. | :08:56. | :08:59. | |
This will of history have an impact on the children of families | :09:00. | :09:05. | |
affected. Just to give some context to the debate, the support `mounts | :09:06. | :09:16. | |
to ?5 a day. Removing that will not lead to refused applicants being | :09:17. | :09:20. | |
removed from the UK any quicker We should be supporting familids until | :09:21. | :09:26. | |
they are removed from the UK. I could not agree more. During | :09:27. | :09:33. | |
committee stage we move to `n amendment to increase support | :09:34. | :09:40. | |
slightly by just over ?1 a day. We're not talking about a m`ssive of | :09:41. | :09:48. | |
money. Just over ?6 a day. H'm not sure any member of this house will | :09:49. | :09:52. | |
be able to survive on that. The existing evidence shows it does not | :09:53. | :10:01. | |
make it quicker for families to be removed from the UK. Ending supports | :10:02. | :10:19. | |
does not influence or encourage people in their removal frol the UK. | :10:20. | :10:26. | |
They have concerns about whdther it will incentivise people to leave or | :10:27. | :10:36. | |
stay. The government's new `pproach to removal support differs hn three | :10:37. | :10:46. | |
aspects to the pilot study. It is up to the claimant to prove thdre is a | :10:47. | :10:51. | |
genuine obstacle to departure. Apart from that nothing else has really | :10:52. | :10:55. | |
changed. The government is not learning lessons from previous | :10:56. | :11:01. | |
pilots of these, and are botnd to repeat the mistakes of the past | :11:02. | :11:10. | |
Amendment 20 96 to assure a right of appeal, surely a basic human night | :11:11. | :11:20. | |
Daly right exists for those who support is discontinued. Mr Deputy | :11:21. | :11:29. | |
Speaker, I stated in the colmittee stage, other departments ard calling | :11:30. | :11:32. | |
for support as part of the legal support strategy. This group has | :11:33. | :11:38. | |
been called highly vulnerable, and more has to be done for leaving | :11:39. | :11:48. | |
care. Amendment 42-45, trying to ensure that this Bill does not fly | :11:49. | :11:52. | |
in the face of the care str`tegy, I hope that the Minister will stand by | :11:53. | :11:57. | |
his rhetoric and accept these amendments. In introducing this Bill | :11:58. | :12:04. | |
the Home Secretary stated as fact that public services were bding | :12:05. | :12:08. | |
abused by a legal migrants. I accept that some people may be livhng here | :12:09. | :12:12. | |
legally and the authorities should remove them. The people I h`ve | :12:13. | :12:16. | |
spoken about and not abusing the system, children or vulnerable | :12:17. | :12:19. | |
families, people leaving care, these are not people abusing the system, | :12:20. | :12:25. | |
they are food system is deshgned to protect. People looking for the best | :12:26. | :12:29. | |
start in life, and I called for the garment to drop the proposals. - | :12:30. | :12:40. | |
call for the government. I wanted to raise a couple of brief points. | :12:41. | :12:44. | |
Firstly in relation to one that has not been discussed so far this | :12:45. | :12:47. | |
afternoon, government amendlents seven. I think it is unforttnate | :12:48. | :12:52. | |
that this has been introducdd at this stage, did not give us the | :12:53. | :12:55. | |
opportunity to look at the principles in committee. AJ -- some | :12:56. | :13:08. | |
fairly significant principlds in middle to access to education. | :13:09. | :13:18. | |
Providing funding, to care leavers who were they are supporting, that | :13:19. | :13:25. | |
have leave to remain. The gtnmen explaining the notes that this is | :13:26. | :13:31. | |
something that will be repl`ced by a requirement to qualify under the | :13:32. | :13:34. | |
student support regulations, applying this is an easy or | :13:35. | :13:38. | |
tentative route. They know that this is disingenuous, under thosd | :13:39. | :13:42. | |
regulations, young people not recognised as refugees only qualify | :13:43. | :13:49. | |
for such a loan if they havd had leave over a period of thred years, | :13:50. | :13:55. | |
and have lived half their lhfe in the UK. Cutting off access to higher | :13:56. | :14:00. | |
education for a significant proportion of young people. These | :14:01. | :14:03. | |
are the people who will ulthmately, in many cases gained leave to remain | :14:04. | :14:09. | |
in the UK and build their lhve set. Not only discriminatory, but | :14:10. | :14:14. | |
effectively preventing young people at a crucial point in their lives, | :14:15. | :14:18. | |
developing skills that will provide them with productive careers and | :14:19. | :14:23. | |
opportunity to give back to society. I know the government has s`id they | :14:24. | :14:26. | |
are concerned there is an anti-burden on local authorhties, | :14:27. | :14:31. | |
because people in the situations are required to pay overseas sttdent | :14:32. | :14:34. | |
fees, it would be easy to rdgulate, to give them status, providhng | :14:35. | :14:41. | |
another option of alleviating the burden on local authorities. Which | :14:42. | :14:44. | |
I'm sure universities would be keen to embrace. I raise a point only | :14:45. | :14:51. | |
because I hope that when thhs Bill gets to another place, this issue | :14:52. | :14:57. | |
will be given proper considdration. I briefly what is speaking to the | :14:58. | :15:11. | |
removal of the support to ftnding the families of asylum seekdrs. This | :15:12. | :15:15. | |
is bad lawmaking, in the face of evidence. As other members have made | :15:16. | :15:21. | |
clear, all the evidence was this is not only a harsh thing to do, but it | :15:22. | :15:28. | |
will be counter-productive to the government's own objectives. If we | :15:29. | :15:36. | |
want to jus expenditure on `sylum seekers, the best way is to conclude | :15:37. | :15:41. | |
cases quickly. It needs better resourcing and decision-makhng in | :15:42. | :15:47. | |
the Home Office. On committde, the Minister said asylum support rates | :15:48. | :15:51. | |
are pull factor for asylum seekers coming to the UK, despite the fact | :15:52. | :15:56. | |
that rates are lower than most other countries in Europe. I did challenge | :15:57. | :16:00. | |
at that time to provide the evidence that they were a pull factor, | :16:01. | :16:04. | |
obviously we were discussing it quite a lot, he was unable to do | :16:05. | :16:09. | |
that. I hope having the opportunity to consider the issue, and draw on | :16:10. | :16:14. | |
the substantial support, yot may be able to provide the evidencd which | :16:15. | :16:19. | |
justifies this measure. All the evidence we received as the | :16:20. | :16:24. | |
committee suggests it will drive things in the other direction from | :16:25. | :16:28. | |
the gunmen's own objectives. Making it that it more difficult for the | :16:29. | :16:32. | |
Home Office to remain in contact with people, and undermine dfforts | :16:33. | :16:37. | |
to promote voluntary departtres It will not tackle the issue, ht will | :16:38. | :16:43. | |
create destitution, which whll be addressed by local authorithes, | :16:44. | :16:46. | |
creating pressure on mental health services, something we also heard. | :16:47. | :16:51. | |
It will potentially leave these people vulnerable to labour | :16:52. | :16:54. | |
exploitation by pushing thel into the hands of exploitative elployers. | :16:55. | :17:01. | |
For all of those reasons, I would urge the gunmen to think ag`in on | :17:02. | :17:13. | |
that issue. -- urge the govdrnment. Think we have touched a number of | :17:14. | :17:17. | |
important themes, which werd debated in committee, in relation to the | :17:18. | :17:22. | |
Bill. Touching on a number of issues which we did examine in det`il | :17:23. | :17:26. | |
during the committee stages of the Bill. Equally, we have had ` number | :17:27. | :17:32. | |
of additional items through new clauses and amendments, not | :17:33. | :17:39. | |
addressed. If I may respond to the right honourable lady for Pontefract | :17:40. | :17:44. | |
and Castleford, and the new clauses, I do understand thd depth | :17:45. | :17:49. | |
of feeling about the human suffering in Syria and the UK. And we are | :17:50. | :17:55. | |
obviously taking a number of steps to respond to the crisis. I | :17:56. | :17:59. | |
recognise the contribution she has rightly made, in a fair way, across | :18:00. | :18:04. | |
the House, to highlight a ntmber of issues and concerns relating to | :18:05. | :18:10. | |
that. I do say to her, and H will explain how this fits in to what | :18:11. | :18:13. | |
other European countries ard doing, we don't believe widening the family | :18:14. | :18:22. | |
eligibility criteria is the appropriate response. And how we are | :18:23. | :18:26. | |
focusing on the military and aid to help refugees in the region. And | :18:27. | :18:29. | |
working with international partners to find a solution to the conflict, | :18:30. | :18:36. | |
as well as of course the issue of resettlement, the resettlemdnt of | :18:37. | :18:41. | |
20,000 of the most vulnerable of the refugees during the course of the | :18:42. | :18:45. | |
Parliament. She asked about Dublin, and I think it is important to | :18:46. | :18:50. | |
underline that the UK has implemented the Dublin thred | :18:51. | :18:54. | |
regulation. Those in Calais are the responsibility of the French | :18:55. | :18:57. | |
authorities. Anybody wishing to benefit from the family regtlation | :18:58. | :19:04. | |
must provide details of thehr family in France to the UK. Requests will | :19:05. | :19:10. | |
be made to the UK to accept responsibility to their clahm based | :19:11. | :19:13. | |
on the presence of close falily members. As part of our joint | :19:14. | :19:17. | |
declaration with the French government, we work with thd French | :19:18. | :19:21. | |
authorities in terms of the overall processing, and ways we can continue | :19:22. | :19:28. | |
to support their activity. Some of the numbers they are processing and | :19:29. | :19:32. | |
seeing as either is increashng. Something we are continuing to work | :19:33. | :19:40. | |
with them on. I think it is worth underlining, the current Falily | :19:41. | :19:44. | |
Reunion policy is also more generous than our international obligations | :19:45. | :19:48. | |
required. As I hinted at, some other EU countries impose a number of | :19:49. | :19:52. | |
requirements. Actually we are seeing requirements. Actually we are seeing | :19:53. | :19:57. | |
countries such as Denmark, Sweden and Austria recently announced they | :19:58. | :20:00. | |
are amending the family reunion policy. Germany has indicatdd it | :20:01. | :20:05. | |
will be reviewing the Familx Reunion policy. She did ask me | :20:06. | :20:12. | |
specifically, in humanitari`n cases, those compelling cases, another | :20:13. | :20:16. | |
example given by the honour`ble gentleman for Belfast East. Where a | :20:17. | :20:22. | |
Family Reunion application fails under immigration rules, such as a | :20:23. | :20:26. | |
case in 18 19-year-old applxing to join refugee parents in the UK, the | :20:27. | :20:30. | |
entry clearance officer must indicate whether there are | :20:31. | :20:42. | |
exceptional circumstances. There is obligation in regarding to the entry | :20:43. | :20:45. | |
clearance offices regarding parents. I know the honourable gentldman for | :20:46. | :20:50. | |
Belfast East is not in his place, Betty Heidler acted initially from | :20:51. | :20:54. | |
the Belfast Harbour police, and I'm happy to reflect on this. | :20:55. | :20:58. | |
Recognising they are establhshed under separate legislation, the | :20:59. | :21:04. | |
harbours, docks and peers act of 1987. There is a powder does exist, | :21:05. | :21:13. | |
I'm happy look in further ddtail. My honourable friend highlightdd one of | :21:14. | :21:16. | |
the issues in relation to deportation. I think, if I lay | :21:17. | :21:23. | |
explain, our primary sanctions for immigration on compliance are | :21:24. | :21:29. | |
removal and civil penalties. That is why in many respects prosecttion | :21:30. | :21:34. | |
numbers are relatively low. It is the focus we will give, givdn if we | :21:35. | :21:39. | |
can remove someone going through the process of prosecution, which may | :21:40. | :21:44. | |
delay removal, and is this the costly, is not necessarily our | :21:45. | :21:45. | |
focus. If we are able to achieve focus. If we are able to achieve | :21:46. | :21:51. | |
removal, and while we have taken the approach we have. I will give a | :21:52. | :21:57. | |
briefly. I'm grateful, will my right honourable friend except th`t he | :21:58. | :22:01. | |
remove somebody you have to apprehend them, to arrest them. That | :22:02. | :22:06. | |
is what the amendment was about Obviously there are powers of arrest | :22:07. | :22:11. | |
that do reside, and we have certain issues on detention which c`me up in | :22:12. | :22:14. | |
the previous debate. I don't cut across anything in order th`t the | :22:15. | :22:20. | |
law is upheld, and people are appropriately identified, and that | :22:21. | :22:25. | |
removal or civil penalty for those who may be unlawfully emploxing them | :22:26. | :22:31. | |
is an appropriate measure. The honourable gentleman speaking for | :22:32. | :22:36. | |
the Scottish National party highlighted an issue and a linimum | :22:37. | :22:41. | |
in fresh. People can apply tndertake two of the points based system. | :22:42. | :22:45. | |
Employment overseas is no gtarantee of finding work in the UK. The | :22:46. | :22:50. | |
honourable gentleman, who speaks for the official opposition highlighted | :22:51. | :22:55. | |
the issue over destitution, and how he believed the arrangements would | :22:56. | :23:00. | |
not work based on the 2005 pilot. I gave some explanation when H opened | :23:01. | :23:05. | |
the debate. There will be focused and targeted engagement with appeal | :23:06. | :23:10. | |
rights families, together whth local authorities, and that is in contrast | :23:11. | :23:14. | |
to what happened before. Th`t closing gates and with families | :23:15. | :23:18. | |
where the local government Association acknowledge that focus | :23:19. | :23:22. | |
their efforts to engage famhlies and promote returns are needed. That is | :23:23. | :23:28. | |
precisely what we intend to do. Equally, some other questions on | :23:29. | :23:35. | |
gaps that someone suggesting might apply, we are absolutely working | :23:36. | :23:40. | |
with local authorities on this. In many ways the local governmdnt | :23:41. | :23:42. | |
Association welcomes the stdps we have taken to ensure that g`ps are | :23:43. | :23:48. | |
close. On the issue of fields from overseas. Busy this is a matter | :23:49. | :23:52. | |
which has been tested by thd Court of Appeal. They have recently | :23:53. | :23:56. | |
confirmed that the garment hs generally entitled to procedd on the | :23:57. | :24:01. | |
basis that an out of countrx appeal is fair and effective remedx. Also | :24:02. | :24:08. | |
in respect to the issues on access to higher education, on this we are | :24:09. | :24:13. | |
saying, we want there to be an equality of treatment, in rdspect to | :24:14. | :24:17. | |
the relevant student support regulations. We are requiring under | :24:18. | :24:24. | |
new provisions on the new clause, like other migrants and British | :24:25. | :24:30. | |
citizens, that is the test that should be applied in those regards. | :24:31. | :24:36. | |
There was a question on safdguards for the children, and I highlighted | :24:37. | :24:44. | |
the legations we have under section 55 to safeguard and care for the | :24:45. | :24:54. | |
safety of children. That is something we have done throtgh the | :24:55. | :24:56. | |
whole provisions, and we judged provide support and mechanisms for | :24:57. | :24:59. | |
children as contained in thd Bill. The question is that the bill be | :25:00. | :25:29. | |
read another time. I think the ayes have it. New clauses 4-7. The | :25:30. | :25:43. | |
minister moved formally. Thd question is that government new | :25:44. | :25:54. | |
clauses 4-7 be added to the bill. I think the ayes have it. Amendment | :25:55. | :26:06. | |
29. The opposition front bench to me formally, which it has done. | :26:07. | :26:15. | |
Division. Clear the lobby. The question is that amendmdnt 9 be | :26:16. | :28:53. | |
made. De ayes to the right to launch at | :28:54. | :40:26. | |
59, the nos to the left 315. The ayes to the right 259, the nos to | :40:27. | :40:44. | |
the left 315. The nos habit. Government amendments 5-17. The | :40:45. | :40:50. | |
Minister to move formally? Thank you. The question is that government | :40:51. | :40:58. | |
amendments 5-17, 3 and four be made? As many of us opinions say | :40:59. | :41:11. | |
aye. The ayes habit. Amendmdnt 7, in the name of Mr McDonald? Very | :41:12. | :41:17. | |
enthusiastic, grateful to the honourable gentleman, he has made | :41:18. | :41:25. | |
formally Amendment 27. The puestion is Amendment 27 be made. As many of | :41:26. | :41:36. | |
them -- about opinions say `ye, and against the opinions say no. Clear | :41:37. | :41:38. | |
the lobby. Question is that Amendment 27 be | :41:39. | :44:42. | |
made, as many of the opinions say aye, the country no. -- contrary. | :44:43. | :50:00. | |
Order, order. The ayes to the right, 260. The noes to the left, 304. The | :50:01. | :54:18. | |
ayes to the right, 260, the noes to the left 360. The noes have it. | :54:19. | :54:29. | |
Unlock. I'd link we are completed. Consideration completed. Thhrd | :54:30. | :54:35. | |
reading? Thank you. I call the Home Secretary to move the third reading. | :54:36. | :54:44. | |
Secretary of State, Theresa May Can I beg that the Bill be read for the | :54:45. | :54:48. | |
third time. We have had considerable debate, lively discussion as the | :54:49. | :54:53. | |
Immigration Bill has been ddbated today and the various other stages, | :54:54. | :54:58. | |
and there have been a range of concerns expressed, considered and | :54:59. | :55:03. | |
amendments have been voted on. I think if I might, as we comd to | :55:04. | :55:08. | |
third reading, it is import`nt as we think about the debate, to remember | :55:09. | :55:13. | |
why this Bill is so necessary. I want to reflect on what it hs we | :55:14. | :55:18. | |
believe this Bill will do. @s I said at the second reading of thd | :55:19. | :55:21. | |
Immigration Bill, we must continue to build an immigration system fair | :55:22. | :55:26. | |
to British citizens and those who come illegally to play by the rules | :55:27. | :55:31. | |
linking to be to the societx. Ensuring immigration is bal`nced, | :55:32. | :55:35. | |
sustainable and net migration can be managed. I'm sure the whole House | :55:36. | :55:40. | |
will agree without immigrathon this country would not be the drhving | :55:41. | :55:44. | |
multination, multi-faith delocracy it is to day. Immigration h`s brooch | :55:45. | :55:49. | |
in this benefits to the economy culture and society. When ndt | :55:50. | :55:53. | |
migration is too high and the pace of change is too fast it puts | :55:54. | :55:57. | |
pressure on schools, hospit`ls, transport and social servicds, | :55:58. | :56:02. | |
driving down wages for people on Boeing comes. Not fair on the | :56:03. | :56:06. | |
British public, those who come legitimately and play by thd rules. | :56:07. | :56:11. | |
Since 2010, the government has reformed their chaotic and | :56:12. | :56:15. | |
uncontrolled immigration system we inherited, building one that works | :56:16. | :56:19. | |
for the national interest. H believe this Bill will ensure we can go | :56:20. | :56:23. | |
further bringing clarity, f`irness and integrity to the immigr`tion | :56:24. | :56:28. | |
system. I would like to thank all members on both sides of thd House | :56:29. | :56:31. | |
for their constructive contributions in shaping this Bill in the | :56:32. | :56:36. | |
Parliamentary stages, and all those who have been involved in working on | :56:37. | :56:40. | |
it. All the members on the committee for the Bill, all those involved in | :56:41. | :56:44. | |
working on it, including thd House authorities. I would like to thank | :56:45. | :56:49. | |
the organisations who gave dvidence to the Bill committee, and provided | :56:50. | :56:57. | |
briefing to the Bill. I would like to thank my right honourabld friend | :56:58. | :57:00. | |
the Immigration Minister, for the thoughtful way he has steerdd this | :57:01. | :57:06. | |
through the House. It has bden important and substantial work. I | :57:07. | :57:09. | |
want to very briefly highlight the measures of the Bill. | :57:10. | :57:13. | |
I want to highlight certain parts of the bill, especially the | :57:14. | :57:23. | |
exploitation of vulnerable employees. It has been raisdd | :57:24. | :57:28. | |
before. We know labour markdt exploitation can be committdd by | :57:29. | :57:32. | |
organised criminal gangs. It is clear workers rights need to be | :57:33. | :57:38. | |
enforced and the framework needs improving in terms of regul`tions. | :57:39. | :57:46. | |
There needs to be more effective enforcement across the whold | :57:47. | :57:50. | |
spectrum of noncompliance. Hllegal working remains one of the lain | :57:51. | :57:59. | |
factors and we are taking steps to make illegal working illegal. We | :58:00. | :58:14. | |
should be clear that this mdasure is not intended to punish the | :58:15. | :58:20. | |
vulnerable, like those who `re trafficked here and forced to work. | :58:21. | :58:26. | |
The Modern Day Slavery Bill act will continue to protect people. Instead, | :58:27. | :58:30. | |
we want to deal with illegal migrants who choose to work a | :58:31. | :58:35. | |
illegally when they should `nd could leave the UK. We must also target | :58:36. | :58:43. | |
the employers who turn a blhnd eye to employing illegal workers. | :58:44. | :58:50. | |
Illegal working happens in licence sectors and the bill will insure | :58:51. | :58:59. | |
that those employing illegal workers will not be able to obtain licenses. | :59:00. | :59:07. | |
The message is simple. Illegal working is wrong and it will not be | :59:08. | :59:12. | |
tolerated. Too often illegal migrants remain illegal in this | :59:13. | :59:16. | |
country. They'd take advant`ge of our generous public services and | :59:17. | :59:21. | |
that cannot continue. We will further restrict access to services. | :59:22. | :59:31. | |
We are introducing new meastres for rogue landlords who continuously | :59:32. | :59:42. | |
rent to illegal workers. We will strengthen the consequences for | :59:43. | :59:45. | |
those who drive without leg`l status. There will be due to on bank | :59:46. | :59:52. | |
and building societies to check the current status of account holders. | :59:53. | :00:01. | |
It is right we addressed thd appeals issued said that we can remove | :00:02. | :00:05. | |
people with no right to be hn the UK. In 2014 we have increasdd the | :00:06. | :00:17. | |
number of people we have deported. The bill allows us to ensurd that | :00:18. | :00:24. | |
illegal migrants who have not been offered leave to remain cannot | :00:25. | :00:34. | |
frustrate the process. We c`n place a satellite tag on those who have | :00:35. | :00:39. | |
been released on bail. The government is also clear th`t we | :00:40. | :00:42. | |
have a duty to offer support to those who come to the UK sedking our | :00:43. | :00:46. | |
protection whilst their clahm is being assessed. But that help cannot | :00:47. | :00:57. | |
continue when the courts established that the individual no longdr needs | :00:58. | :01:12. | |
support. I will just mentioned to other areas that are import`nt. One | :01:13. | :01:17. | |
is controlling our borders which is vital in protecting our sectrity. It | :01:18. | :01:23. | |
is important that we know who enters the UK. Older officers have more | :01:24. | :01:34. | |
powers to intercept vessels at the and can apply travel bans to stop | :01:35. | :01:38. | |
dangerous individuals coming to the UK. Also, we will ensure all | :01:39. | :01:46. | |
customer facing public sector workers will have to speak fluent | :01:47. | :01:52. | |
English. We will legislate to make sure this becomes a reality. When | :01:53. | :01:58. | |
the government came to power in 2010 the immigration system we inherited | :01:59. | :02:02. | |
was chaotic. In the past five years we have taken great strides | :02:03. | :02:10. | |
forwards. We have shut down bogus colleges, capped the number of | :02:11. | :02:14. | |
non-migrant workers admitted, protected our public servicds from | :02:15. | :02:19. | |
abuse. These reforms are working, but we must go further. This bill | :02:20. | :02:25. | |
will build on our achievements and make sure we have a system that is | :02:26. | :02:28. | |
fair on the British public `nd those who come here legitimately `nd | :02:29. | :02:34. | |
importantly, it serves the national interest. I commend this ill to the | :02:35. | :02:42. | |
house. The question is that the Bill be read at the time. I call Andy | :02:43. | :02:48. | |
Burnham. We have had a lively and thorough debates, if not a genuine | :02:49. | :02:52. | |
dialogue as the movement from the government has been minimal. We have | :02:53. | :02:56. | |
not won many amendments, but we have won the argument and said that I | :02:57. | :03:01. | |
wish to thank my honourable friend to ensure -- who ensured th`t the | :03:02. | :03:16. | |
debate was led well. I would also like to thank the member from | :03:17. | :03:24. | |
Rotherham who brought an insight into her outstanding work rdgarding | :03:25. | :03:34. | |
the exploitation of children. Our thanks go to other members who | :03:35. | :03:38. | |
served on the committee and the co-chairs, and the third party | :03:39. | :03:44. | |
associations that the Home Secretary referenced. Figures were published | :03:45. | :03:48. | |
last week which set the context for this third reading debate. The ONS | :03:49. | :03:55. | |
reported that net migration has reached a record high of 336,00 . | :03:56. | :04:02. | |
82,000 from last year and 101,0 0 higher than when the Prime Linister | :04:03. | :04:09. | |
came to office. I heard the Home Secretary's comments about the | :04:10. | :04:13. | |
records of the biggest government. She needs to look at her own records | :04:14. | :04:19. | |
before she points the finger. Let us that it against what they promise. | :04:20. | :04:23. | |
Their 2010 manifesto made a pledge to reduce net migration to tens of | :04:24. | :04:31. | |
thousands. If we don't meet it, beat us out, said the Prime Minister The | :04:32. | :04:38. | |
2015 manifesto said the samd thing. Instead of decreasing it, they are | :04:39. | :04:43. | |
increasing it by tens of thousands. It is a lamentable record. The Home | :04:44. | :04:50. | |
Secretary like to go to the Conservatory party conference and | :04:51. | :04:53. | |
took a tough game, but she can't escape her own record and the scale | :04:54. | :04:58. | |
of the gap between her rhetoric and reality erodes public trust on this | :04:59. | :05:02. | |
most important and sensitivd issues. As I made clear at second rdading, I | :05:03. | :05:07. | |
will always support practic`l measures to deal with the ptblic's | :05:08. | :05:11. | |
legitimate concerns about immigration. There are some measures | :05:12. | :05:16. | |
we are poor, especially the emphasis on English-language requirelents and | :05:17. | :05:21. | |
the labour force, but I will not lead our name to desperate `ttempts | :05:22. | :05:28. | |
to legislate in haste and h`lf baked measures that are being used to | :05:29. | :05:37. | |
camouflage failure. We will refuse to give this bill a third rdading | :05:38. | :05:41. | |
tonight because the governmdnt has failed to listen in committde and | :05:42. | :05:44. | |
produce any meaningful eviddnce that the measures of this bill whll have | :05:45. | :05:51. | |
any more success than the steps they took in the last parliament. But | :05:52. | :05:56. | |
worse, the bill could have ` number of unintended and pernicious | :05:57. | :06:00. | |
consequences, as the shadow immigration Minister exposed in | :06:01. | :06:14. | |
committee. When it comes to human trafficking and slavery, thhs | :06:15. | :06:18. | |
government does deserve somd credit, but the bill could lead to | :06:19. | :06:27. | |
discrimination and erode Civil Liberties and rights. The ndw fence | :06:28. | :06:37. | |
of illegal working could deter people from coming forward. | :06:38. | :06:43. | |
Unscrupulous individuals already hold the whip hand. This bill will | :06:44. | :06:48. | |
strengthen their grip over these most vulnerable people. This house | :06:49. | :06:54. | |
should reject it. Working to put food in your kids's mouth should | :06:55. | :07:00. | |
never be a criminal offence. More broadly, if employees feel they will | :07:01. | :07:10. | |
lose wages by reporting the employers, would this not h`ppy with | :07:11. | :07:16. | |
the effects and increase thd size of the black market? These are genuine | :07:17. | :07:19. | |
concerns and I have not seen any convincing evidence from thd | :07:20. | :07:23. | |
government to suggest they `re misplaced. What the governmdnt has | :07:24. | :07:28. | |
in unmoved, I am sure there are lordships will wish to push the | :07:29. | :07:31. | |
government hard in another place. I will give way to my honourable | :07:32. | :07:37. | |
friend. All my honourable friend agree that the government are | :07:38. | :07:40. | |
focusing on the wrong party within this bill? He really should be | :07:41. | :07:46. | |
concentrating as the Home Sdcretary should be doing on tramping down on | :07:47. | :07:52. | |
unscrupulous employers that prey on the misery of those people who are | :07:53. | :07:59. | |
forced into these terrible conditions, such as those exploited | :08:00. | :08:03. | |
on Britain's building sites which I have seen with my own eyes. My | :08:04. | :08:08. | |
honourable friend has more experience of the workplaces that | :08:09. | :08:15. | |
might be most affected by this bill than anyone else. Those unscrupulous | :08:16. | :08:21. | |
employers will feel in bold and by this bill because they know people | :08:22. | :08:26. | |
on those building sites do not any more have the courage to report them | :08:27. | :08:31. | |
to the authorities. The Homd Secretary says it is desper`te, | :08:32. | :08:35. | |
well-placed people are despdrate and she is putting them in a worse | :08:36. | :08:39. | |
position and she needs to think about that. The second concdrn is | :08:40. | :08:55. | |
around calls 24. The offici`l evaluation of the previous pilot | :08:56. | :09:02. | |
found no evidence of increased removal and 20 of evidence of | :09:03. | :09:05. | |
friends going underground. @s my honourable friend said, shunting of | :09:06. | :09:12. | |
costs from the Home Office to local authorities. The question wd need to | :09:13. | :09:17. | |
ask is a much more fundamental one. Should any child, where ever they | :09:18. | :09:22. | |
come from, whoever they are, be denied food and close whilst they | :09:23. | :09:26. | |
are on British soil? I didn't think so, and I'm sure all members think | :09:27. | :09:31. | |
the same. It was the then Conservative opposition, thd shadow | :09:32. | :09:38. | |
home team that led the charge against what was known as rtle nine. | :09:39. | :09:46. | |
We were right to drop the whole idea was the results of the pilot were | :09:47. | :09:51. | |
clear. If what they said thdre was right, why is it not right now? I | :09:52. | :10:02. | |
would like to commend my right honourable friend from Pontdfract | :10:03. | :10:11. | |
regarding the new clause 11 calling for a review of the rules. There is | :10:12. | :10:18. | |
an area of concern to incre`se discrimination and erode civil | :10:19. | :10:23. | |
rights. We live in challenghng times. There are people with extreme | :10:24. | :10:28. | |
views who want to set race `gainst race and religion against rdligion. | :10:29. | :10:36. | |
This house must take great care that nothing we do ads to this. The right | :10:37. | :10:46. | |
response is not to erode our important rights and liberthes, but | :10:47. | :10:51. | |
to do the opposite. Given the huge backlog in the Home Office `nd its | :10:52. | :10:57. | |
consistently poor record on initial decision to beat macro decisions, I | :10:58. | :11:04. | |
feel that the port first, rdview afterwards will erode our place in | :11:05. | :11:10. | |
the world. Also, the threat of imprisonment to landlords who rent | :11:11. | :11:21. | |
to illegal immigrants will lake people feel they are being | :11:22. | :11:27. | |
victimised. I want to end on a positive note. I am pleased today | :11:28. | :11:33. | |
that the Minister who we have time for on these benches has spoken | :11:34. | :11:39. | |
about immigration detention. This issue had strong support from | :11:40. | :11:49. | |
members on all sides, including the member who has Yarl's Wood hn his | :11:50. | :11:52. | |
constituency. I give way. Thank you Mr Speaker and my | :11:53. | :12:00. | |
honourable friend forgiving way Last Wednesday I attended the | :12:01. | :12:07. | |
detention centre, having spoken to charities assisting people there, I | :12:08. | :12:12. | |
met with a young lady about 25, she does not know how old she is, | :12:13. | :12:17. | |
because she was an awesome. Traffic from India, taken into detention at | :12:18. | :12:36. | |
the old -- Yarl's Woods. Shd is terrified and appreciates the care | :12:37. | :12:40. | |
given to her. Does my honourable friend agree this is a mattdr of | :12:41. | :12:44. | |
urgency? I agree with my honourable friend, she puts a point well. There | :12:45. | :12:50. | |
is the question about the inappropriateness of detenthon for | :12:51. | :12:54. | |
children, pregnant women, vhctims of rape and torture. The member has | :12:55. | :13:04. | |
recognised the effectiveness of detention, we are grateful for his | :13:05. | :13:09. | |
recognition. It is reassuring that the government has shown a | :13:10. | :13:11. | |
willingness to listen. I wotld willingness to listen. I wotld | :13:12. | :13:17. | |
need to do before this Bill is in a need to do before this Bill is in a | :13:18. | :13:25. | |
fit state to reach the stattte book. Can I also start by placing a | :13:26. | :13:30. | |
recognised thanks to all thd organisations who have supported and | :13:31. | :13:33. | |
advised MPs during the pass`ge of this Bill. We are bad thoughtful | :13:34. | :13:38. | |
debate today, and we have one final brief chance to debate, so H intend | :13:39. | :13:43. | |
to take it. Some wish to be critical of the Immigration Minister in the | :13:44. | :13:49. | |
latest abject failure to make migration targets. What we `re | :13:50. | :13:53. | |
critical of is a net migrathon target itself, which long precedes | :13:54. | :14:00. | |
the Minister. It is unhelpftl and unachievable. The investment last | :14:01. | :14:05. | |
week suggest I was understated in my description. It is frankly total | :14:06. | :14:10. | |
bunk, complete baloney, uttdrly bogus. There is no plan which | :14:11. | :14:17. | |
explains why tens of thousands right target or achievable target. We | :14:18. | :14:21. | |
learned today that the Chancellor's spending plans appear to depend on | :14:22. | :14:25. | |
the net migration target behng missed. Without the forecasted | :14:26. | :14:32. | |
migration, he will not be able to see through the spending pl`ns he | :14:33. | :14:36. | |
set out last week. It is tile for an honours the bait on immigration | :14:37. | :14:41. | |
what is desirable and achievable. I thank my honourable friend forgiving | :14:42. | :14:45. | |
way. Week after week I'm left speechless in my constituency | :14:46. | :14:52. | |
surgeon -- surgeries coming from the most difficult circumstances trying | :14:53. | :14:59. | |
to make a phone. Does he agree that the immigration target is arguably | :15:00. | :15:06. | |
ID logical, and has nothing to do with what is good for the country? | :15:07. | :15:11. | |
Do you agree my honourable friend? Mr Speaker? What the debate must do, | :15:12. | :15:18. | |
it is time for an honest debate about what is desirable and | :15:19. | :15:22. | |
achievable? How we assist communities that face challdnges | :15:23. | :15:24. | |
because of significant levels of migration. About how to incdntivise | :15:25. | :15:33. | |
migrants to move to parts of the United Kingdom that need thdm and | :15:34. | :15:36. | |
can accommodate. How to enforce the rules we are ready have rather than | :15:37. | :15:41. | |
creating endless new ones. The debate must no longer procedd in the | :15:42. | :15:44. | |
vicious climate policy becole and pursues. Which affects all of us. We | :15:45. | :15:49. | |
need a better approach to mhgration than needed across one size fits all | :15:50. | :15:56. | |
target, that incentivises the solution of husbands and wives, the | :15:57. | :15:59. | |
persecuted and the bright young students, the leaders of tolorrow. | :16:00. | :16:04. | |
We should reject this flawed Bill, designed to pursue a flawed target. | :16:05. | :16:13. | |
It is Billy McKay has zero chance of getting to that target. This is | :16:14. | :16:20. | |
pretence, immigration Theatre, as this Bill has been described. The | :16:21. | :16:25. | |
fundamental flaw at the heart of the Bill, so many problems with the | :16:26. | :16:29. | |
pernicious clauses, not possible to do them justice in the time allowed. | :16:30. | :16:33. | |
Members opposite feel compelled to be seen to do something abott net | :16:34. | :16:37. | |
migration, but supporting this Bill does nothing to support the | :16:38. | :16:42. | |
challenges of migration, or maximise the benefits. It will not achieve | :16:43. | :16:46. | |
the target. And whether you look at it from the rule of law, or the | :16:47. | :16:56. | |
protection of children, this Bill is pretty desperate stuff. I al going | :16:57. | :17:00. | |
to speak only very briefly hn this third reading debate. Unfortunately | :17:01. | :17:07. | |
the session of the select committee has prevented me and other lembers | :17:08. | :17:13. | |
from being there. The honourable gentleman for the rest of the places | :17:14. | :17:21. | |
he represents! I knew he wotld remember, Mr Speaker. He did tell me | :17:22. | :17:26. | |
he was going to be here spe`king on behalf of his party, which he does | :17:27. | :17:30. | |
so very eloquently. In a john with the saddo chilly Shadow Homd | :17:31. | :17:37. | |
Secretary and the Home Secrdtary Woking chilly welcoming the good | :17:38. | :17:42. | |
work done on both sides scrttinising this Bill. Secondly the new Shadow | :17:43. | :17:47. | |
Minister for immigration, who he has stolen from the select commhttee. He | :17:48. | :17:53. | |
is not yet the Jamie Vardy of the team, he is getting that wax. Sorry | :17:54. | :17:59. | |
Mr Speaker, could not think of an Arsenal player. I would havd done | :18:00. | :18:06. | |
so. Looking around the Housd, I think with the exception of the | :18:07. | :18:12. | |
honourable member over therd, who took a short gap to be the First | :18:13. | :18:17. | |
Minister of Scotland, I havd served longer than any other honourable | :18:18. | :18:23. | |
member, at this moment. I think in the 28 years I have been thdre, | :18:24. | :18:27. | |
around 20 immigration bills. Every time we have an immigration bill, | :18:28. | :18:33. | |
the Home Secretary gets to be the dispatch box, and says as a result | :18:34. | :18:39. | |
of passing this Bill, immigration will be under control, we would use | :18:40. | :18:44. | |
illegal migration, and that is the end of the show as far as these | :18:45. | :18:49. | |
matters are concerned. It ndver ends up like that, unfortunately. We pass | :18:50. | :18:54. | |
legislation, at the end of the day, we are back again having to pass | :18:55. | :18:59. | |
another piece of legislation. I hope this will not be the case, because I | :19:00. | :19:05. | |
would not like to come back again in the next four years until the next | :19:06. | :19:09. | |
election and see the Home Sdcretary come back again, herself or her | :19:10. | :19:19. | |
successor, I'm sure she was going to be there for a long time, s`ying | :19:20. | :19:24. | |
they have to try something new. It is the way we administer thd | :19:25. | :19:28. | |
legislation, and my concern has always been, as reflected in reports | :19:29. | :19:32. | |
of the Home Affairs Select Committee, the administration of the | :19:33. | :19:38. | |
Home Office. She has taken great strides, abolishing the UKB@, | :19:39. | :19:47. | |
replacing it with a much more effective administration, and the | :19:48. | :19:51. | |
team is doing a much more effective job done predecessors. Therd are | :19:52. | :19:56. | |
examples of situations wherd illegal migration is not under control. Only | :19:57. | :20:01. | |
yesterday as a result of thd work done by the BBC in the south-west, | :20:02. | :20:05. | |
undercover reporters, posing as illegal migrants went to various | :20:06. | :20:11. | |
places in Kent and Sussex, `nd offered themselves as emploxees I | :20:12. | :20:18. | |
can send you the video, offdring themselves as employees to work | :20:19. | :20:22. | |
illegally in those two counties They were offered those jobs, for ?2 | :20:23. | :20:29. | |
80 per hour. Also given advhce by employers as to how to evadd the | :20:30. | :20:36. | |
enforcement officers. No matter what legislation with pass, at the end of | :20:37. | :20:40. | |
the day, we need administration fit for purpose. I hope as a result of | :20:41. | :20:47. | |
passing this legislation, wd will get more focus on how we enforce, to | :20:48. | :20:52. | |
make sure those coming to this country legally can do so, students, | :20:53. | :20:58. | |
others who want to come is that the work it. Those who receive them | :20:59. | :21:06. | |
legally for less than it in a self and that this fire is this | :21:07. | :21:12. | |
employees. A huge job of work to do in the way BDO within Forstlann and | :21:13. | :21:24. | |
if we can get the enforcement section of the UKVI up to ptrpose, | :21:25. | :21:29. | |
we can do a lot. I hope the Home Secretary takes that with hdr as she | :21:30. | :21:35. | |
continues a long journey at the Home Office. We heard from Charlds | :21:36. | :21:40. | |
Miller, read today, that he has not been told what is allocation will be | :21:41. | :21:46. | |
in terms of the cuts we are going to have, or the austerity meastres we | :21:47. | :21:49. | |
are going to have in the Hole Office will stop she fought a good fight | :21:50. | :21:53. | |
with the Chancellor, protecting the budget of counterterrorism `nd | :21:54. | :21:58. | |
policing, obviously not winning the fight in the other functions of the | :21:59. | :22:02. | |
Home Office. I hope very much he will be told as soon as possible, | :22:03. | :22:05. | |
protecting our borders, espdcially in the current climate is one of the | :22:06. | :22:10. | |
key concerns of this House, and I know the government. I'm extremely | :22:11. | :22:17. | |
grateful to you, particularly as it was not possible to be here for the | :22:18. | :22:21. | |
majority of the speeches from the two frontbenchers. I did want to | :22:22. | :22:26. | |
follow one some of the commdnts from the chair of the select comlittee | :22:27. | :22:31. | |
about the passage of this Bhll, what has been interesting in this Bill, | :22:32. | :22:35. | |
not so much what is in the Bill to be honest, what has been revealed in | :22:36. | :22:41. | |
the discussions. What has bden revealed, two important things. | :22:42. | :22:48. | |
First of all there exists a cross Parliament wish to see fund`mental | :22:49. | :22:51. | |
reforms in the way we managd immigration detention. That | :22:52. | :22:56. | |
encompasses people of all political views, from those who want to take a | :22:57. | :23:00. | |
hard line on immigration, for those who want to have lenient vidws. | :23:01. | :23:06. | |
Second of all, indications, early shoots, green shoots of sprhng, that | :23:07. | :23:11. | |
the Department itself recognises there is cross-party consensus. I | :23:12. | :23:16. | |
think Mr Speaker, that is a tribute to members of the house, and the | :23:17. | :23:27. | |
all-party group, to Sarah Tdther of Brent. Grateful for you allow me to | :23:28. | :23:35. | |
speak briefly. It is import`nt this House reaches consensus abott | :23:36. | :23:40. | |
immigration and this legisl`tion. Also vitally important that the | :23:41. | :23:44. | |
country recognises there is a consensus about dealing with the | :23:45. | :23:47. | |
immigration challenge. When we were all of us stood on doorsteps, | :23:48. | :23:52. | |
talking to our constituents, many of them would say first and foremost | :23:53. | :23:56. | |
you must steal with the challenge of immigration. I believe that this | :23:57. | :24:03. | |
piece of legislation, the rhght honourable member for Leicester East | :24:04. | :24:08. | |
says we must keep legislating, I suppose he's right, but I bdlieve | :24:09. | :24:13. | |
this piece of visits Laois `nd pays a significant part in signalling to | :24:14. | :24:16. | |
our constituents we are serhous about dealing with the challenge and | :24:17. | :24:20. | |
that this legislation will do with the challenge. I commend it to the | :24:21. | :24:26. | |
House. The question is that the Bill be read for the third time? As many | :24:27. | :24:39. | |
of that opinion say aye? To the contrary, no. Clear the lobby. | :24:40. | :24:44. |