01/12/2015 House of Commons


01/12/2015

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 01/12/2015. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

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.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS