Proceeding contribution from Baroness Anelay of St Johns (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 9 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill.
Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill
It was helpful of the noble Baroness further to explain her offer. I come to the final issue: what happens if we do not agree on the administrative review being an appropriate solution? It would be up to noble Lords to decide what, in their various approaches, they may want to do with it, but I have a significant question to ask. At Second Reading, the Minister carefully prayed in aid the manifesto commitment with regard to Clause 4 but not with regard to Clause 1. Today, the noble Baroness, Lady Warwick, made the confident statement that this was not a manifesto commitment. I seek guidance as to whether the Minister has line reference to that commitment. Obviously, it will have an impact on some of us who are bound by the Salisbury convention, but not on all of us. I look at the Minister to see whether she wishes to quote the Labour Party manifesto at me.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 677 c67GC
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Children Appeals Asylum China Fees and charges Families Human rights Immigration controls Immigration Undocumented migrants Health professions Entry clearances Married people Overseas students Refugees
- Legislation
- Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 01:55:01 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_289477
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_289477
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_289477