Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 11 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill 2005-06.


Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill

I used the Ullahcase not to highlight the point about religion but to describe what happened in those circumstances. It was the linkage between the refugee convention and the European Convention on Human Rights that I was trying to make: being able to focus on one meant that you incorporated the other. That was the point that the House of Lords made. In a sense, the case is an irrelevance, and perhaps I should not have given the detail. The judgment and its consequence deals with the point. I think that I have dealt with the issues that applied to the fictional Mr Ahmed—in the sense that his name is fictional—and I am happy to look at the individual case. I have already explored the benefit of being in Committee: enabling us to talk about the issues in detail. There will be at least two opportunities to test the opinion of the House on all questions. I do not think that the noble Lord should worry that he will not be able to do that.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
677 c100-1GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Children Codes of practice Appeals Asylum Deportation Dependants Employment Human rights Immigration controls Immigration Undocumented migrants Entry clearances National security Marriage Pay Public appointments Overseas students Migrant workers Refugees Torture Independent Monitor of Entry Clearance Refusals
Legislation
Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk