Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 19 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill.


Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill

It is not a question of negating the convention. The issue is that, as we have said, we think it important to ensure within Clause 52 that the interpretation that we wish to place is in statute. The noble Lord will know that, when one wishes to be absolutely clear about a position, it is much better to put it into legislation than not to. That is a very simple and practical reason why we sought to do it. The Joint Committee may take a different view—I read its report with great interest and, obviously, we will be in discussion with it. However, we have tried to be as clear as possible about the importance of placing Article 1F(c) in Clause 52 appropriately.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
677 c265GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Asylum Detainees Deportation British nationality Eligibility Immigration controls Immigration Undocumented migrants Human trafficking Exemptions Prosecutions Paternity Refugees Safety Trials Victims Dual nationality
Legislation
Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk