Proceeding contribution from Lord Dholakia (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 7 February 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Immigration Asylum and Nationality Bill.
Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill
My Lords, like the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, I came across this amendment only rather late in the day. I should like the noble Earl to know that I would certainly have put my name to it if I had seen it earlier. The noble Earl is absolutely right to propose this new clause. Ultimately we are not talking about the removal of a child, but about the provisions made to look after the welfare of children in relation to the three categories mentioned in the amendment. During the passage of the Children Bill the noble Baroness said:"““We are sure that the amendment would have an impact on what we would be able to do in terms of removals and the ability of people to use the Bill for judicial review. It is for those reasons—and those reasons alone—that I cannot accept the amendment””.—[Official Report, 15/7/04; col. 1464.]" Let me take the noble Baroness back to what is being proposed here. The amendment refers first to Section 11 and how three categories from the Children Act might be imported. The first is the regional offices of the National Asylum Support Service. Those officers are not involved in removals, they are there to look after the welfare of children. For the centre manager of an immigration removal centre to be involved, the policy decision would already have been taken. All we ask is that when children are being held in a detention centre, the managers should look after their welfare. Lastly, the chief immigration officer at a port of entry should rightly be concerned with this. We have discussed how children should be interviewed, whether they understand the procedures and so forth. All these details need to be looked at carefully. The amendment is quite simple. It says nothing about removals and does not address the policy of immigration. It is therefore right and correct that these Section 11 matters should be included in the overall provisions of the Bill. Including provisions of this nature will put an acceptable face on our Immigration Service. People elsewhere will see that this is how we treat those immigrating to this country. It will be to the advantage of the Immigration Service and its support services. More importantly, it will be to the advantage of the managers of removal centres. I support the amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 678 c644-5
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Children Disclosure of information Contracts Data protection Codes of practice Appeals Bail Asylum Detainees Applications Deportation British nationality Aircraft Employment Families Human rights Enforcement Fixed penalties Eligibility Immigration controls Immigration Undocumented migrants Human trafficking Hong Kong Legal representation Entry clearances Legal opinion Immigration officers Private sector Pilot schemes National security Protection Monitoring Passengers Registration Terrorism Treaties Training Refugees Small businesses Right of search Temporary accommodation Students Detention centres British overseas citizenship
- Legislation
- Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:26:14 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_298559
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_298559
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_298559