Proceeding contribution from Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 25 March 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL].
Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL]
My Lords, we have tabled this amendment so that we have another opportunity to discuss probationary citizenship leave. The discussion in Committee was quite frustrating, because we spent a lot of time on the name "probationary citizenship" rather than on the principle of what it adds to the citizenship journey. It was clear from the government amendments and the debate in Committee that the Government’s drafting and thinking on the amendments are not as advanced as they ought to be. Given that the Government propose to introduce a draft Bill in October, there is the opportunity to return to these provisions when thinking is a bit more advanced and the proposals are sufficiently developed for us to scrutinise them. As drafted, probationary citizenship is no more than another name for temporary or limited leave, which is why our amendment seeks to actually call it what it is. As named now, it contributes to the complexity of the Government’s naturalisation proposals. It gives the impression, by renaming it, that something new and different is being proposed, when it is actually the same process by another name. While we are on the matter of the name, it is worth noting that the consultation threw up the fact that the very word "probationary" has negative overtones and makes people tend to think of someone who has done something wrong and is on probation. I am sure that is not the Government’s intention—I am sure that they have heard this view before—but it would be good, if they intend to change the terminology, if they could think of something more positive. The main reason to question this again is that the debates we had before dinner have shown very clearly that we are talking about the same process but simply renaming it. I would be grateful if the Minister could elucidate what the Government’s thinking is on what this actually adds to the object that we are all trying to achieve, which is to have a much better assimilation programme. We do not feel that simply renaming it in this way is the strongest way of achieving it. I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 709 c730
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Children Disclosure of information Conditions of employment Data protection Criminal records Biometrics Asylum Detainees Applications British nationality Airports Customs officers Customs Citizenship Borders Employment Families Fingerprints Immigration controls Immigration Genetics Undocumented migrants Human trafficking Foreign nationals Immigration officers Misconduct Offenders Personal records Northern Ireland Police Powers Public appointments Ports Passengers Proof of identity Migrant workers Travel Terrorism Training Security Refugees Voluntary work Revenue and Customs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland UK Border Agency
- Legislation
- Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill (HL) 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 10:25:12 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_542817
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_542817
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_542817