Coffee House

Immigration Bill row looms closer to Commons

8 April 2014

5:05 PM

8 April 2014

5:05 PM

The Commons is in legislative limbo at the moment, waiting for the Queen’s Speech, which has just been delayed another day to 4 June. But one thing that could well keep MPs rather well occupied before then is the Immigration Bill, which suffered a defeat in the House of Lords last night – as predicted on Coffee House.

The defeat was on Lord Pannick’s amendment which proposes setting up a committee of MPs and peers to consider whether plans to render foreign-born terror suspects ‘stateless’ should go ahead. Peers clearly did think it reasonable, as they backed it 242 votes to 180. The Bill will have its third reading on 6 May, before returning to the Commons for consideration of Lords amendments.

This is where it gets fun. The Home Office will seek to overturn this amendment, at which point MPs will be forced to vote on it. This will be fine if MPs have been reassured sufficiently about the controversial proposal to back it since they expressed concerns about it, but I’m not quite sure that they are: some seem to think that the government has historically campaigned against similar proposals in other countries.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.

Show comments
  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Immigration arrangements are reciprocal. So if UK regulations discriminate against the nationals of one particular country, Brit residents abroad in that country are in the frame for similar harassment.
    As example, the wife of a Brit businessman of my acquaintance, married for some 40 years, resident in UK for a similar period, with “right of abode in UK” in her passport. Snag is that this passport has expired and Brit Immigration charge £900.00 to transfer the “right of abode” stamp to the new passport. So she has to carry both the old and new passport when she travels. Not such a hardship you might suppose, but how long before said transfer requirement becomes mandatory?
    This type of not-so-petty money-grubbing by HMG is outrageous, and leaves me wondering how long it will be before the Japanese government reciprocates.
    Jack, the Japan Alps Brit

  • Bert3000

    Why is the government trying to give itself the right to deprive Boris Johnson (born in New York) of UK citizenship?

  • DavEd CamerBand

    The left seem to have it both ways:

    “benefit claimants aren’t lazy, there are no jobs”

    “Immigrants come here to work”

    Are there jobs or not?

  • BlancheRMandel

    The Bill will have its third reading on 6 May, before returning to the Commons for consideration of Lords amendments.

  • Common Sense ✟ كافر

    It’s very clear the well-being of foriegn Muslim terrorists comes way before the well being of the indigenous White working class amongst those who have such powerful positions in this country.

    • telemachus

      Hear this Mr so called common sense

      In a previous debate, Lord Macdonald had warned that the Home Secretary’s proposal “associates the United Kingdom with a policy beloved of the world’s worst regimes during the 20th century.”

      Commenting, Clare Algar, Executive Director of legal charity Reprieve said: “It is good news that these dangerous proposals have been staved off – for now at least. Making people stateless in this way was rightly described by the US Supreme Court 50 years ago as a ‘punishment more primitive than torture.’ It is staggering that Theresa May thought it one that should be imposed on British citizens, without even so much as a trial.

      “We have already seen examples in the past where those who have lost their British citizenship have subsequently been ‘rendered’ or killed by drone strikes. There is a real concern that these plans are part of the UK’s contribution to the ill-conceived ‘War on Terror.’”