A new report going round has it that about 10, 000
foreigners seeking to stop their deportation from the UK as a result of a
ruling passed by the House of Lords.
However, the decision of the Lords has been condemned by
many who view it as a big let-down and insult to the Government, saying such a
decision is a “threat to public safety.”
The Immigration Bill debate hinged on how long would-be
immigrants should be detained at immigration centres. At present, immigrants
can be detained indefinitely, however, peers in a vote capped it for only 28
days.
Critic Lord Keen of Elie, who is also the Advocate General
for Scotland, claimed the move would jeopardise safety and security in the UK,
and said: "Such an amendment would significantly impact on our abilities
to enforce immigration controls and maintain public safety."
He made the condemnation after the Lords voted 187 to 170
for the limit, which can only be extended by a court.
Crossbench peer Lord Green of Deddington said the 28-day
time limit could lead to up to 10,000 people a year appealing for release from
detention and said: “The power of detention is essential to effective removal.
"It is fundamental to the whole immigration system.
Broadly speaking, I would say that the system is working.
"It would encourage people to spin things out to get to
28 days, and then who knows, they may disappear," Lord Green said.
Contrarily, it was argued by the Lords that holding people for
the foreseeable future was detrimental to their health, with Labour's Baroness
Lister of Burtersett going one step further to call indefinite detention a
"stain on this country's human rights record."
Similarly, a group of cross-party peers recommended the cap
last year, with the The All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Refugees and
the APPG on Migration putting forward a report.
Meanwhile, current data indicates that some detainees have
kept for over a year Verne IRC, Dorset, and in Harmondsworth IRC, West London.
Also speaking, Lord Keen added: "The Government takes
the issue of deprivation of liberty very seriously.
"There is a well-established principle that for an
individual to be detained pending removal there must be a realistic prospect of
removal within a reasonable time, and that is carried out by virtue of judicial
oversight."
UKIP was highly critical of the move, with Defence and
Security spokesman Mike Hookem branding it 'completely wrong'.
The MEP said: "Sitting here in Brussels, where fear
roams the streets after the shootings yesterday, I can tell you this decision
by the Lords is completely the wrong one to have been made.
"The suspected terrorists roaming Brussels include
illegal immigrants: do Peers not want to make sure the British people are safe?
Have they learned nothing from the tragedy of Paris?
"The rights of the many are being ridden roughshod by
the rights of the few who include people who have already broken the law by
getting into this country illegally.
"28 days is not sufficient given the checks needed and
the huge backlog because of EU open borders."
According to record, this ruling would be the second time
the Government has been defeated over the bill, with the upper house hitherto
voting to permit asylum seekers the right to work if their claims have not been
processed within six months.
On the other hand the changes are not set in stone, as any
amendments made to bills passing through the house will automatically be sent
back to the Commons.
A spokesman said: "Any legislation that's in the House
of Lords if it's amended will be sent back to be either accepted or
rejected."
There could be a risk of what is known as 'ping pong', where
the bill is sent back and forth between the houses with neither side willing to
accept changes.
No comments:
Write comments