- 20/04/2022
- Posted by: Valerie Vaz MP
- Category: News
The Nationality and Borders Bill makes wide-ranging reforms to the legal framework for immigration to the United Kingdom. The Bill returned to the Commons for consideration of amendments made by the Lords for a second time on Wednesday 21 April 2022, so that we could vote on the amendments.
Motion to disagree with LA 4G. LA4G removes provisions in the Bill which allow decisions for a person’s British citizenship to be revoked with no notice to have retrospective
effect before commencement. I voted against the motion, which was passed, Ayes:311 and Noes:231.
Motion to disagree with LA 5B. The amendment would ensure Britain meets its obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention. I voted against the motion, which was passed, Ayes:310 and Noes:231.
Motion to disagree with LA6B. LA6B amends provisions for a differentiated approach to the treatment of refugees based on the criteria set out in Article 31(1) of the Refugee Convention. It seeks to ensure that all refugees are given their convention rights and that family unity is maintained. I voted against this motion, which was passed, Ayes:309 and Noes: 225.
Motion to disagree with LA7B. This would allow people claiming asylum, and their adult dependants, the right to work in six months, and would remove the condition restricting jobs, for those allowed to work, to those on the shortage occupation list. Work alleviates poverty, improves mental health and wellbeing and aids integration. I voted against this motion, which was passed, Ayes;294 and Noes: 242.
Motion to disagree with LA8B. This amendment would require one or more returns agreements to be in place with a safe third country before inadmissibility provisions in clause 15 can be brought into force. I voted against this motion, which was passed, Ayes: 303 and Noes: 236.
Motion to disagree with LA 53B. This amendment sought to compel any Secretary of State wishing to make an offshoring agreement for asylum seekers with a third-party state to identify that country and have it confirmed by Parliament. This is what the Home Secretary failed to do prior to her announcement of the recent agreement with Rwanda. I voted against this motion, which was passed, Ayes: 303 and Noes: 234.
Motion to disagree with LA10B. This amendment provides for the family reunion of unaccompanied child refugees in Europe. I voted against this motion, which was passed, Ayes: 303 and Noes: 235.
Motion to disagree with LA11B. would set targets for the Government on numbers of refugees accepted per year. The asylum system requires medium-term planning to build the appropriate infrastructure at the required local community level to support integration and ensure resilience in times of crises. I voted against this motion, which was passed, Ayes 306 and Noes: 231.
Motion to disagree with LA13B and insist on disagreement with LA15. This would amend the proposed new offence of knowingly arriving in the UK without a valid entry clearance where this is required under the Immigration Rules. Only those who have already been deported would be subject to the criminal offence. I voted against this motion, which was passed, Ayes:311 and Noes:228.
Motion to disagree with LA20B. This would replace the words “for gain” with “without reasonable excuse” relating to trafficking offences. I voted against this motion, which was passed, Ayes:312 and Noes:227.
Motion to disagree with LA25B. This amendment seeks to undo the Government’s provisions which could, in effect, criminalise modern slavery victims who have been pushed into crime by human traffickers. Only criminals who have committed serious public order offences such as terrorism or other serious offences should have their protection withdrawn. I voted against this motion, which was passed, Ayes: 308 and Noes: 228.
Motion to disagree with LA26B. This amendment seeks to expand protection for those found to have been victims of modern slavery. I voted against this motion, which was passed, Ayes:296 and Noes: 184.