Arrangements to safeguard and promote welfare
Children Bill [Lords]
10:45 am
Mr Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight, Conservative)
I should like to say one or two things that may be unpopular, and to echo the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Hertsmere (Mr. Clappison) and question the Minister on why amendment No. 99 might be less acceptable than the EU directive to which the hon. Member for Lancaster and Wyre referred.
I do not think that it is unfair to say that a child who has no right of abode in this country is a second-class child when compared with a child who has that right. That does not mean that that child should be treated less well for the purpose of this Bill, but I wanted to pick up on the phrase used by my hon. Friend the Member for Hertsmere. A child who comes from another country is the responsibility of that child's parents, wherever it is. Let us not try to take on the burdens of the world, even though they sometimes present themselves at our ports of entry.
Having said that, of course I accept that there is a need for us to extend to children in this country whatever protection we can. I am therefore attracted to the amendment No. 99, although I have to say that I am more attracted to amendment No. 30. When the Minister rejects the former amendment, as I suspect that she will, I should be grateful—I was not aware of this until the hon. Member for Lancaster and Wyre mentioned it—if she could explain what is meant by the words
''having regard to the need''.
The hon. Gentleman is essentially asking that not only the chief immigration officer but a regional officer of the National Asylum Support Service and the centre manager of an immigration removal centre ''must make arrangements'' for ensuring that their functions are discharged
''having regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children''.
Meanwhile, the EU directive appears to say—I hope that I have written the words down correctly—that the best interests of children seeking asylum shall be a primary consideration, presumably of each nation or each high contracting party, or some such terminology. It seems to me that that phrase places a greater obligation on the Government than
''must make arrangements . . . having regard to the need''.
Mr. Dawson indicated assent.