Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield, Conservative)

I welcome hon. Members on both sides to the first sitting of this Public Bill Committee. Before we begin, I have some preliminary announcements. I am ever conscious of the comfort of Members, and if it gets a little warmer and they wish to take off their jackets, I am happy that they should do so. Again, and I say this with considerable emphasis, please would Members ensure that mobile phones, pagers and other electronic gadgets are switched to silent mode or preferably turned off during Committee.

I advise Members that there is a money resolution and a Ways and Means resolution in connection with the Bill and copies are available in the room. Adequate notice of amendments should be given and, as a general rule, I and my fellow Chairman, Anne Begg, do not intend to call starred amendments, including any that may be reached during an afternoon sitting. The Committee will first be asked to consider the programme motion, which is on the amendment paper, for which debate is limited to half an hour. We will then proceed to a motion to report written evidence, which I hope we can take formally. My first task, which is a pleasure, is to call the Minister to move the programme motion. I understand that he is to take this Bill through on his own, and we all wish him well in that heavy responsibility.

Phil Woolas (Minister of State (also in the Home Office), Home Office; Oldham East & Saddleworth, Labour)

I beg to move,

That—

(1) the Committee shall (in addition to its first meeting at 10.30 am on Tuesday 9 June) meet—

(a) at 4.00 pm on Tuesday 9 June;

(b) at 9.00 am and 1.00 pm on Thursday 11 June;

(c) at 10.30 am and 4.30 pm on Tuesday 16 June;

(d) at 9.00 am and 1.00 pm on Thursday 18 June;

(2) the proceedings shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at 5.00 pm on Thursday 18 June.

Thank you, Sir Nicholas. May I say what a genuine pleasure it is to serve once again under your chairmanship? You are a strong but fair Chairman and I look forward to the Committee. We had a Programming Sub-Committee, in which the Opposition made clear their principled objection to programming. We have not put knives in the debate; we have an end time. The usual channels have a good agreement, so I will not delay the Committee any further.

Damian Green (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Ashford, Conservative)

It is, as ever, life-enhancing to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Nicholas. I know that you would not wish to accuse me of crawling to the Chair at this early stage of the proceedings. I reiterate our objection in principle to the routine, indeed universal, use of programming. It is particularly inappropriate with this Bill, as will be illustrated. The  usual channels have operated well and we have all accepted a suitable programme for progress over the sittings allocated. Given that it is considerably smaller than the draft Bill that the Government put forward a few months ago, it should not and need not be particularly difficult. Many of the more contentious elements and, regrettably, many of the better elements have been taken out. During our proceedings we will attempt to re-insert parts of the draft Bill, which is what some of our amendments try to do. Given that those were originally Government proposals, we look forward to the support of Government Members.

A raft of Government amendments have been tabled already, and I wait with eager anticipation for further amendments to give effect to some of the measures that the former Home Secretary told us about on Second Reading, including a points-based system for citizenship and a cap on the number of people allowed to apply for it.

Phil Woolas (Minister of State (also in the Home Office), Home Office; Oldham East & Saddleworth, Labour)

She did not say that.

Damian Green (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Ashford, Conservative)

That is what she told us. I am genuinely interested to know whether those policies have survived the change of Home Secretary last week and whether the appropriate amendments on citizenship will be tabled, as would be entirely proper. Will we have the opportunity to discuss, if not during Committee, on Report, the very interesting ideas that the former Home Secretary put before the House on Second Reading? As I said, however, we have an in-principle objection to these proceedings, but not to the programming motion.

Tom Brake (Carshalton & Wallington, Liberal Democrat)

I echo colleagues’ comments: it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Nicholas. Regardless of whether we have objections, in principle, to programming, we support the timetable for this Committee stage. We considered the need for more sittings, but felt that, given that Second Reading did not quite go the full course, the agreed number of sittings might be sufficient to deal with the points that we seek to address. To echo points made, it is disappointing that this Bill does not cover some aspects of borders, citizenship and immigration matters, such as the Government’s call for the simplification of legislation—I am not convinced that the Bill represents a simplification. Neither does it address a major area of concern about, for example, the destitution of refused asylum seekers who cannot be returned to places such as Zimbabwe. That could, and should, have been addressed, but regrettably was not.

With those few comments, however, the Liberal Democrats are happy with the timetable for the Bill, which we hope to investigate and probe further over the next couple of weeks.

Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield, Conservative)

I advise hon. Members that copies of any memorandums that the Committee receives will be made available in the Committee Room.