Lord Carlile of Berriew: I am grateful to the noble Lord for giving way, but I just want to ask him this question. Would he be happy about legislation being passed that meant that people who had a justifiable claim to asylum were never allowed to pursue that claim to asylum—that is, a justifiable claim under international and existing United Kingdom law?
Lord Carlile of Berriew: My Lords, I have signed some amendments which were tabled by my noble and learned friend Lord Etherton, who has asked me to apologise for his absence today. I am not going to speak to those in any detail because, as is typical of my noble and learned friend, the explanatory statements which he has added to those amendments say it all, and make them very easy to understand. What concerns me...
Lord Carlile of Berriew: If the impact assessment is to be provided in a timely way—or if not—will the Minister ensure that it contains an estimate or assessment of the number of people who would have been granted asylum but will not be because they are excluded as a result of the blanket effects of the Bill?
Lord Carlile of Berriew: My Lords—
Lord Carlile of Berriew: My Lords—
Lord Carlile of Berriew: May we return to something that the noble Lord said a few moments ago? He said that it is not for him to dictate what appears in an impact assessment. If it is not for a Minister—either this Minister or one of his noble or honourable friends, either in this place or another—to dictate what appears in an impact assessment, for whom is it to determine what appears in one?
Lord Carlile of Berriew: Before the noble Lord stands up again, I feel I should bring this debate to a close. I am grateful to all noble Lords who have spoken in this debate, particularly those who supported the amendments in my name. A number of other very interesting issues have been raised. I have no doubt that we will be returning to a number of them on Report; I certainly will. The reasons given by the Minister...
Lord Carlile of Berriew: The noble Baroness has had quite a lot to say today about the wishes of the people of this country. Would she like to tell us what her evidence is that the wish of the people of this country is that people should be retrospectively affected by legislation of which they plainly had no awareness at the time when it had its First Reading?
Lord Carlile of Berriew: In Calais?
Lord Carlile of Berriew: My Lords, I beg to move Amendment 6, which stands in my name. There are some other amendments associated with it. I am very grateful to the noble Baronesses, Lady Hamwee and Lady Chakrabarti, and my noble and learned friend Lord Etherton for putting their names to Amendment 6. I am also grateful to the many well-known organisations that have made representations on these matters, including...
Lord Carlile of Berriew: Does the Minister not think that it might at least be a courtesy to the Committee to set out which of the provisions, in his view and that of the Home Secretary, are or are not compatible with the convention? That would help us to determine the quality of the legislation that is proposed.
Lord Carlile of Berriew: This could develop into a really interesting argument, I am afraid—between lawyers. The noble Lord just referred to the dualist theory, which of course is very important, but, in reality, international treaties are not usually entered into legislation because they are made under the royal prerogative. But that does not make them any less binding.
Lord Carlile of Berriew: Does the noble Lord not agree that the Section 19(1)(b) statement on this Bill is very different from the Section 19(1)(b) statement on the Communications Bill? I am sure that he has looked at it. Secretary of State Tessa Jowell made the following statement: “I am unable (but only because of Clause 309) to make a statement that, in my view, the provisions of the Communications Bill are...
Lord Carlile of Berriew: My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Baroness. I support her Amendment 4 for the following reason. If I was a person in a country far from here who faced torture and very serious discrimination, possibly for his or her political views or opposition to the Government, or possibly for their sexual orientation which is an issue in quite a number of these cases, I might look up what the...
Lord Carlile of Berriew: I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. He has just told us that these amendments will hold Parliament to account. If Parliament is not satisfied with the account it is given under these amendments, what advice would he give to Parliament as to how Ministers can be prevented from carrying out what they have tried to do?
Lord Carlile of Berriew: My Lords, I do not have an objection in principle to this amendment. Indeed, it sets out a requirement for information which I would suspect in about six months’ time several normal legal websites will carry on a search inserting words such as “What is still in force of EU legislation?” But I am troubled by the implication that this is a substitute for the two amendments that this House...
Lord Carlile of Berriew: Is not the case referred to in this Question an illustration of the opacity, rather than transparency, of the financial system relating to political parties? Is it not very important that we should put all protections in place to ensure that political parties have a well-understood and common system of ensuring that donations, in particular those emanating from foreign powers, are dealt with...
Lord Carlile of Berriew: My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Hamilton, in what he said. My only passing thought is to award my noble friend, for his intervention, the “name-dropping of the week” prize. I am not enthusiastic about disagreeing with the Minister, the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, because I know from listening to him many times that he is a great supporter of the rights of your...
Lord Carlile of Berriew: My Lords, I declare a specific interest as a member and former chair of the Cambridge Woolf Institute’s independent Commission on the Integration of Refugees. I resigned as chair to be able fully to participate in the proceedings on this Bill. I have listened with great care to all the speeches we have heard so far. I particularly agree with those of my noble and learned friend Lord...
Lord Carlile of Berriew: My Lords, will the Minister give a clear undertaking to this House, without any equivocation, that all measures for dealing with asylum seekers and refugees will be in compliance with current UK law and current UK international treaty obligations?
