All 3 Debates between Baroness Butler-Sloss and Baroness Whitaker

Mon 28th Feb 2022
Nationality and Borders Bill
Lords Chamber

Lords Hansard - Part 1 & Report stage & Report stage: Part 1
Wed 14th Mar 2018
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill
Lords Chamber

Committee: 7th sitting (Hansard - continued): House of Lords

Nationality and Borders Bill

Debate between Baroness Butler-Sloss and Baroness Whitaker
Baroness Whitaker Portrait Baroness Whitaker (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, as vice-chair of the All-Party Group on the Chagos Islands, I will add one brief point to the amendment so persuasively moved by my noble friend. If resettlement had taken place following the High Court ruling of November 2000 that the ordinance banning the Chagossians’ return was unlawful, it would have much reduced the need for an immigration route to the UK. Her Majesty’s Government should lift that ban immediately, in addition to accepting my noble friend’s amendment. The recent Mauritian expedition helpfully showed that there is no reason why the Chagossians should not return to their homeland. Some will probably want to do that rather than come to the UK, which would much diminish the apparent problem that the Government have.

Baroness Butler-Sloss Portrait Baroness Butler-Sloss (CB)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I sat as a judge in one appeal on the Chagossians and learned about the disgraceful behaviour of successive Governments of all political views—not, I have to say, the Lib Dems because they were not in power, but certainly the Conservatives and Labour have each left the Chagossians to their fate. One appalling thing they did was take an agreement from them whereby they signed away their rights for some paltry sum, such as £1,500. It is time that at least some of these Chagossians got some rights. As the noble Baroness who moved the amendment pointed out, this situation is unique. Therefore, the Government really should be generous and understanding and do something to repair the appalling damage done in the past by this Government, as well as the previous Labour Government.

European Union (Withdrawal) Bill

Debate between Baroness Butler-Sloss and Baroness Whitaker
Baroness Butler-Sloss Portrait Baroness Butler-Sloss
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I have added my name to this amendment. The noble Lord, Lord Bassam, spoke powerfully about a particular girl from Syria but she is typical of children across Europe. I went to Calais in May with Fiona Mactaggart, then an MP, and we wrote a report about the situation in Calais and Dunkirk, but it is also true in Italy and in Greece. Of those children who have come across Europe without their families, there is a group who have rights under EU law. Those are the children who can apply under what is known as Dublin III. This amendment asks that the relatively small number of children who have actually succeeded in coming to this country should not be cut off when Brexit occurs. I accept Brexit, but what I ask, along with fellow Members who have put their names to this amendment, is that the Minister who answers on behalf of the Government recognises that Brexit should not prevent the existing rights of children. It is not just a moral issue; it is a legal issue: they currently have rights and it would in my view be shocking if those rights were got rid of because we leave the EU.

Baroness Whitaker Portrait Baroness Whitaker (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, at this very late hour I say that I agree with everything that other noble Lords have said and add that our record has not been what it should be in implementing our obligations regarding this most deserving of humanitarian problems. We should improve it, not curtail it, so I support these very moderate amendments.

Marriage: Humanist Ceremonies

Debate between Baroness Butler-Sloss and Baroness Whitaker
Thursday 21st January 2016

(8 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts