(1 week, 1 day ago)
Lords ChamberAs an amendment to the motion that the bill be now read a second time, at end to insert “but that this House calls upon His Majesty’s Government, in the light of the 32nd Report from the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, to ensure sufficient time is available for consideration of amending stages of this bill, and to provide full support at ministerial and official level to the peer in charge of the bill for its remaining stages in the House of Lords.”
My Lords, this amendment would simply implement the advice given by the Cabinet Secretary to the Prime Minister as to how to handle this Bill, which was to treat it in the same way as other Private Members’ Bills bringing in changes to legislation on matters of conscience, such as the abortion Bill, the end of capital punishment or the decriminalisation of homosexuality. The advantage of that, of course, is that it means that government time is made available and all the resources of the Government and the Civil Service are made available for the purpose. I am most grateful to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, for his assurances that he has been given some help.
I am not so sure, however, about the noble and learned Lord’s assurances on the time needed for this. As I understand it, four days have been allocated between now and Christmas to consider the Bill—the Employment Rights Bill has a total of 15 days. These are Fridays, and there are other Private Members’ Bills. It is really important that this matter be discussed properly, and that is why I have tabled this amendment. Anyone who has read the report from the committees of this House will realise that there is much to do on amending the Bill.
My father died in agony. When I went to see him, I said, “I’m so sorry that your cancer is causing you this distress”. He said to me, “Michael, you are to blame”. I was completely poleaxed by that. I asked, “How can you say that I am to blame?” He said, “Because you have consistently voted to prevent me getting what I want, which is the opportunity to decide how and when I come to die”. As a Christian, I have thought about that long and hard, and I have come to the conclusion that my father was right and I was wrong. Therefore, I support absolutely the principle of this Bill.
However, I have some problems with it. On page 7 of the excellent Explanatory Notes to the Bill, a table on what is required is set out. I suspect that people will get to the stage where they just cannot go on any longer. They will do their best to hang on, but they will get to the stage where it is just too much, as my father did. However, under the provisions of this Bill, you have to see a GP, then you have to see another GP and then a panel. There then must be a holding period of no less than three weeks before you can get to the position where you are given what you want. That is completely impractical and impossible. I know that some people will say, “We’re doing that in order to provide protection”, but whom are we protecting? Surely the patient should come before anything else.
I am conscious of time, but one thing more that worries me is the provision in the Bill leaving the Secretary of State for Health, who is against the Bill, up to four years to delay its implementation. The noble and learned Lord, the sponsor of the Bill, said that it is giving hope to people. Well, there is not much hope with the possibility of the Bill not coming into effect until well into the next Parliament. We need time. We need every resource available in government and we need government time, so that we can get this absolutely right. There will not be a second opportunity for a very long time. Anyone who has read the letters that have come into us will know that many people are holding great hopes for this Bill. It is up to this House to amend it so that the other place can make it worthy of their hope.
(6 months ago)
Lords ChamberAs I said in my earlier answer, if there is a free trade agreement with a particular country and it is a member of the WTO, we cannot prevent any other companies that are domiciled overseas with a registered company bidding for public contracts. Likewise, we would not want British companies to be debarred from bidding for international contracts, which amount to around £1.3 trillion.
My Lords, why is Fujitsu still being allowed to bid for government contracts when it has made no substantial contribution towards the costs and hardship that it caused as a result of the Horizon scandal?
The noble Lord is trying to tempt me to answer a question that is beyond the scope of this Question. The contract that was awarded to Fujitsu is not a new contract but a continuation of a contract. I do not have the details before me, but I am happy to write to the noble Lord.
(1 year, 5 months ago)
Lords ChamberI do not think so. The Minister will note that there is an air of scepticism in the House about the implementation of these new procedures. Will transitional measures be in place to enable the new system to bed in while the existing system carries on working?
No, I do not believe that there will. As I say, this system is being operated and introduced by the European Union, so we have limited say in whether there should be transitional arrangements. Having said that, I do not think that the start date has been made public yet. I know there is a target start date, but I would imagine that there is no obligation to start on the date that has already been published if things are not yet ready.
My Lords, I apologise to the noble Lord; I did think this was Back-Bench and not Front-Bench Questions.
Well, it is Back-Bench Questions. Could I say to my noble friend how much I sympathise with him? Not only has he had to deal with the Rwanda legislation but he is now being held to account by Opposition Members for foolish decisions taken by the European Union.
(1 year, 5 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, as I said, this will be offered to individuals with no right to remain. They are visa overstayers and failed asylum seekers, who are offered this option as part of our regular dialogue. It is very hard to say exactly how many people are likely to be offered this, so I cannot answer that question in its entirety. However, this builds on our already widely used voluntary returns scheme, which saw more than 19,000 people accept support to return to their country of origin last year. We have agreed with the Government of Rwanda that individuals who are relocated voluntarily will have the same package of support for up to five years as those who are being discussed under the Bill.
My Lords, has my noble friend the Minister seen reports this morning in the Times, the Telegraph and other newspapers suggesting that this House has delayed the passage of the Rwanda Bill unnecessarily, resulting in people being exposed to the dangers of the channel? Will he take this opportunity to point out that this House was well prepared to pass the legislation back to the House of Commons for consideration before Easter, that it is no fault of this House that the legislation has been delayed and that this House has just been doing its job by asking the Commons to think again and is not responsible for delaying the legislation?
I am happy to reassure my noble friend that I have seen those reports and that I passed that very message back before those newspapers published their reports.
(1 year, 9 months ago)
Lords ChamberI rather agree with Michel Barnier, with whom I imagine the noble Lord sympathises quite a lot, who said:
“You can find nothing in the French constitution about migration, and there is almost nothing in the European treaties. For 30 or 40 years, there’s a kind of interpretation that is always in favour of the migrants … We have to rewrite something in the … treaties or in”
the European Convention on Human Rights. Is he wrong?
My Lords, has my noble friend seen the reports in the newspapers that civil servants in the Home Office are deciding that they cannot comply with Ministers’ policy declarations because they are in breach of the Civil Service Code? Is this not a rather alarming development, if true, and can my noble friend tell us exactly what is going on in the Home Office?
I have seen those reports, and I certainly have seen nothing of the sort from any civil servants.
(2 years, 2 months ago)
Lords ChamberI thank the noble Lord for that question. It is quite a long way from comparing ETIAS and ETAs, of course, but the short answer is that the figures that appeared in the Daily Mail article relate to the military aid to civilian authority application, which was made in order to make up for shortfalls in Border Force staff during strike action. I am glad to confirm for the House that there is no strike action planned during the peak of the summer season. I can also confirm that the Border Force strikes at Christmastime saw the effective deployment of soldiers; I am sure that Members of this House are grateful to them for their excellent work on that occasion.
I can assure the noble Lord that we have trained and are ready to deal with situations relating to a shortage of Border Force staff. We have recruited more staff, cancelled some leave and trained staff to address more front-line roles, so the noble Lord should be satisfied with that.
My Lords, I voted for Brexit because I thought that it would result in making our country more competitive and reduce the burdens on people. Is this not a classic example of going in the opposite direction, and should we not abandon it?
I agree entirely with my noble friend as to the sentiment behind the decision that we as a nation took. I can reassure him that the ETA system is as unbureaucratic as it can be and is not linked in the same way that ETIAS is to a burdensome requirement for biometric and fingerprint recognition on entry into and exit from the European Union. The British scheme simply requires the taking of a photograph when someone applies for an ETA on their phone. It will be much smoother and much less burdensome and as a result, economic benefits will, I think, accrue to our country.
(2 years, 4 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, the Government responded to the report published by the noble Lord’s committee, Regulating Election Finance, in September 2021, and the Elections Act 2022, to which I have already referred, contains measures which closely link to recommendations made in the report; for example, the new requirement on political parties to declare their assets and liabilities over £500 on registration, and a restriction of third-party campaigning to UK-based or otherwise eligible campaigners. The Government have stated that the recommendations in the report deserve full consideration, electoral law is complex, and more work is required to consider the implications and practicalities.
Just to follow on from that question from the noble Lord, Lord Evans, does my noble friend accept that all organisations, however properly conducted, can find themselves in difficulty over the money laundering regulations—as, for example, happened with HSBC, of which the noble Lord, Lord Evans, was a director?
Yes; I absolutely accept my noble friend’s point. Certainly, in relation to the question that has been asked, it is incumbent on all parties to be vigilant about all donations at all times.
(2 years, 10 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy understanding is that there are 12 diphtheria cases, but I will certainly make further inquiries in light of that. I can assure the noble Baroness that healthcare in contingency asylum accommodation is a priority. Those contracted to the Home Office endeavour to ensure that people accommodated in hotels or other contingency accommodation are signposted to GP practices, and there is local health screening in most cases.
My Lords, can my noble friend explain to me how it is possible to regard people coming from Albania, which is a stable and democratic country, as asylum seekers, and how much is it costing the taxpayer to put these people up in hotels?
Clearly, a large number of those crossing are from Albania. It is understood that around 12,000 of those who have crossed this year have been from there, and it is right to say that Albania is a safe country. Migrants are entitled to avail of the asylum application process and those applications are considered in accordance with the procedure as it currently stands. This matter clearly needs to be considered and is being considered.
(3 years, 2 months ago)
Lords ChamberThe noble Viscount brings both good news and bad news. The good news is that the Ukrainians are desperate to get back to normal, but I say that with a note of caution, because I hope they are not going back to face further danger.
My Lords, if a private company could produce its product only with a six-month wait, competition would move in to take over its market. Has my noble friend any plans to ensure that this happens with the delivery of these important services?
I say to my noble friend, as I have said to other noble Lords, that I hope that normal visa services, in terms of delivery times, will return in due course, but we are prioritising the Ukrainians at the moment.
(4 years, 10 months ago)
Lords ChamberMessaging and communication must be very clear in whatever regime we are in over Christmas, but it is too early to determine what might be necessary then. By acting now with a second national lockdown, we have the best chance of allowing more contact at Christmas, which we all want for ourselves and our families, but we will continue to be guided by the science.
My Lords, does my noble friend not think that stopping people getting married or entering churches for private prayer, and police commissioners threatening to investigate how families are celebrating Christmas and the birth of their saviour, is a tad over the top, particularly given the news this morning, from Professor Spector of King’s College London, that the R number has fallen to 1 in England, rather than what we were told over the weekend?
My noble friend makes a good point, but the Government, guided by the scientists, will continue to monitor the situation. The next few weeks will be quite unpleasant for people across the country. I do not think that there is any chance of the police breaking into people’s houses to check what they are doing, but they are there to uphold public protection and people’s safety.