(3 years ago)
Lords ChamberI totally agree with my noble friend and have said on many occasions that the days when we could import cheap labour from the EU or anywhere else are gone. Our immigration system will be based on the skills that people bring to bear and there will be certain thresholds on incomes.
The noble Baroness, Lady Ritchie of Downpatrick, is not present, so I call the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes of Cumnock.
My Lords, the Minister will be aware that there is some confusion arising from statements made by the Home Secretary about our adherence to the European Convention on Human Rights. Earlier, I think she said that the Government were still adhering to it. Will she confirm that there is no intention in any way to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights and the Council of Europe?
I do not agree with my noble friend. We do not have any shortage of people who want to come here. We do have shortages in certain sectors due to supply chain issues and we are remedying that.
My Lords, all supplementary questions have been asked and we now move to the next Question.
(3 years ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, if the Government wanted to protect the organisations, we would not be calling an inquiry. We absolutely want to get to the bottom of this for every woman and girl in this country, or any mother or daughter, who feels so keenly what happened to Sarah Everard.
My Lords, the time allowed for this Question has elapsed.
(3 years ago)
Lords ChamberI think the noble Lord asks a question that probably requires more than the 20 seconds that I have left to answer it. He makes a pertinent point about conflict and the cause of migration and refugee issues. Certainly, some of the countries that he talks about might not be suitable to send refugees to.
My Lords, the time allowed for this Question has elapsed.
(3 years ago)
Lords ChamberTo ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to promote (1) knowledge, and (2) understanding, of the contribution of migration to society.
My Lords, I hope that noble Lords will bear with me and that I get this correct.
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper, with the correct list of questioners.
(3 years, 1 month ago)
Lords ChamberThe noble Lord is talking about Afghan citizens. Clearly, Afghanistan is an incredibly difficult environment at this point in time, but, as I have reiterated in previous answers, we are doing all we can to help those people who need our ongoing assistance.
My Lords, all supplementary questions have been asked. We now move to the next Question.
(3 years, 1 month ago)
Lords ChamberSeed-corn funding is generally pump-prime funding, which is then intended to be self-financing ongoing, and the agencies and organisations involved are actually supportive of this model of funding.
My Lords, the time allowed for this Question has elapsed.
(3 years, 1 month ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, all supplementary questions have been asked and we now move to the next Question.
(3 years, 2 months ago)
Lords ChamberI have no hesitation in agreeing with the noble Lord that asylum seekers are human beings who deserve our respect; they are not objects. Our Nationality and Borders Bill seeks to address the point that the people who are so culpable here are the criminals, who have no regard for lives, vulnerable or otherwise, and seek only to make money out of other people’s vulnerability.
My Lords, the time allowed for this Question has elapsed.
(3 years, 4 months ago)
Lords ChamberI shall say to the noble Baroness what I said to the noble Lord, Lord Chidgey: the FCDO regularly and consistently raises any human rights concerns with the Government of Zimbabwe, and we would do if we had any evidence of violations against those returns.
My Lords, all supplementary questions have been asked.
(3 years, 4 months ago)
Lords ChamberI totally agree with my noble friend. On the racial attacks, the Prime Minister could not have been clearer about his abhorrence for and willingness to deal with them than he was yesterday. On lessons learned from the Olympics, I agree with my noble friend. I am sure that that will be considered and that the House will be kept updated on the progress made.
My Lords, the time allowed for this Question has elapsed. We now come to Oral Questions to the Minister of State at the Cabinet Office, the noble Lord, Lord Frost. There will be three Questions, with 10 minutes allowed for each, and we will proceed in the same way as for other Oral Questions.
Before I call the first Question, it may assist the House if I make a short statement about the sub judice resolution. I have been advised that there are active legal proceedings on the legality of the Northern Ireland protocol. I assure the House that Members may make full reference to the challenge to the Northern Ireland protocol, which is a judicial review of an issue of national importance.
I am also advised that there are active legal proceedings and open inquests in relation to historical Troubles-related deaths. Mr Speaker made a Statement in the House of Commons yesterday; I share his view that this is an issue of national importance. When cases relate to issues of national importance, the Lord Speaker can allow reference to the cases in the House. I am exercising that discretion to allow limited reference to active legal proceedings and open inquests in relation to historical Troubles-related deaths. However, references to these cases should be limited to the context and the events that led to the cases and not include details of cases nor the names of those involved in them. Members of the House should be mindful of the matters that may be the subject of future legal proceedings and should exercise caution in making reference to individual cases.
I also remind Members of the presumption that court orders, such as anonymity orders, will be respected in Parliament. I draw attention to the report of the Joint Committee on Privacy and Injunctions, which made clear that
“privilege places a significant responsibility on parliamentarians to exercise it in the public interest. The presumption should be that court orders are respected in Parliament; and that when a Member does not comply with one he or she can demonstrate that (it) is in the public interest.”