---

Column 239

Porter, Barry (Wirral S)

Porter, David (Waveney)

Portillo, Michael

Powell, William (Corby)

Price, Sir David

Raison, Rt Hon Sir Timothy

Redwood, John

Rhodes James, Sir Robert

Riddick, Graham

Ridsdale, Sir Julian

Roberts, Rt Hon Sir Wyn

Roe, Mrs Marion

Rost, Peter

Rowe, Andrew

Sackville, Hon Tom

Sayeed, Jonathan

Scott, Rt Hon Nicholas

Shaw, David (Dover)

Shaw, Sir Giles (Pudsey)

Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')

Shelton, Sir William

Shephard, Mrs G. (Norfolk SW)

Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)

Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)

Shersby, Michael

Sims, Roger

Skeet, Sir Trevor

Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)

Soames, Hon Nicholas

Speed, Keith

Speller, Tony

Spicer, Sir Jim (Dorset W)

Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)

Stanbrook, Ivor

Stanley, Rt Hon Sir John

Steen, Anthony

Stern, Michael

Stevens, Lewis

Stewart, Allan (Eastwood)

Stewart, Andy (Sherwood)

Stewart, Rt Hon Sir Ian

Stokes, Sir John

Sumberg, David

Summerson, Hugo

Tapsell, Sir Peter

Taylor, Ian (Esher)

Tebbit, Rt Hon Norman

Temple-Morris, Peter

Thompson, Sir D. (Calder Valley)

Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)

Thorne, Neil

Thornton, Malcolm

Thurnham, Peter

Townend, John (Bridlington)

Townsend, Cyril D. (B'heath)

Tracey, Richard

Tredinnick, David

Trippier, David

Twinn, Dr Ian

Vaughan, Sir Gerard

Viggers, Peter

Waldegrave, Rt Hon William

Walden, George

Walker, Bill (T'side North)

Waller, Gary

Ward, John

Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)

Warren, Kenneth

Watts, John

Wells, Bowen

Wheeler, Sir John

Whitney, Ray

Widdecombe, Ann

Wilshire, David

Winterton, Mrs Ann

Winterton, Nicholas

Wolfson, Mark

Wood, Timothy

Yeo, Tim

Tellers for the Noes :

Mr. John M. Taylor and

Mr. Nicholas Baker.

Question accordingly negatived.

New Clause 7

The right to be heard

No statutory instrument giving effect to or supplementing any of the provisions of this Act shall contain any provision depriving a person of a right to be heard before a special adjudicator or the Immigration Appeal Tribunal.'.-- [Mr. Fraser.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. Fraser : I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Madam Deputy Speaker : With this it will be convenient to take the following amendments :

No. 4, in clause 5, page 5, line 39, at end add--

(8) Rule 14 of the Immigration Appeals (Procedure) Rules 1984 shall have effect in respect of appeals from the special adjudicator to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal.'.

No. 5, in clause 6, page 5, line 48, after law', insert or fact'.

No. 6, in page, 6, line 12, at end add--

(5) For the purposes of this section the words "question of law" include the question as to whether an asylum seeker has had the opportunity to be heard and to be represented before a special adjudicator or the Immigration Appeal Tribunal.'.

No. 9, in schedule 2, page 10, line 31, at end insert

except on a question of law in those cases where the parties to the application for leave have been heard and have appeared before the special adjudicator, but otherwise a refusal shall attract a right of appeal.'.

---

Column 240

No. 10, in page 11, line 14, at end insert

and an application for leave to appeal to the Tribunal shall be on any question of law or fact material to that determination.'. Mr. Fraser : New clause 7 would prevent the Home Secretary or the Lord Chancellor from making any immigration appeal rules that would deprive an applicant on an appeal, or seeking leave to appeal, of a hearing before the special adjudicator or the immigration appeal tribunal. It is a matter to which we referred in our previous debate and about which we argued at great length in Committee. We return, however, to our belief that those who have a case to be heard have the right to have their case put to an adjudicator personally, to be heard personally before him, rather than the application being submitted in writing for leave to appeal.

Amendment No. 4 would incorporate in the new draft rules, which the Government have published today, rule 14 of the immigration appeal rules of 1984. Rule 14 of the set of rules that apply to existing appeals gives a person whose appeal has been turned down by an adjudicator the right to obtain leave to appeal to the immigration appeal tribunal on a point of law --that is the first limb--and provides an exception that takes effect in those cases where it is argued by the appellant that to refuse leave to remain would put the Government in breach of the convention on refugees. In that second, limited area, there is a right of appeal to the immigration appeal tribunal. 7.30 pm

By means of amendment No. 4, we propose to preserve the special right that has been incorporated in the appeal rules ever since they were first enunciated. I think that the Minister would agree that the 1984 rules are a rehash of earlier rules. It is important to draw attention to rule 14 because unless its effect is preserved the new rules will represent a significant subtraction from the rights of claimants for political asylum who are in the United Kingdom. Amendment No. 5 is an alternative to the new clause. When someone had not been able to exercise the right to be heard before a special adjudicator, the breach of that fundamental right would in itself amount to a ground for appeal on a point of law to the adjudicator and thence to the immigration appeal tribunal.

Amendment No. 6 is an alternative to amendment No. 5. Perhaps it goes further, because it would widen appeal rights to include an appeal on a point of fact. If the Minister does not concede the new clause and amendment No. 5, amendment No. 6 would introduce a right of appeal on a point of fact and everyone would be able to exercise that right of appeal.

Amendment No. 9 replicates amendment No. 5 in its application to the immigration appeal tribunal. Amendment No. 10 replicates amendment No. 6, again in respect of the immigration appeal tribunal. At the heart of the new clause and the amendments is the right to be heard, which is fundamental to the exercise of an appellant's rights before any judicial or quasi-judicial body.

The Minister may be going about the matter in the wrong way and thereby making a rod for his own back. He said earlier that to obtain leave to appeal it is necessary only to write out a claim, and if every word of it is true that must constitute a ground for giving leave to appeal to the special adjudicator.

---