Appendix 1
Correspondence between Rt Hon Alan Beith MP, Chairman
of the Constitutional Affairs Committee and Rt Hon Lord Falconer
of Thoroton, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Constitutional
Affairs
Thank you for your response to the Committee's Report
on Asylum and Immigration Appeals.
There are some outstanding points which the response
raises:
- I regret that you have not
included a statement of the recommendations 3 to 12 in the Report
and how the Bill has been changed to supersede those comments.
For the general reader this makes the outcome of the Report unclear;
it is particularly regrettable as the controversial points about
the "ouster" clause were in that group. It would be
helpful if you could provide the Committee with a summary of the
changes made to Government policy and in particular to the Bill
which make the previous recommendations 3 to 12 unnecessary. It
may be that the Committee will wish to complete the record by
publishing the summary, perhaps as a Special Report.
- When he gave evidence to us Mr Lammy said that
he was minded to allow appeals to the House of Lords in immigration
cases. What is Government policy on this now?
- In your introduction you regret the time lapse
between the publication of the Report and the response. The reason
for the delay is entirely reasonable in the circumstances. May
I make a small procedural point? Although relations between your
Department and the Committee on an official level are commendably
close, I think that the proprieties would be better observed if
you were to write to me about any delay in responding to a report
in future.
It would be very helpful if you could write to me
on the first two points by the end of June so that the Committee
is ready to continue its work on scrutinising the Government's
proposals relating to this Bill.
10 June 2004
