The Committee repeats its previously stated view that it regards it as unacceptable that amendments having obvious implications for human rights should be introduced at such a late stage in a Bill's passage through Parliament, without adequate warning and without a clear explanation of the Government's view of the human rights implications. Such a practice undermines proper democratic scrutiny of the human rights implications of legislation.
The Committee considers that there is a significant risk that making the provision of accommodation to failed asylum seekers conditional on their performance of community work (new clause 10) is in breach of the prohibition of forced or compulsory labour in Article 4(2) ECHR.
The Committee considers that there is a significant risk that singling out failed asylum seekers from the class of those in need of emergency social assistance to prevent destitution, and requiring them to perform community work as a condition of entitlement to such assistance, is in breach of Article 14 ECHR in conjunction with Article 4(2) or Article 4(3)(d) ECHR, because it is a difference of treatment on grounds of nationality for which there is no objective and reasonable justification.
The Committee considers that there is a significant risk that refusing or withdrawing the provision of accommodation to or from a failed asylum seeker who is unable to return to their country, on the ground that they refuse to perform community work, will be in breach of Article 3 ECHR.
On the understanding that a former asylum-seeker remains free to apply for housing in the area of an authority where he has family associations, the Committee does not consider the local connection deeming provision in new clause 11 to give rise to a significant risk of incompatibility with the right to respect for family life in Article 8 ECHR.
On the assumption that the Government can provide Parliament with the evidence which demonstrates that the value of the benefits in kind provided to asylum-seekers is equivalent to the value of back-payments of benefits being abolished, the Committee does not consider there to be any significant risk of a breach of Article 23 of the Refugee Convention or Article 14 ECHR in conjunction with Article 1 Protocol 1 in the abolition of back-dated payments of benefits (new clause 12).
The Committee considers that there is a significant risk that the new procedures for marriage are incompatible with the right to marry because they introduce restrictions on that right which are disproportionate and which may impair the very essence of the right.
The Committee considers there to be a significant risk that the marriage provisions discriminate on grounds of religion and belief, and on grounds of nationality, without objective and reasonable justification, contrary to Article 14 ECHR in conjunction with the right to marry in Article 12 and the right to manifest one's religion in Article 9(1).
The Committee is unable to reassure Parliament that the power to remove rights of appeal against entry clearance decisions (new clause 29) is compatible with human rights in the absence of an express statement on the face of the Bill indicating more specifically the type of cases in which the power can be exercised.
| 
