Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page


Lord Filkin: My Lords, at this time of night and for many reasons I shall not disagree with the broad thrust of the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland. It is in part because one recognises that it has considerable value even though we do not always agree on many issues.

On the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, I shall not repeat what I said when I spoke to the amendment. I recognise the argumentation but at heart the Government differ from that stance for the reasons I set out.

The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, as ever, tested me hard at this time of night on a number of issues. I will attempt to answer a number of them but I hope he will not consider me churlish if I say that they require more consideration than I can give off the cuff. Therefore, he is owed a thoughtful and reflective reply after I have reflected on the matters further.

As I indicated previously, we are not aware of any cases of a person subject to a hospital order having Article 33(2) applied to them. However, if a person has committed an offence and is subject to a medical order—and both points need to be in operation—there is nothing in the present law which prevents the Secretary of State considering deportation on conducive grounds and, if so, whether Article 33 of the Refugee Convention would prevent removal.

The effect of Clause 61 is to create a presumption that Article 33 would not prevent a removal. But that presumption is rebuttable and we would, as I stressed earlier, have to consider and would want to do so on a case-by-case and individual basis.

On his point about a draft mental health Bill, he asked whether, where no offence has been committed and an individual can be retained, that invoked Article 33(2) by virtue of the clause. No, because Clause 61(2) requires the conviction of an offence and a sentence to be imposed, as I implied when I spoke earlier on those points.

Those are in the nature of initial responses. As regards the other points, I will ensure that I reply within the week when have I inspected Hansard to see whether we have addressed them all. I am fairly sure that I have not.

Lord Goodhart: My Lords, I regret that we are faced with a situation in which an attempt to make the lot of refugees facing deportation somewhat easier has concluded by making their situation worse. Had it been possible to do anything about it, I would have wished to divide the House. Plainly, it is not and in that case I beg the leave of the House to withdraw the amendments standing in my noble friend's name.

Amendment No. 104F to 104H, by leave, withdrawn.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

6 Nov 2002 : Column 854

LORDS AMENDMENTS

105Page 34, line 8, leave out from "if" to end of line 13 and insert "he is convicted outside the United Kingdom of an offence, and either—
(a) the offence is one for which the maximum period of imprisonment under the law of any part of the United Kingdom in respect of an offence that is similar in character is ten years or more, or
(b) the offence is similar in character to an offence that has been specified for the purpose of this subsection under subsection (3A)." The Commons disagreed to Lords Amendment No. 105 but proposed Amendments Nos. 104A to 104E in lieu thereof.


106Page 34, line 13, at end insert— "(3A) The Secretary of State may by order specify an offence under the law of any part of the United Kingdom for the purpose of subsections (2) and (3).


    (3B) An order under subsection (3A) may provide that the offence is specified for the purpose of—


(a) subsection (2) only;
(b) subsection (3) only;
(c) both subsections (2) and (3) (3C) An order under subsection (3A) shall be made by statutory instrument and shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament." The Commons disagreed to Lords Amendment No. 106 but proposed Amendments Nos. 104A to 104E in lieu thereof.

Lord Filkin: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do not insist on their Amendments Nos. 105 and 106 to which the Commons have disagreed. I spoke to these amendments with Amendment No. 104.

Moved, That the House do not insist on their Amendments Nos. 105 and 106 to which the Commons have disagreed.—(Lord Filkin.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

LORDS AMENDMENT

109Page 34, line 42, leave out paragraph (b) The Commons disagreed to this amendment but proposed the following amendments to the words so restored to the Bill—


109APage 34, line 47, leave out "a period of custody" and insert "detention, or ordered or directed to be detained,"
109BPage 34, line 48, after "prison" insert "(including, in particular, a hospital or an institution for young offenders),"
109CPage 35, line 1, after second "to" insert "imprisonment or detention, or ordered or directed to be detained, for"
109DPage 35, line 2, leave out "of custody"

Lord Filkin: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do not insist on their Amendment No. 109 to which the Commons have disagreed and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 109A to 109D to the words so restored in the Bill. I spoke to these amendments with Amendment No. 104.

Moved, That the House do not insist on their Amendment No. 109 to which the Commons have disagreed and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 109A to 109D to the words so restored to the Bill.—(Lord Filkin.)

[Amendment No. 109E not moved.]

On Question, Motion agreed to.

6 Nov 2002 : Column 855

LORDS AMENDMENT

126After Clause 68, insert the following new clause—
"Disapplication of section (Consequential and incidental provision) in relation to Part 4
Section (Consequential and incidental provision) shall not apply to this Part." The Commons disagreed to this amendment for the following reason—


126ABecause the power to make consequential and incidental provision should not be restricted in the manner proposed.

LORDS AMENDMENT

192After Clause 101, insert the following new clause—
"Disapplication of section (Consequential and incidental provision) in relation to Part 5
Section (Consequential and incidental provision) shall not apply to this Part." The Commons disagreed to this amendment for the following reason—


192ABecause the power to make consequential and incidental provision should not be restricted in the manner proposed.

LORDS AMENDMENT

216After Clause 123, insert the following new clause—
"Disapplication of section (Consequential and incidental provision) in relation to Part 6
Section (Consequential and incidental provision) shall not apply to this Part." The Commons disagreed to this amendment for the following reason—


216ABecause the power to make consequential and incidental provision should not be restricted in the manner proposed.

LORDS AMENDMENT

224After Clause 136, insert the following new clause—
"Disapplication of section (Consequential and incidental provision) in relation to Part 7
Section (Consequential and incidental provision) shall not apply to this Part." The Commons disagreed to this amendment for the following reason—


224ABecause the power to make consequential and incidental provision should not be restricted in the manner proposed.

Lord Filkin: My Lords, I beg to move that this House do not insist on their Amendments Nos. 126, 192, 216 and 224 to which the Commons have disagreed for their reasons numbered 126A, 192A, 216A and 224A. I spoke to these amendments with Amendment No. 16.

Moved, That the House do not insist on their Amendments Nos. 126, 192, 216 and 224 to which the Commons have disagreed for their reasons numbered 126A, 192A, 216A and 224A.—(Lord Filkin.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

LORDS AMENDMENT

225Before Clause 137, insert the following new clause—
"Consequential and incidental provision (1) The Secretary of State may by order make provision which he thinks necessary in consequence of or in connection with a provision of this Act.


    (2) An order under this section may, in particular—


(a) amend an enactment;
(b) modify the effect of an enactment.

6 Nov 2002 : Column 856

(3) An order under this section must be made by statutory instrument.


    (4) An order under this section which amends an enactment shall not be made unless a draft has been laid before and approved by resolution of each House of Parliament.


    (5) Any other order under this section shall be subject to annulment pursuant to a resolution of either House of Parliament."


    The Commons agreed to this amendment with the following amendment—


225ALine 3, leave out "provision which he thinks necessary in consequence of or" and insert "consequential or incidental provision"

Lord Filkin: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 225A to Lords Amendment No. 225. I spoke to this Amendment with Amendment No. 16.

Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 225A to Lords Amendment No. 225.—(Lord Filkin.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page