In the late night debate, the Government defeated by 217 votes to 200 an opening amendment that would have required ministers to “have regard” to the UK’s international obligations on the protection of human rights, refugees and rights of the child. Ministers declared it unnecessary
A demand to allow an asylum claim to be considered if a person has not been removed from the UK within six months was defeated by 213 votes to 193. And a proposal to limit the detention of unaccompanied children to 72 hours was defeated by 207 votes to 200.
An amendment seeking to provide safeguards to UK-based victims of modern slavery was defeated by 205 votes to 193.
At least one other vote was ditched in the face of the Government victories. And the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev Justin Welby, a strident critic of the Bill, also dropped his demand for a statement on tackling the refugee problem and human trafficking to the UK, after a similar proposal was rejected by MPs.
While he agreed on the need to stop the small boat crossings, Mr Welby said: “I fail to see how this (the Bill) does it and I have not heard anything to convince me. But that is the view of the other place. I agree that in the end on most things except the most essential that this House must give way to the other place.”
He added: “The problem with the Bill is that it has not started at the right place. Where it needed to start with is… to have a level of national consensus and agreement on what the aim of our migration policy and immigration policy is in the long-term.”
The debate in Parliament came as an accommodation barge to house 500 migrants was on the move. The plans involving the Bibby Stockholm barge in Portland Port, Dorset, are a month behind schedule but the vessel finally left Falmouth, Cornwall, on Monday where work was being carried out to prepare it for its new role.
Downing Street defended the use of barges to house migrants, insisting it is a cheaper alternative to housing them in hotels.
A sad day on so many levels as I’m sure future commissions of enquiry will outline.
Imagine a world where a government votes down a requirement to have regard to international human rights obligations. It’s not “unnecessary”.
And people keep voting Tory. It’s unreal.
This is why the House of Lords is good. They seem to make the right amendments on bills most the time, whereas the government is a shit show.
Shame that the Parliament Act means you can just ignore their amendments though.
4 comments
ByCharles Hymas, HOME AFFAIRS EDITOR
In the late night debate, the Government defeated by 217 votes to 200 an opening amendment that would have required ministers to “have regard” to the UK’s international obligations on the protection of human rights, refugees and rights of the child. Ministers declared it unnecessary
A demand to allow an asylum claim to be considered if a person has not been removed from the UK within six months was defeated by 213 votes to 193. And a proposal to limit the detention of unaccompanied children to 72 hours was defeated by 207 votes to 200.
An amendment seeking to provide safeguards to UK-based victims of modern slavery was defeated by 205 votes to 193.
At least one other vote was ditched in the face of the Government victories. And the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev Justin Welby, a strident critic of the Bill, also dropped his demand for a statement on tackling the refugee problem and human trafficking to the UK, after a similar proposal was rejected by MPs.
While he agreed on the need to stop the small boat crossings, Mr Welby said: “I fail to see how this (the Bill) does it and I have not heard anything to convince me. But that is the view of the other place. I agree that in the end on most things except the most essential that this House must give way to the other place.”
He added: “The problem with the Bill is that it has not started at the right place. Where it needed to start with is… to have a level of national consensus and agreement on what the aim of our migration policy and immigration policy is in the long-term.”
The debate in Parliament came as an accommodation barge to house 500 migrants was on the move. The plans involving the Bibby Stockholm barge in Portland Port, Dorset, are a month behind schedule but the vessel finally left Falmouth, Cornwall, on Monday where work was being carried out to prepare it for its new role.
Downing Street defended the use of barges to house migrants, insisting it is a cheaper alternative to housing them in hotels.
A sad day on so many levels as I’m sure future commissions of enquiry will outline.
Imagine a world where a government votes down a requirement to have regard to international human rights obligations. It’s not “unnecessary”.
And people keep voting Tory. It’s unreal.
This is why the House of Lords is good. They seem to make the right amendments on bills most the time, whereas the government is a shit show.
Shame that the Parliament Act means you can just ignore their amendments though.