LONDON (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Boris Johnson’s nationality and borders bill has been defeated in the House of Lords four times, including the elimination of a key plank of the government’s immigration strategy that would have criminalised refugees who enter the UK illegally.
Clause 11 of the bill would have split refugees into two groups based on how they entered the country. The clause was defeated by a majority of 78 votes, 204 to 126.
If the clause had stayed in place, those who came to the UK on their own would have had a lesser level of protection and less rights than those who came via government-approved methods.
It meant that anyone coming in the UK via an unlawful means, such as a small boat over the Channel, may face an inadmissible claim, a four-year prison sentence, no access to public money, and their family members could be prohibited from joining them.
The first of three days of debate during the bill’s report stage began on Monday. Changes made in the Lords will then be implemented in the Commons. The government could then accept or reject the measures imposed by the Lords.
The vote has given the administration a bloody nose, said to Steve Crawshaw, policy director of Freedom from Torture.
The nationality and borders bill’s illegality and cruelty for Ukrainian refugees and others refugees wasn’t ever a doubt. This huge victory indicates that even this government, which is foreign to the truth and humanity, will have to face it, he remarked.
Lord Dubs, a refugee campaigner and Labour peer, spoke out against the section, saying that those leaving Afghanistan and Ukraine “put the lie to the concept that you can get here through the sort of path that the Home Office permits.”
All four defeats came during the report stage of the contentious nationality and borders bill. Peers also changed the Bill to remove a contentious provision that would have allowed people to lose their British citizenship without warning.
Deprivation of citizenship can be carried out under current legislation for anyone judged to be a threat to the UK – such as those involved in terrorism or war crimes – or for those who fraudulently got citizenship.
If it was “not substantially possible” and in national security’s interest, the bill was suppose to allow citizenship to be revoked without notice.
“Government’s powers pf stripping citizenship are the broadest in the G20 as it is,” director of the non-profit Reprieve, Maya Foa said. They are disproportionately employed against members of ethnic minority groups. MPs must pay attention and remove this discriminatory clause from the bill.
If someone is in a war zone or if telling them might reveal vital intelligence sources, citizenship will be stripped by the Home Office without notification.
