Comparison of Divisions: Gurkha Settlement Rights — Government defeat — 29 Apr 2009 at 15:49 with Division No. 219 on 27 Apr 2006 at 17:18

The majority of MPs voted in favour of the motion:^[1]

• This House
• regrets the Government's recent statement^[2] outlining the eligibility criteria for Gurkhas to reside in the United Kingdom;
• recognises the contribution the Gurkhas have made to the safety and freedom of the United Kingdom for the past 200 years;
• notes that more Gurkhas have laid down their lives for the United Kingdom than are estimated to want to live here;
• believes that Gurkhas who retired before 1997 should be treated fairly and in the same way as those who have retired since;
• is concerned that the Government's new guidelines will permit only a small minority of Gurkhas and their families to settle whilst preventing the vast majority;
• further believes that people who are prepared to fight and die for the United Kingdom should be entitled to live in the country; and
• calls upon the Government to withdraw its new guidelines immediately and bring forward revised proposals that extend an equal right of residence to all Gurkhas.

As a consequence, the alternative Government motion, which read:^[3]

• This House
• recognises that this Government is the only one since the Second World War to allow Gurkhas and their families settlement rights to the United Kingdom;
• notes that in 2004 the Government permitted settlement rights to Gurkhas discharged since 1997, following the transfer of the Brigade HQ from Hong Kong to the United Kingdom;
• further notes that under these rules around 6,000 Gurkhas and family members have been welcomed to the UK;
• acknowledges that the court judgement of September 2008 determined that the 1997 cut-off date was fair and rational, while seeking clarification of the criteria for settlement rights for those who retired before 1997;
• further notes that on 24 April the Government published new and more generous guidelines for the settlement applications of Gurkhas who retired before 1997;
• supports this revised guidance, which will make around 10,000 Gurkhas and family members eligible to settle in the UK;
• further notes that the Government undertakes actively to inform those who may be eligible in Nepal of these changes and to review the impact of the new guidance within 12 months;
• further notes that the contribution Gurkhas have made is already recognised by pensions paid to around 25,000 Gurkhas or their widows in Nepal that allow for a good standard of living there; and
• further notes that in the year 2000 Gurkha pensions were doubled and that, earlier in April 2009, in addition to an inflationary uplift of 14 per cent., those over 80 years old received a 20 per cent. increase in their pension.

... was never voted upon.

Although this extremely rare Government defeat in an opposition day motion is not binding (has no legal force)^[4] a Government minister made a statement later in the day to bring "forward the date for the determination of the outstanding applications to the end of May."^[5]

• [1] Christopher Huhne MP, House of Commons, 29 April 2009
• [2] Phil Woollas MP, Written Ministerial Statement, 29 April 2009
• [3] Phil Woolas MP, House of Commons, 29 April 2009
• [4] Home Secretary Jacqui Smith blamed for humiliating Gurkhas defeat in the Commons, Daily Mail, 30 April 2009
• [5] Phil Woolas MP, House of Commons, 29 April 2009

Amendment proposed: No. 6, in page 5, line 20, at end insert-

'Assembly control of Orders in Council

7 Paragraph 2 of the Schedule to the 2000 Act is replaced by-

"Parliamentary and Assembly control of Orders in Council

2(1) Except where sub-paragraph (2) applies, an Order in Council may not be made under paragraph 1(1) unless each of the following conditions is met-

(a) Condition 1 is that a draft of the Order has been referred under section 1(1) of the Northern Ireland Act 2006 to the Assembly;

(b) Condition 2 is that a meeting of the Assembly has taken place at which it has had the opportunity to consider the draft of the Order;

(c) Condition 3 is that the Assembly at that meeting has not expressed by resolution passed with cross-community support its opposition to the draft of the Order;

(d) Condition 4 is that the draft of the Order has been approved by resolution of each House of Parliament.

(2) This sub-paragraph applies where the Order declares that the Secretary of State has advised Her Majesty that because of the urgency of the matter it is necessary to make the Order without meeting any of the conditions in sub-paragraph (1).

(3) Where an Order contains a declaration under sub-paragraph (2) it-

(a) must be laid before Parliament after being made; and

(b) ceases to have effect if it is not approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament before the end of the relevant period.

(4) Where an Order contains a declaration under sub-paragraph (2) it-

(a) must be referred to the Assembly under section 1(1) of the Northern Ireland Act 2006 after being made; and

(b) ceases to have effect if before the end of the relevant period-

(i) the Assembly has not had an opportunity to consider the Order; or

(ii) the Assembly has passed a resolution with cross community support expressing its opposition to the Order.

(5) But sub-paragraphs (3)(b) and (4)(b) do not prejudice-

(a) anything done under the Order before it ceased to have effect; or

(b) the making of a new Order.

(6) In this paragraph-

"the Assembly" means the Assembly referred to in paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Northern Ireland Act 2006; "the relevant period" means the period of 40 days beginning with the date on which the Order is made.'.-[Mark Durkan.]

Question put, That the amendment be made:-

The Committee divided: Ayes 51, Noes 234.