Immigration Bill — New Clause 15 — Exemptions to Automatic Deportation of Criminals on Human Rights Grounds — 30 Jan 2014 at 16:00
The majority of MPs voted against only allowing human rights grounds to be used to prevent a foreign criminal being deported in cases where there would be a breach of the right to life, or right not to be tortured; and against adding a new exemption to deportation for cases where harm to the criminal's children outweighs the public interest in removal.
MPs were considering the Immigration Bill. The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was:
- ‘(1) The UK Borders Act 2007 is amended as follows.
- (2) In section 33 (Exceptions), in subsection (2)(a), for “Convention rights”, substitute “rights under Articles 2 or 3 of the Convention”.
- (3) In section 33, after subsection (6A), insert—
- “(6B) Exception 7 is where the Secretary of State thinks, taking into account all the circumstances of the case including the seriousness of the offence, that removal of the foreign criminal from the United Kingdom in pursuance of a deportation order would cause such manifest and overwhelming harm to his children that it overrides the public interest in removal.”.
- (4) In section 38 (Interpretation)—
- (a) after subsection (3), insert—
- “(3A) In section 32, “Convention rights” has the same meaning as in the Human Rights Act 1998 (c. 42).”;
- (b) omit paragraph (4)(b);
- (c) after subsection (4) insert—
- “(4A) In section 33, “rights under Articles 2 or 3 of the Convention” means Articles 2 or 3 of “the Convention” as defined in the Human Rights Act 1998 (c. 42).”.’
The effect of this amendment would have been to alter the exceptions from automatic deportation of foreign criminals.
The amendment would have limited the requirement for a minister not to deport of a foreign criminal on grounds the deportation would breach the European Convention on Human Rights to breaches of the right to life and the prohibition on torture and not require, or permit, an exemption to deportation on the grounds of breaches of other rights.
It would have added an exception to deportation relating to harm to the criminal's children.
The motion rejected in this vote was:
- That the clause be added to the Bill.
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
|Party||Majority (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||3||84 (+2 tell)||1||29.5%|
|LDem||41 (+2 tell)||0||0||76.8%|
|Peter Bottomley||Worthing West||Con (front bench)||no|
|Robert Buckland||South Swindon||Con (front bench)||no|
|Geoffrey Cox||Torridge and West Devon||Con (front bench)||no|
|Stephen Phillips||Sleaford and North Hykeham||Con (front bench)||both|
|Hazel Blears||Salford and Eccles||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Jim Dowd||Lewisham West and Penge||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Natascha Engel||North East Derbyshire||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Kate Hoey||Vauxhall||Lab (minister)||aye|
|John Mann||Bassetlaw||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Siobhain McDonagh||Mitcham and Morden||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Graham Stringer||Blackley and Broughton||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Gisela Stuart||Birmingham, Edgbaston||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Derek Twigg||Halton||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Keith Vaz||Leicester East||Lab (minister)||aye|