European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill — New Clause 34 — Settled Status: Right to Appeal — 7 Jan 2020 at 20:15

The majority of MPs voted against establishing a right to appeal decisions on granting "settled status", a right to remain in the United Kingdom indefinitely.

MPs were considering the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill.[1]

The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was titled: Settled status: right to appeal and stated:

  • (1) A person may appeal against a settled status decision to the First-tier Tribunal.
  • (2) A settled status decision includes a decision—
  • (a) to refuse to grant leave to remain under Appendix EU of the Immigration Rules made under section 3(2) of the Immigration Act 1971, or
  • (b) to grant limited leave to remain under Appendix EU of the Immigration Rules made under section 3(2) of the Immigration Act 1971 to a person who has applied for indefinite leave to remain under that Appendix.
  • (3) An appeal against a decision under subsection 2(b) may be brought only on the grounds that the person is entitled to indefinite leave to remain under Appendix EU of the Immigration Rules.
  • (4) While an appeal under subsection 2(a) is pending, the person concerned shall be deemed to have all the rights associated with indefinite leave to remain under Appendix EU of the Immigration Rules in particular as concerns residence, employment, access to social security benefits and other services.
  • (5) While an appeal under subsection 2(b) is pending, the limited leave to remain granted under Appendix EU to the Immigration Rules shall continue in force.
  • (6) “Pending” shall have the same meaning for the purposes of subsections (4) and (5) above as in section 104 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.”

The rejected new clause was accompanied by the following explanatory statement from its proposer:

  • This new clause would establish a right to appeal settled status decisions.

Without the amendment the Bill[1], via clause 11, did empower a Minister to create regulations providing for an appeal system, but did not require those powers to be exercised nor give a right to remain for those undertaking an appeal.

The UK Government website states: "You can stay in the UK as long as you like if you get settled status".[2]

Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

Party Summary

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.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con341 (+2 tell) 0094.0%
DUP2 0025.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Lab0 189093.6%
LDem0 9 (+2 tell)0100.0%
PC0 40100.0%
SDLP0 20100.0%
SNP0 45095.7%
Total:343 251093.3%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
no rebellions

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive