Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill — New Clause — Time Limit on Immigration Detention for EEA and Swiss Nationals — 19 Oct 2020 at 21:15
The majority of MPs voted against introducing a time limit on immigration detention of twenty-eight days for nationals of the European Economic Area and Switzerland.
MPs were considering the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill.[1][2]
The motion supported by a majority of MPs in this vote was:
- That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 6
Lords amendment 6[3] stated:
- Insert the following new Clause—
- “Time limit on immigration detention for EEA and Swiss nationals
- (1) For the purpose of this section, a person (“P”) is defined as any person who, immediately before the commencement of Schedule 1, was—
- (a) residing in the United Kingdom in accordance with the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 (SI 2016/1052);
- (b) residing in the United Kingdom in accordance with a right conferred by or under any of the other instruments which is repealed by Schedule 1; or
- (c) otherwise residing in the United Kingdom in accordance with any right derived from European Union law which continues, by virtue of section 4 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (saving for rights etc. under section 2(1) of the ECA), to be recognised and available in domestic law after exit day.
- (2) The Secretary of State may not detain P under a relevant detention power for a period of more than 28 days from the relevant time.
- ...
The rejected new clause also included:
- (6) This section does not apply to a person in respect of whom the Secretary of State has certified that the decision to detain is or was taken in the interests of national security
--
- [1] Parliament's webpage on the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill, Parliament.uk
- [2] Explanatory notes to the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill, Overview of the Bill, Parliament.uk
- [3] Lords amendments to the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill, 13 October 2020, Parliament.uk
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.
| Party | Majority (Aye) | Minority (No) | Both | Turnout |
| Alliance | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Con | 326 (+2 tell) | 4 | 0 | 91.2% |
| DUP | 0 | 4 | 0 | 50.0% |
| Green | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Independent | 1 | 3 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Lab | 0 | 189 | 0 | 94.0% |
| LDem | 0 | 9 (+2 tell) | 0 | 100.0% |
| PC | 0 | 3 | 0 | 100.0% |
| SDLP | 0 | 2 | 0 | 100.0% |
| SNP | 0 | 46 | 0 | 97.9% |
| Total: | 327 | 262 | 0 | 92.4% |
Rebel Voters - sorted by vote
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
| Name | Constituency | Party | Vote |
| Rehman Chishti | Gillingham and Rainham | Con | no |
| David Davis | Haltemprice and Howden | Con | no |
| Tim Loughton | East Worthing and Shoreham | Con (front bench) | no |
| William Wragg | Hazel Grove | Con (front bench) | no |