Nationality and Borders Bill — Clause 9 — Notice of Decision to Deprive a Person of Citizenship — 20 Apr 2022 at 17:48

The majority of MPs voted to make a new law allowing people to be deprived of their citizenship without notice retrospective, so existing orders depriving people of their citizenship which are invalid due to a lack of notice become valid.

MPs were considering the Nationality and Borders Bill.[1][2][3]

The motion supported by the majority of MPs in this vote was:

  • That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 4G.

Lords amendment 4G stated[6]:

  • Page 12, line 13, leave out subsections (5) to (7)

Had it not been rejected this amendment would have impacted Clause 9 of the Bill titled: Notice of decision to deprive a person of citizenship. The subclauses in question state:

  • (5) A failure to comply with the duty under section 40(5) of the 1981 Act in respect of a pre commencement deprivation order does not affect, and is to be treated as never having affected, the validity of the order.
  • (6) In subsection (5), “pre-commencement deprivation order” means an order made or purportedly made under section 40 of the 1981 Act before the coming into force of subsections (2) to (4) (whether before or after the coming into force of subsection (5)).
  • (7) A person may appeal against a decision to make an order to which subsection (5) applies as if notice of the decision had been given to the person under section 40(5) of the 1981 Act on the day on which the order was made or purportedly made.

Explanatory notes to the Bill Amendment state, in respect of these provisions[3]:

  • Subsection 5 provides that a deprivation order made before subsections (2) to (4) come into force (including before the Bill comes into force) remains valid where the person was not notified of the decision to deprive in accordance with section 40(5).


  • Subsection 6 defines the term “pre-commencement deprivation order” used in this clause as an order made before subsections (2) to (4) of this clause are commenced.


  • Subsection 7 provides that a person has a right of appeal against a decision to deprive them of their citizenship where subsection (5) applies to the deprivation order made in relation to them.

As well as removing a universal requirement to give someone notice of a decision to deprive a them of their citizenship, the Bill also made this provision retrospective, in that it sought to make previous orders made without such notice valid, but to give a right of appeal.


Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

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 (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Alba0 1050.0%
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con305 (+2 tell) 3085.6%
DUP3 0037.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent1 40100.0%
Lab0 166083.0%
LDem0 12092.3%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 20100.0%
SNP0 39 (+2 tell)091.1%
Total:309 232084.9%

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

David DavisHaltemprice and HowdenConno
Andrew MitchellSutton ColdfieldConno
William WraggHazel GroveConno

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.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive