(LONDON) Press Release Statement Report: Immigration Compliance Minister Closing Speech on Second Reading of Nationality & Borders Bill voted last night as Ayes-366 – Noes-265 #AceNewsDesk report

#AceNewsReport – July.21: Thank you to all members who have spoken in this extremely thorough two day debate…..

#AceDailyNews reports after House of Commons 2-day-debate on Justice Minister’s closing speech for the second reading of the Nationality & Borders Bill in the House of Commons on Tuesday evening with votes in favour of 101 ….

The public expects this House to protect our borders. They expect us to combat the dinghies crossing the English Channel and they expect us to remove those with no right to be here. This Bill will deliver those people’s priorities.

This Bill is fair but firm. Fair to those people in genuine need, but form towards those people seeking to abuse the system.

Firstly, let me reiterate the Government’s commitment to supporting those in genuine need. Of course, we cannot help all 80 million displaced people around the world who may wish to come here, but we will play our part.

Firstly, we are continuing our world-leading Resettlement programme, where, working with the UNHCR we resettle the world’s most vulnerable. We have resettled 25,000 people in the last 6 years, more than any other European country and half of them children. And we will be strengthening this arrangement by immediately granting indefinite leave to remain to those people entering via the resettlement programme. I am concerned by the resettlement outcomes, only 5% are in work after a year, so we are going to do more on integration and we’re going to draw in a wider range of persecuted people. Recognising, for example, that the most persecuted group globally are persecuted Christians.

We’re not just running Europe’s biggest resettlement programme, we are also, as we speak, bringing locally engaged staff in Afghanistan to the United Kingdom and we have opened up a route for BNOs from Hong Kong to come here. And in addition to that 29,000 people have come her over the last 6 years as part of refugee family reunion.

I’m very disappointed that of the 32 local authorities in Scotland, only one, Glasgow, takes dispersed asylum seekers. So if Scotland wants to do more, they have the opportunity to do so. And moreover, when it comes to taking unaccompanied asylum seeking children under the national transfer scheme, of the 600 or so who were transferred last year, Scotland took a very small handful. Those children have over £50,000 a year funding going with them. There are children right now in Dover who need to be looked after so I call on the Scottish Government to put action behind their words and take some of those children on tonight.

So let me be clear. The UK will always play its part for those in genuine need. But we will choose who deserves our help.

Illegal immigration undermines that choice. Instead of the United Kingdom being able to choose the children and families most in need, illegal immigration instead allows those who pay people smugglers, or who are strong, to push their way to the front of the queue.

There is no worse example of that than the small boats crossing the English Channel. Around 80% are young single men who have paid people smugglers to cheat the system. They are not fleeing war. France is not a war zone. Belgium is not a war zone and nor is Germany. These are safe European countries with well-functioning asylum systems. These journeys are dangerous and totally unnecessary, and they push to one side those in greatest need, including women and children.

This Bill contains provisions such that people arriving by small boat and other illegal means will be liable for prosecution and a four year jail term, and people smugglers will face a life sentence. This Bill also gives Border Force the powers they need to make interceptions at sea.

And let me be clear, nothing in this Bill would have made the Kindertransport from the 1930s illegal, that was an authorised and organised programme that would be perfectly legal. Indeed it is analogous to the safe and legal route that we are currently offering locally engaged staff from Afghanistan.

And let me further reassure the House that there is no intention in this Bill to criminalise bona fide rescue operations by the RNLI.

Let me be clear also that nothing in this Bill infringes our international obligations. Article 31 of the Refugee Convention makes it clear that it is permitted to impose penalties where someone has not come directly, I use the word directly, from a place of danger and where they did not have reasonable opportunity to claim asylum somewhere else. But people coming from France are not coming directly from a place of danger, as required by Article 31, and they did have a reasonable chance to claim asylum in France. So these measures are wholly consistent with our international obligations.

Our legal system needs reform. It is open to abuse. People make repeated human rights, asylum and modern slavery claims, often strung out over many years, in an effort to avoid removal. But very often they are later found to be without merit. For example, in 2017, 83% of those last-minute claims raised in detention to frustrate removal were later found to be without merit.

I have seen some terrible examples of murderers and rapists making these claims, without merit, to avoid deportation. And it’s not just me who says that, let me quote what the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Burnett of Maldon, said last October. He said this “Late claims, raised shortly before removal have been endemic, many fanciful or entirely false”. He went on “It is a matter of regret that a minority of lawyers have leant their professional support to vexatious representations and abusive late legal challenges.” The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales is saying in those remarks that change is needed.

This Bill also has measures on age assessment. We are the only European country not to use scientific age assessments. Recent evaluations in Kent concerning 92 people claiming to be children later found that around half in fact were not. There are very obvious and serious safeguarding issues if men that are 23 years old successfully pretend to be under 18 and then get housed or are educated with 16-year-old girls and we cannot tolerate that.

On modern slavery, this Bill will make sure we identify genuine victims of modern slavery but also avoid unmeritorious claims designed to delay removal or deportation. Where someone is a genuine victim we will make sure they are properly looked after. This policy will make clear for the first time in legislation that confirmed victims with recovery needs stemming from their exploitation will be entitled to a grant of leave where that is necessary to assist them in their recovery or indeed to assist in a prosecution. We hope that by encouraging people to being their claims up front in one go that asylum claims, modern slavery and human rights matters will be able to be identified early and properly but we avoid some of the abuse we have unfortunately seen all too often.

Some members raised questions of detention, claiming it was indefinite. That is of course not the case, we don’t have indefinite detention. 75% of people spend less than a month in detention prior to removal and we have the Hardial Singh case law principles which mean you cannot be detained if there is no prospect of removal. There are frequent opportunities to apply for immigration bail in addition to the protections afforded by Article 5 of the ECHR.

In relation to the Dubs amendment, we prefer to prioritise not people who are in safe European countries but people who are in dangerous places.

The public expect us to look after those in genuine need. We will do so. But the public also expects us to protect our borders from illegal immigration and promptly remove those with no right to be here. This Bill delivers those objectives.

#AceNewsDesk report ……Published: July.21: 2021:

Editor says …Sterling Publishing & Media Service Agency is not responsible for the content of external site or from any reports, posts or links, and can also be found here on Telegram: https://t.me/acenewsdaily all of our posts fromTwitter can be found here: https://acetwitternews.wordpress.com/ and all wordpress and live posts and links here: https://acenewsroom.wordpress.com/and thanks for following as always appreciate every like, reblog or retweet and free help and guidance tips on your PC software or need help & guidance from our experts AcePCHelp.WordPress.Com

#debate, #house-of-commons, #london, #nationality-borders-bill, #press-release, #speech

‘ RAF Deploy First Wave of Bombers to Iraq ‘

#AceNewsServices – BRITAIN – September 27 – Armed British RAF jets have been deployed on their first mission in Iraq since UK lawmakers voted to authorize military strikes against so-called Islamic State (IS) targets in the country.

'A British Eurofighter EF-2000 Typhoon '  (Reuters/Giampiero Sposito)

‘A British Eurofighter EF-2000 Typhoon ‘ (Reuters/Giampiero Sposito)

A Ministry of Defense Spokesman (MOD) confirmed on Saturday that “Royal Air Force Tornados continue to fly over Iraq and are now ready to be used in an attack role as and when appropriate targets are identified.”

UK MPs vote overwhelmingly for ISIS airstrikes in Iraq

The spokesman added that no running commentary on the jets’ movements would be forthcoming, but they “are pleased with the response time achieved.”

On Friday, MPs in Britain’s House of Commons voted overwhelmingly to take part in military action against Islamic State (also known ISIS, or ISIL).

The motion proposed by Prime Minister David Cameron’s government was passed overwhelmingly by 524 votes to 43 – a majority of 481.

Britain’s three biggest parties, coalition government partners the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, plus the opposition Labour party, all officially backed the bombing campaign. The government insisted the intervention was legal under international law because it was requested by the Iraqi prime minister.

On Friday, MPs in Britain’s House of Commons voted overwhelmingly to take part in military action against Islamic State (also known ISIS, or ISIL).

The motion proposed by Prime Minister David Cameron’s government was passed overwhelmingly by 524 votes to 43 – a majority of 481.

Britain’s three biggest parties, coalition government partners the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, plus the opposition Labour party, all officially backed the bombing campaign.

The spokesman added that no running commentary on the jets’ movements would be forthcoming, but they “are pleased with the response time achieved.”

The motion proposed by Prime Minister David Cameron’s government was passed overwhelmingly by 524 votes to 43 – a majority of 481.

Britain’s three biggest parties, coalition government partners the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, plus the opposition Labour party, all officially backed the bombing campaign. The government insisted the intervention was legal under international law because it was requested by the Iraqi prime minister.

The measure did not propose any UK involvement in air-strikes in Syria, where a US-Arab coalition began bombing IS militants on Tuesday. A year ago, British MPs rejected air-strikes on Syria to oppose the government of President Bashar Assad.

Cameron told MPs early in Friday’s debate the situation in Syria is more complicated” than Iraq because of its “brutal dictator” President Assad, and the civil war that has been ongoing there for the past three years.

He noted, however, that there was a strong case for attacking IS in Syria, a proposition which both Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond and Defense Secretary Michael Fallon have cited as a distinct possibility.

Cameron added that there was no legal barrier” to expanding operations into Syria, though MPs were far from united on such a move.

Shadow Education Minister Rushanara Ali resigned from Labour’s front bench on Friday in order to abstain from voting on the measure.

I am not confident that this military action will be effective in the short term in just targeting the terrorists and not harming innocent civilians,” she wrote in a letter to Labour party leader Ed Miliband.Nor can I pretend to have any confidence that there is a credible long-term strategy to build up the capacity of the Iraqi army or that the potential impact on radicalisation in the UK has been properly thought through.”

She added that while a majority of British Muslims abhorred the actions of IS, there is a widespread belief in both Muslim and non-Muslim communities that military action “will only create further bloodshed and further pain for the people of Iraq.”

Public opinion, however, has turned decidedly in favor of military action following the beheading of British aid worker David Haines.

A poll conducted for The Sun newspaper, published on Friday, showed that 57 percent of UK residents surveyed said they supported bombing ISIS in Iraq, compared to 24 percent who were against the move.

Support for a bombing campaign is up by one-fifth on a similar poll last month.

Asked whether they backed strikes on IS in Syria as well, 51 percent approved of spreading the intervention while 26 percent opposed it. Meanwhile, 43 percent backed sending ground troops to Iraq, or considering sending them there.

Meanwhile, activists from the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said that US-led forces had launched airstrikes against Islamic State compounds in the central province of Homs and the northern region of Raqqa on Saturday, AP reports.

The targets included wheat silos west of the eastern city of Deir el-Zour.

BBC – RT – Daily Mail – Daily Express – AP – Reuters – Sun 

#ANS2014

#britain, #house-of-commons, #iraq, #isil, #isis, #islamic-state, #syria

` House of Commons MP ` Nigel Evans ‘ has been Cleared of a String of ` Sex Abuse Charges ‘ including Rape ‘

#AceUKNews – PRESTON – April 10 – (BBC) – Former deputy speaker of the House of Commons Nigel Evans has been cleared of a string of sex abuse charges, including one of rape.

The rape claim was one of several allegations made by seven men during a five-week trial at Preston Crown Court.

The former Conservative MP was said to have used his political influence to take advantage of his alleged victims.

But the defence pointed out inconsistencies in various witness accounts.

There was profound shock on all sides when the allegations of sexual offences against the then deputy
speaker first surfaced – and no shortage of MPs and peers willing to speak up for him.

The jury unanimously found Mr Evans not guilty of one count of rape, five sexual assaults, one attempted sexual assault and two indecent assaults.

Read More: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26974975

#ANS2014

#britain, #house-of-commons, #london, #preston-crown-court, #rape

#UKGovNews : ” Ninety Three Percent of `People Polled’ said `Tax Payer Should Not Subsidise MP’S Meals’ to the `Tune of £5.8 Million’ Per Annum”

#AceNewsServices says `WHAT? NO MARTINI’ and Some
MPS COMPLAIN ABOUT SUBSIDISED CATERING AT HOUSE OF COMMONS

24 January 2014 11:44 AM

It’s a tough life at the House of Commons. Aperitifs are in short supply, the Cajun food is poor and there is a dearth of ‘fresh game’ on the lunchtime menu.

Those are the views, at least, of a few anonymous MPs whose views have been revealed by a recent Freedom of Information requestMetro has reported.

Though officials reportedly said the number of complaints was relatively small, the extravagance of requests knew no bounds. Chitterlinks (pigs intestines) and a live jazz band were among some of the suggestions made.

To one anonymous MP, the poor selection of pre-dinner drinks was a particular source of dissatisfaction.

‘We were told by the waiter that there was no martini. I then enquired about a gin and tonic, a Campari or even a sherry for my guest only to be told that, no, only wine was available,’ said the MP.

‘All rather embarrassing, don’t you think? Whoever is in charge of the drinks stock should really get their act together.’

Cooking methods also provoked indignation. One MP commented: ‘ Having been to New Orleans and being an excellent Cajun cook myself I can assure you that there are NO potatoes in gumbo’.

The MP went on: ‘I think the potato thing is getting out of hand. Yes, I know our meals are ‘‘subsidised’’ by the taxpayer but we really have very little choice but to dine in the House.’

The complaints come despite the fact government meals are subsidised by the taxpayer to the tune of£5.8 million a year, meaning a pint of beer inside the Commons costs just £1.70 (less than the going rate at a local Weatherspoons) and a slow-cooked pork belly and vegetables main rings in at £3.55.

Should the taxpayer continue subsidising Westminster meals and drinks? 

Should Taxpayer Continue Subsidising 2014-01-29 12:54:30

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

#acenewsservices, #cajun-cuisine, #campari, #cooking, #freedom-of-information-laws-by-country, #house-of-commons, #house-of-commons-of-the-united-kingdom, #member-of-parliament, #new-orleans