Skip to main content

1-15 of 15 results for subject:"EU law"

Member X
Baroness Debbonaire
Subject X
Legislative consent motions

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More
Debbonaire, Baroness (15)

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More
Legislative consent motions (15)

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

I rise on behalf of the Opposition to explain why we oppose the Government on all five of their motions to disagree with their lordships.

On EU citizens’ rights, their lordships passed an amendment providing for, first, a declaratory system for gaining settled status and, secondly, for a physical document. The...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 cc321-2
House
House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes exactly the right point. Government Members should consider that the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, the3million and the Residential Landlords Association have all warned that there is a risk that landlords and employers will be reluctant, without that immediate physical proof that other Windrush...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c322
House
House of Commons

Yes, the hon. Gentleman is absolutely right.

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c322
House
House of Commons

My right hon. Friend is exactly right. I ask Government Members to imagine a future constituency surgery in which they are asked to explain to their constituents who are EU citizens why they have been denied a physical document or settled status or have experienced delays in getting that status...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c323
House
House of Commons

That is spot on. It is why many EU citizens in my constituency say they feel singled out—because they do not have what other non-UK citizens have, which is a physical document.

I turn to the CJEU and Lords amendments 2 and 3. In clause 26, the Government signal their intention...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c323
House
House of Commons

The problem is that we are allowing Ministers to set the terms and test, which is an unacceptable breach of the boundaries between the Executive and the judiciary.

The Government have had plenty of time to consider the provisions of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. If they want more time,...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c324
House
House of Commons

Of course not—hon. Members on the Government Benches seem to agree with my hon. Friend—but if so why remove the provision? Why not keep it in?

The Government say there is no change of policy, but the removal of clause 17 is a change of policy. They complain that leaving the...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 cc324-5
House
House of Commons

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that point and for his partial agreement—I think—but if it is not acceptable in this Bill, why would it be acceptable in another? It is a negotiating aim, and we are told by the Secretary of State that the negotiations have already started.

To my...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c325
House
House of Commons

I thank the hon. Lady for that intervention. It is clearly important to put on the record again that we are talking about reuniting children with an adult relative who is here legally. We are not talking about people who have no right to be here; we are talking about...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c326
House
House of Commons

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I do want the Government to stick to that commitment. For the Government to ask us simply to trust them because it will pop up in another bit of legislation is just not good enough.

Let me finally deal with Lords amendment 5, which relates...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c326
House
House of Commons

That is indeed the impression that seems to be being given. I suggest that Conservative Members, particularly those who are newly elected and represent constituencies in Scotland and Wales, should ask themselves whether this is what they told their voters back in November. Did they tell them that they would...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c326
House
House of Commons

I think what it says is that the Government will consult, but they are not listening. I think it mighty suspicious that the refusal to respect the amendment comes after those devolved legislatures said that they did not consent.

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c327
House
House of Commons

The hon. Lady is quite right. That is one of the problems that we had during the previous iteration of the Bill, and even more in the case of this one.

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c327
House
House of Commons

I will give way once more, and then I must finish.

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 c327
House
House of Commons

If the hon. Gentleman thinks that the convention is already law and we should respect that, why not just accept the amendment? Clause 38, which it seeks to amend, makes the somewhat obvious statement that this Parliament is sovereign. Why does that need to be in the Bill? I should...

Member
Baroness Debbonaire (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 January 2020
Reference
670 cc327-8
House
House of Commons