Asked by: Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the government of China concerning the bounties offered for the capture of three residents of the UK.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
On 13 July, at the Foreign Secretary's instruction, his senior official conducted a formal démarche of the Chinese Ambassador. The senior official set out our strong objections to actions in Hong Kong in recent weeks, including the issuing of arrest warrants and bounties for eight individuals living overseas, three of whom live in the UK, as well as the detention and questioning of the family members of some of those individuals in Hong Kong. We also expressed our ongoing opposition to the imposition of the National Security Law by Beijing on Hong Kong, which is a breach of the Sino-British Joint Declaration.
Asked by: Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to secure the salmonoid and coarse fish stocks in England and Wales against predation by cormorants and goosanders; and what consideration they have given to amending the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975 for this purpose.
Answered by Lord Benyon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
This is a devolved matter and the information provided therefore relates to England only.
The Government recognises the impact that fish-eating birds, such as cormorants and goosanders, can have on fish populations. Currently, Natural England can grant licences to shoot a limited number of cormorants and goosanders to prevent serious damage to inland fisheries, where it can be shown that non-lethal measures are failing to manage predation. In the case of cormorants, up to 3000 birds may be licensed to be shot each year. To improve the effectiveness of both non-lethal and lethal measures, Natural England encourages fisheries within the same river-catchment area to cooperate as part of an area-based licensing scheme.
The Environment Agency also supports the employment of Fishery Management Advisers, who provide practical support to angling clubs and fisheries about protecting fish from cormorants and goosanders.
Working together, Natural England and the Environment Agency help fisheries effectively manage predation problems without irreversibly harming the conservation status of these species.
The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) continues to be effective at providing licensing functions to permit the control of piscivorous birds to protect fisheries and in that regard the Government has no plans to amend the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975.
Asked by: Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government which of the provisions in the Bill of Rights Bill were recommended by the Independent Human Rights Act Review Panel.
Answered by Lord Bellamy - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Bill of Rights follows careful consideration of the work done by the Independent Human Rights Act Review panel. We are very grateful to the panel for its detailed work. In terms of specific provisions, the Bill of Rights takes forward the recommendation from the Review that remedial orders should not be used to amend the Act itself. The Bill also seeks to increase the prominence of the common law in relation to rights protection, which was a key theme of the panel's report.
More broadly, the Review’s analysis helped inform our approach in those areas of the Bill that were covered by its Terms of Reference, which was narrower than the scope of the Bill of Rights.
Asked by: Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what proportion of the responses to its consultation on the Bill of Rights Bill supported (1) the proposal to repeal the Human Rights Act altogether, (2) the proposal to restrict positive obligations, (3) the proposal to diverge from the European Court on Human Rights’ living instrument doctrine, and (4) the proposal to remove judicial power to interpret legislation in line with the European Convention of Human Rights.
Answered by Lord Bellamy - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government’s consultation response is available on gov.uk, where we gave a comprehensive breakdown of the responses to the consultation. The consultation sought views on proposals as well as key themes relating to revision and replacement of the Human Rights Act.
Asked by: Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what representations they have received from (1) other states, and (2) the UN Universal Periodic Review which took place on 10 November, regarding the Bill of Rights Bill.
Answered by Lord Bellamy - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The UN’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a state driven process which involves a review of the human rights records of all UN Member States. The UK is firmly committed to the success of the UPR as an important mechanism for constructive peer review.
During the UK’s UPR on 10 November a number of states made recommendations relating to Human Rights Act reform and the Bill of Rights. As is usual practice, a report compiling the recommendations made during the review will be published by the UN Human Rights Council in due course, and a full recording of the session is available on UN Web TV.
The Government regularly discusses matters of mutual interest with our international state partners, and we fully intend to maintain our leading role in the promotion and protection of human rights. The Bill of Rights will allow us to remain a State Party to the ECHR and fully avail ourselves of the margin of appreciation in the sensible application of our human rights laws.
Asked by: Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to bring forward legislation to enable the removal of peerages from those who have been convicted of and imprisoned for serious criminal offences.
Answered by Lord True - Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal
Legislation and Standing Orders provide for the expulsion of peers from the House of Lords who are imprisoned for serious offences. Ultimately, matters relating to the expulsion of a peer is for the House of Lords rather than the Government.
Nobody is under any obligation to address convicted criminals for serious offences by their title.
Whilst Peers may voluntarily stop using their peerage titles, there is currently no formal mechanism for revoking their titles, which would require bespoke primary legislation. The Government currently has no plans to bring forward such legislation.
Asked by: Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many asylum seekers were detained on (1) 30 April, and (2) the same day in each of the previous three months.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
The Home Office publishes statistics on people in detention in the 'Immigration Statistics Quarterly Release', which can be found on Gov.uk. The number of people in detention at the end of each year is broken down by asylum and non-asylum in table Det_01, of the ‘Detention summary tables’, which can also be found attached. The latest data goes up to the end of December 2021. Data for January to March 2022 will be published on the 26 May 2022.
Asylum-related cases refer to those where there has been an asylum claim at some stage prior or during detention. This will include asylum seekers whose asylum claims have been refused, and who have exhausted any rights of appeal, those retuned under third country provisions, as well as those granted asylum/protection, but detained for other reasons (such as criminality).
Information on how to use the dataset can be found in the ‘Notes’ page of the workbook.
Asked by: Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that individual asylum seekers are not detained if there is no evidence that the individual presents a reasonable suspicion of danger to national security.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
The Home Office does not detain anyone in temporary asylum accommodation. Our accommodation providers do not have enforcement powers and those we are accommodating are free to come and go as they please. However,detention is an essential part of effective immigration control and is used to ensure that those with no right to remain in the UK are returned to their home country if they will not leave voluntarily. Migrants, including asylum claimants, may be detained for immigration purposes only in accordance with Home Office policy, as set out in the Detention General Guidance and the Adults at Risk in Immigration Detention policy.
The published detention policy makes it clear that detention must only be used when necessary, and for the shortest possible period. There is a presumption in favour of liberty for any person. We only detain people where removal is a realistic prospect within a reasonable timeframe, or initially to establish their identity or basis of claim. This is set out in both legislation and domestic caselaw and we are held to account on this by the courts, and by a series of safeguards that ensure proper scrutiny of decisions to detain, and on-going detention. Due to the complex range of factors involved, the suitability of detention must be appraised on a case by case basis. Once a person is in detention, regular reviews are undertaken to ensure that their detention remains lawful, appropriate, and proportionate. All asylum claims are considered as quickly as possible and enforcement action is taken once any claims have been considered and refused, and once any appeal rights have been exhausted.
Asked by: Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the average cost of (1) detaining an asylum seeker in custody, and (2) providing them with social housing in the community.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
The Home Office does not detain anyone in temporary asylum accommodation. Our accommodation providers do not have enforcement powers and those we are accommodating are free to come and go as they please.
Information on the average cost per night to hold an individual in immigration detention can be found at Migration transparency data - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk). As at Quarter 4 2021, the average cost per night to hold an individual in immigration detention was £101.61.
The total expenditure on asylum is published in the Home Office Annual Report and Accounts, available at https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/ho-annual-reports-and-accounts(opens in a new tab).
We do not publish a breakdown of costs of our accommodation & support contracts by location or property type as such detail is considered commercially sensitive.
Asked by: Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what (1) advice, and (2) training, they give to public servants dealing with asylum seekers who have family living in the UK.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Public servants, including asylum decision making staff, give careful consideration of the protection needs by assessing all the evidence provided by the claimant.
All case working staff receive extensive training on considering asylum claims through our foundation training programme and must follow published Home Office policy guidance when making decisions. The training and guidance cover topics on dependents applying for asylum, child dependents and family asylum claims including those for family and private life.
In addition, an information leaflet is issued to asylum claimants at the point of claim which outlines the asylum process and the claimant’s responsibilities within that process. This information leaflet is periodically reviewed.