I used the Ullahcase not to highlight the point about religion but to describe what happened in those circumstances. It was the linkage between the refugee convention and the European Convention on Human Rights that I was trying to make: being able to focus on one meant that you incorporated the other. That was the point that the House of Lords made. In a sense, the case is an irrelevance, and perhaps I should not have given the detail. The judgment and its consequence deals with the point. I think that I have dealt with the issues that applied to the fictional Mr Ahmed—in the sense that his name is fictional—and I am happy to look at the individual case.
I have already explored the benefit of being in Committee: enabling us to talk about the issues in detail. There will be at least two opportunities to test the opinion of the House on all questions. I do not think that the noble Lord should worry that he will not be able to do that.
Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 11 January 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill 2005-06.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
677 c100-1GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:00:44 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_290313
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_290313
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_290313