UK Borders Bill

Nothing that the Minister has said alters his first answer, which was tremendously clear and honest. Perhaps he would like to address the point made by the Immigration Advisory Service—that this part of the Bill does not give the Home Secretary any powers that he does not already have. Its briefing on the Bill makes the point that all the relevant factors"““can be considered under the present rules relating to deportation and the Secretary of State can deport those whose presence is not conducive to the public good…There exists a rebuttable presumption in favour of deportation.””" These measures are just rhetoric. They do not provide a proper change in the law. Ministers should also be aware of the possible unintended consequences of this part of the Bill. Article 8 of the European convention on human rights provides protection of the right to privacy and family life. In its briefing on the Bill, the pressure group Liberty has pointed out a potentially perverse consequence when considering the relative positions of two offenders in our jails: one who is in prison for a long time for a violent offence, and another who is serving a shorter sentence for something like burglary. As Liberty says:"““The protections offered by article 8 relate to the impact upon family life rather than the severity of the offence…This means that the person receiving the short custodial sentence for theft, whose children have grown up, is likely to be less well protected than the person committing the more serious offence but who has younger, more dependent children.””" That, surely, is a perverse effect. It also means that a sentencing judge or magistrate might be inclined to avoid imposing a custodial sentence for an offence that carries a sentence of less than 12 months, because even if they believed that custody was justified, they would know that deportation was almost certain to follow. Some magistrates and judges would be concerned that that would be an unfair and disproportionate consequence. One can agree or disagree with Liberty’s analysis of the effects of the clause, but it seems perfectly clear that Ministers have not thought the issue through and that the net effect will be, first, that the Home Secretary’s powers will not change very much and, secondly, that fewer people might receive sentences that would lead to deportation. It is easy to see how the Bill could become yet another in the long line of Home Office Bills that promise more than they deliver. I hope that it avoids that fate. Does the hon. Member for Luton, South (Margaret Moran) still wish to intervene, or has the moment passed?