UK Borders Bill

I warmly support the noble Earl’s amendment, which he spoke to so comprehensively and convincingly that there is really very little to add. I just take this opportunity to stress a couple of points that have come out in our deliberations today, not least in what the noble Earl said. First, it is not at all clear why this legislation is necessary as these children are anyway supposed to be in the care of the social services. We need to hear a more convincing rationale for why additional legislation is necessary. As the Refugee Children’s Consortium has made plain in a very helpful brief, rather than helping with the Government’s objectives, this legislation, as the noble Earl underlined, is likely to make the situation worse, as young people disappear in fear. Secondly, towards his conclusion, the noble Earl asked four specific questions that had arisen in the context of the consultation paper, Planning Better Outcomes and Support for Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children. I am sure that the noble Earl is not alone in wanting that. I shall be very disappointed if the Minister cannot give specific answers to those questions, because there is a lot of anxiety surrounding the matter. I conclude by emphasising what in our deliberations, with the best of intentions, we are sometimes in danger of forgetting. We are dealing with children going through the most demanding emotional and psychological experience. If we take seriously the undertakings that we have given in the convention, it really is unthinkable that we can be party to increasing that mental anguish, suffering and uncertainty. That point cannot be emphasised enough. We talk these days a great deal about citizenship and what it means to be a United Kingdom citizen. Do we really believe that being a United Kingdom citizen means identifying ourselves with a policy that is aggravating the suffering of children?