My Lords, the reference to international agreements, of course, would also cover the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, a convention to which we are required to respond and which we are required to fulfil. I have here a copy of it—I have read it quite thoroughly—and one can question whether we are complying with, accepting and making effective article after article of the convention. I shall not take too long on this—I shall not go through all the articles—but Article 2 requires states parties to, "““respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child’s or his or her parent’s or legal guardian’s race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion””,"
and so on. So there is to be no discrimination at all and every child is to be treated in the same way.
I think of the children I know who play on the beaches of north Wales and who climb the hills of Snowdonia. Are they as restricted as those who are in detention centres or in immigration centres, or who are in hiding because they fear the knock on the door and their enforced deportation? Under Article 2 of the convention, I would question whether we have the right to deal in this way with children.
Article 3 states that everything shall be done in, "““the best interests of the child””."
We have argued on this before and this debate has become very much a debate on children and on their opportunities and freedoms. Imagine the trauma of being a child who is forced, with his or her parents, to flee from a very unfriendly country. Perhaps we should put ourselves in the shoes of these children. I have grandchildren and others here have grandchildren whom we would protect with our own lives, yet such children are subject to traumatic experiences in the countries from which they come. I am told that there are one or two countries in Africa where you can buy a child for £10. There is suffering and poverty there, but perhaps that is for another debate.
As to the process of leaving their country, how are they carried? What happens to them on that journey from their country of origin to this country? How are they to survive here? Is it a sort of Anne Frank subsistence in hiding? How are they fed? How are they cared for? What hope do they have? In all things we try to build a world fit for children to live in—I have said this before—because that is one of our greatest responsibilities. Nothing should clamp down on the hope and joy of childhood. But there is no joy in a detention camp. There is no joy in the back of a lorry fleeing from a country. When we look at this, we cannot claim that what we are doing is in the best interests of a child, if we keep that child in situations here that are totally contradictory to the United Nations convention.
Article 5 deals with the rights and duties of parents. The whole set-up of immigration centres leads to fear and dread about what will happen to their children and what tomorrow will bring. I imagine that some of our children are afraid of the dark, but life is nearly all dark for these children. Article 6 says that, "““every child has the inherent right to life””."
But what sort of life is it—a life of fear, poverty and general hopelessness?
I was looking at the evaluation report for Section 9. I saw these children’s countries of origin to which they would be deported. The country that came up most often was Pakistan. Yes, you can perhaps send a family back there. The next country was Somalia. Do you send a child back to Somalia with his family? The third most popular was Zimbabwe; after that was the Democratic Republic of Congo. Then it was Angola and Iran. When we talk about people going back to their countries of origin, these are the countries that we mean. If we say that we are supporters of the United Nations convention, we must look carefully at what we are doing with these families when they are not allowed to stay here. Article 9 says that, "““a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will””."
So let us go to Section 9, which I expect we will deal with on Thursday.
UK Borders Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Roberts of Llandudno
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 9 October 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on UK Borders Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
695 c220-1 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:21:43 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_415937
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_415937
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_415937