I am feeling slightly wounded. I did not say that I was ignoring the argument. I said that the noble Lord had put forward a number of cases and I suggested a meeting—it does not have to be in Liverpool; it can be in London—so that the methodology, the casework and the reason why the department arrived at certain decisions which it believed to be in the spirit of our policy could be discussed with him and whoever else wished to be involved. I shall take on board for consideration the points that he makes at such a meeting. I do not believe that that is ignoring the issue. It is recognising that there is a point that needs to be investigated. I also offered the assurance of a further discussion on Report, so I feel slightly wounded. I repeat that we are not ignoring the noble Lord’s argument; I am suggesting that it has to be taken on board and, in the light of investigations, we can look again at the problem that he has set out. If that is not sufficient, I apologise, but that is as far as I can go on this occasion. I hope that it will be sufficient to enable the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment without feeling that he is being totally ignored.
Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Brett
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 2 March 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
708 c605 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:43:21 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533147
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533147
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533147