That is why, as it happens, I will not vote against this Bill, because although I have some misgivings, there is a legitimate concern that needs to be dealt with in relation to illegal boats. However, the simple fact is that that is not a reason for the blanket derogation, or the blanket removal of ECHR protections, that is proposed in a series of amendments. That is the difference. My hon. Friend and I are at one, but sometimes a mixture of politics and law arises in these matters. The point I am making is that, frankly, if any Government want to take the political risk of ignoring an interim measure, they can do so under our law as it stands. It happens that they effectively did so on prisoner voting, so they could do that now if they wanted to. I am not going to advise on that, because one has to be very wary not to come to views that may very often not be fact-specific when individual decisions are made.
Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Robert Neill
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 17 January 2024.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
743 c865 Session
2023-24Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-02-12 17:21:40 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-01-17/240117104000067
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-01-17/240117104000067
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-01-17/240117104000067