My Lords, I am very grateful to everybody who has spoken, all of whom I think have deepened the arguments and reminded noble Lords what is at stake here. I am grateful to the Minister for spelling out the Government’s case. I suspect he did not manage to answer all the questions, so I would be very grateful if he could look through Hansard and write to everybody who spoke in answer to those questions.
8.15 pm
I am conscious that the Committee wishes to get going. The one thing I want to say is that the Minister says that we should be welcoming this, and that it is somehow an improvement. Yes, of course it is an improvement on the holding rooms, but what he has not answered is the really the kernel of the SLSC’s report. Why, in upgrading from a holding room, is it necessary to introduce this intermediate category that, for the difference of one day, removes many of the protection that are there for those held for five days? He has not answered that. That is why there is so much concern among all the organisations that know what is going on at Manston and are really worried about what this will mean. I hope that when he writes he will make clear when this actually starts being operative. He talked about the upgrading of Manston—that is great, he made it sound, if not exactly wonderful, certainly better that perhaps it is at present—but the fact is that this is a downgrading of the treatment of people who are kept for more than 24 hours. That is the point, and that point has not been met. However, I am conscious that the House wishes to proceed and therefore I withdraw my Motion.