Proceeding contribution from Lord Lemos (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 5 November 2025. It occurred during Debate on bill on Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill.
Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill
I thank the noble Lord, Lord Harper, for reminding me about that specific point. As a former Immigration Minister, he is much more familiar with the data than I am, or at least what it was when he was there. I take very seriously the general point about data for risk assessment, and I understand what the noble Lord is driving at. I cannot give him that information today, but I will be very happy to write to him. I know that the noble Lord, Lord Jackson of Peterborough, might raise a wry smile at yet another letter from a Home Office Minister, but on the specific question about risk assessment and data that is collected for it—which is different from the specifics of some of the data that I have already discussed—I will be very happy to write to the noble Lord.
Amendment 35C from the noble Baroness, Lady Lawlor, seeks to widen the scope of existing inadmissibility powers so that any claim made by a holder of a student visa lodged more than two days after they arrive in the UK must be declared inadmissible, unless there is evidence that political circumstances have changed in the person’s home country such as to endanger their life or liberty. I acknowledge that the noble Baroness has recognised some of the questions that were raised, not just on our side but from her own Front Bench, in the way that the amendment is now presented to the House, and that there has been a change there. But I am afraid that the other objections I raised in Committee, which the noble Baroness set out, still remain. Let me try to explain a bit better.
The likely consequence of the amendment—I think the noble Lord, Lord German, referred to this—would still be to refuse to admit claims to the UK’s asylum system, but without an obvious way in which to return those individuals who make them without potentially contravening the key principle of non-refoulement in the refugee convention. The noble Lord, Lord German, referred to that. This would still, I am afraid, leave any affected individuals in a state of limbo with no certainty, and—this is the point that makes for the difficulty—we would have no certainty as to whether they qualified for refugee status. It is not just a question of where they would be returned to and whether that would be safe; it is about whether they would be able to claim refugee status at all. The Government’s view is that sorting that out would potentially prove extremely cost ineffective, so I am afraid the view of the Government is that it just would not work in practice.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 849 cc1944-5
- Session
- 2024-26
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Children Disclosure of information Biometrics Appeals Asylum Detainees Deportation Employment Housing Finance Families European Convention on Human Rights Immigration controls Undocumented migrants Foreign nationals EU nationals Domestic service Offenders Overseas students Refugees Visas Victims Ukraine Migrant workers Slavery English Channel British national (overseas) First-tier Tribunal Immigration bail People smuggling
- Legislation
- Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill 2024-26
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on hansard.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-11-14 14:47:14 +0000
- URI
- http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2025-11-05/25110539000035
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2025-11-05/25110539000035
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2025-11-05/25110539000035