§ Mr. PowellI beg to move Amendment No. 39, in page 5, line 35, leave out paragraph (a).
§ The Deputy Chairman (Mr. Oscar Murton)With this we are to discuss the following amendments:
§ No. 40, in page 5. line 39, leave out paragraph (b).
898§ No. 41, in page 5, line 41, leave out paragraph (c).
§ Mr. PowellThe object of the first two of these three amendments, and I imagine of the third as well, is to obtain an understanding of how it is intended that these provisions should work. We are dealing with exclusion orders made in relation to persons who are not citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies. Some hon. Members present at any rate will recall from an earlier debate that such exclusion orders must be made for exclusion from the United Kingdom as a whole and that in applying to them the provisions of Clause 3 certain modifications are made. In particular, they are made to Clause 3(2), under which the Secretary of State is to have regard to what might be called the affinities, and Clause 3(4), which exempts a class of persons from the mischief of exclusion orders altogether.
Subsection (4), to which the amendments relate, provides for the manner in which the procedure for exclusion orders set out in Clause 3 is in detail to be modified when being applied to the exclusion orders from the United Kingdom of persons who are not citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies.
My attention and that of my hon. Friends was attracted by paragraph (a) which makes it possible, for instance, to prescribe different periods of minimum residence in order to be clear of exclusion orders in regard to residence in Great Britain and in regard to residence in Northern Ireland.
It is not clear on the face of it why this should be so. Why should a person be exempt from exclusion from the United Kingdom when he has resided for, let us say, 15 years in Northern Ireland, whereas he would be exempt from exclusion from Great Britain only if he had resided there for 20 years? That appears to be a possible meaning of the words in paragraph 899 (a). As regards presence in Great Britain or Northern Ireland, the same consideration seems to apply.
I therefore hope that we can have an explanation of why that sort of refinement is to be necessary in applying the general provisions to the exclusion of persons who are not citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies.
In paragraph (b) we find that in the course of applying the order of which I am speaking, "subsection (2) above" can be excluded altogether. Subsection (2) says, amongst other things, that instead of Great Britain as the area to which affinity must be considered, the United Kingdom must be substituted. If that is so in principle, why should there be any cases where it is only the affinities to a territory outside Great Britain and not outside the United Kingdom which would come into question in the context of these exclusion orders?
I hope that I have said enough to show that at least one Member finds it not easy to understand the full purport of these two paragraphs. I hope that we can have some help from the Government.
§ 6.15 p.m.
§ Mr. LaneOur amendment No. 41 is a probing amendment designed to secure an explanation how the Government visualise the machinery working in practice. Perhaps it may be made clear at the same time, since we are dealing with those who are not citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies, to what extent and in which ways this is going beyond the procedure which already exists for the Immigration Act 1971.
§ Mr. Roy JenkinsI had better begin by confessing that I find Clause 6 the most difficult to understand. Some of the other clauses are fairly difficult to understand, but this is peculiarly difficult. It is a peg on which the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland can hang an order to exclude people who are not citizens from Northern Ireland as well as from Great Britain.
I am assured, and I say this in fairness to the draftsmen and myself, that the drafting would have been easier and simpler had it been possible to construct the Bill afresh from the start, and com- 900 plications arise from the fact that we could not.
The right hon. Member for Down, South (Mr. Powell) asked whether under subsection (4)(a) we were proposing to provide for different periods of ordinary residence for Great Britain and for the United Kingdom. I can give him the assurance that we are not. Subsection (4)(a) is intended only to enable the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to adapt references to Great Britain to Northern Ireland. It is a very complicated piece of drafting and it is not faulty, but things would have been easier had we been able to start afresh without having to graft the new provisions on.
Any order laid by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland will be brought before the House in due course. The provision will enable a second "ring fence" to be erected around the United Kingdom in much the same way as it is around Great Britain.
§ Mr. PowellI am obliged for the explanation. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.