§ Amendments made:
§
No. 49, in page 33, line 29 at end insert—
association" means an unincorporated body of persons;'
§
No. 50, in page 33, line 39 at end insert—
company" means a body corporate;'.—[Mr. Raison.]
§ 7 pm
§ Mr. Alexander W. LyonI beg to move amendment No. 88, in page 35, line 10, leave out from 'to' to end of line 13 and insert—
'being resident within the United Kingdom at any time after his conditions of residence have been removed by the Secretary of State. The burden of proving that the conditions were removed as a result of fraud, false representation or the deliberate concealment of any material fact shall lie upon the Secretary of State. Appeals against any such decision shall lie to the adjudicater under the Immigration Act 1971'.1126 In the last few debates we have extolled the virtues of the judges in relation to the review of ministerial decisions. In this debate I want to make it plain that the judges are people with clay feet.Over the last 10 years, the race relations issues that have most caused deteriorations in the assuredness of status of the ethnic minority groups have not emanated from this House.
Apart from the changes in the rules about fiancées, which may have had a wider effect, the issue I am raising has had more effect on race relations than anything we have done here or anything that Ministers have done. That action was taken by the judiciary. Because it was in relation to what we call illegal immigrants, the matter has been so overshadowed by emotion that no one has been able to think straight or seriously about it since the judges made their decisions.
I want to try to defuse the emotion to enable us to recognise the serious injustice that has been done, is being done and will continue to be done, unless we make a change. In 1962, any Commonwealth citizen was entitled to enter this country at will. No one could stop him. In 1962 the Conservative Government took the view that they had to introduce controls on Commonwealth citizens. Thus, all Commonwealth citizens became subject to immigration controls. However, because the decision was so controversial, the number of work permits issued was generous and no one paid much serious attention to illegal entrants other than seamen deserters.
The 1962 Act has made it plain that seamen who overstayed their leave were illegal entrants and could be removed. That was all, save and except one class of person, namely those who entered across the beaches or flew in in private aeroplanes and were in this country for up to a month. If they were caught within the first month they were treated as illegal entrants and could be removed in the same way as if they had presented themselves at an immigration desk. If they stayed more than a month they could not be removed. In the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1968 it was made an offence so to enter. That had not been an offence before. Therefore, if a person was caught within a month he was prosecuted. Because the limit of jurisdiction for a summary offence—which it was then made—is six months, seven months were allowed in which to take action against an illegal immigrant.
If a person managed to avoid the scrutiny of the immigration service for more than seven months he was entitled to stay here permanently. He could not be removed or prosecuted. He had achieved permanent residence. For that reason in 1971 it was decided that that situation should be changed. The House will agree that it should have been changed. It was wrong that illegal entry should have been treated so leniently until then. That was the law between 1962 and 1973, when the 1971 Act came into force.
The second schedule to the 1971 Act provided that in future anyone who was here illegally, however he had entered, would be able to be removed—not deported—in the same way as if he had come to the desk at London airport and had been refused entry. We understood and accepted that. Soon afterwards the courts interpreted that provision to mean that whenever or however a person had come up to 1968 he could be removed at any time in the future. There was a retrospective element in that. That was why the Labour Government decided that we would not apply the retrospective effects of the 1971 Act. That was 1127 the so-called amnesty which was not an amnesty, but it recognised that we had not intended to legislate retrospectively. We believed that people who entered between 1968 and 1973 should have the benefit of what we had intended and we said that only in the future would we apply the provision.
7.15 pm
That is water under the bridge. It was clear in the 1971 Act that no one had intended that a person should be treated as an illegal entrant if he came through immigration control and was allowed to enter by an immigration officer. No one considered that that was the effect of the Bill. Therefore for several years after the 1971 Act came into force the Home Office did not consider that it was entry by deception if someone came in at London airport and told lies—however material those lies were—and afterwards it was found that he had obtained entry by deception. However, the courts decided that that was entry by deception.
If the House had had that put to it during proceedings on the 1971 Act, it is possible that the House would have agreed that that was right. Where there was a deliberate attempt to deceive at London airport and an immigrant told lies to get in, the House may have agreed that it was right to change. However, we did not take that view in 1971 and that was not what we intended by the legislation. It came about only as a result of decisions in the courts.
If we had wanted to make that major change of policy the House should have made the change, not the courts. I might be prepared to go along with it if there were deliberate deception and lies were told material to the issue. The courts have said that, unlike contractual obligations such as the purchase of a car or a house, where an intention to deceive has to be proved by positive words or actions, entry to this country is like dealing with the insurance business. There one is obliged in good faith to tell everything that might be material to the person to whom one is making an application.
The burden is upon the applicant to prove that he has done everything in good faith and therefore one can be said to be deceiving even if one did not volunteer information or even if a certain question were not put. It is possible, too, that the person who carried out the deceit was not the applicant because he did not fill in the form or answer the questions but was doing it through an agency and consequently the deception was by the agency. Nevertheless, the applicant is liable, as a result of recent decisions.
The courts may not have gone to that extent, but the Immigration Appeal Tribunal recently decided that it does not matter whether the fact on which an immigration officer was deceived was material to his conclusions. It does not matter if the immigration officer were to say that he would not have taken the decision adversely even if he had known the fact. There is a tribunal decision to that effect. I do not think that the courts have gone as far as that. There is one sentence in the decision of Lord Wilberforce in the leading case of Zamir where it might be concluded that he did not intend that. He said:
It is clear on general principles of law that deception may arise from conduct, or from conduct accompanied by silence as to a material fact.1128 I do not know whether that is the law or the way that the Home Office and the immigration service are applying the law.Whatever is the interpretation of schedule 2 to the 1971 Act, I understood when I was a Minister that that could apply only to entry after 1968 because in 1968 entry by deception was made a criminal offence.
What I now find in some cases that I have seen—and in one which I have just referred to the Minister—is that the Home Office is applying the doctrine to cases where the persons concerned entered before 1968. I have very considerable doubts whether the Home Office is legally entitled to do that. I know the Minister's views about entry by deception and illegal entry, but if it was not illegal before 1968, it seems to be quite wrong that people should be removed now because they entered before 1968 in ways which are now regarded as amounting to deception.
The real gravamen of the charge is not that it applies to people in the future. The real gravamen is that years after people came in—from 1968 onwards—and settled here—and, in two cases before the courts, acquired citizenship here—they can have their citizenship status removed and their settled status removed, simply because someone has come along later and said "You deceived us because you did not tell us the full truth about your conditions when you came into the country".
That action could be taken in relation to a child who had made no kind of representation to the immigration service, when the representations were made by his parents. That child may have come to the country in 1969 or 1971 and may now be 12 or 10 years of age. He can suddenly be seized upon and told by the immigration service "You are not entitled to be in this country because you are not settled in the way in which we say you should be settled". Nothing has caused more difficulty than that in the black community.
When people were stopped in a self-service store in North London, the immigration officers had gone there on a tip-off that some of the staff were thought to be illegal entrants, without proper documentation. On that occasion, the immigration officers stopped a number of people who were walking around the store. Those people were not employed there. Nevertheless, they were asked to produce evidence to show that they had a proper immigration status and were settled here. In order to do that they needed their passports, but they were not allowed to go and get them. They were taken to the police station and put into a cell until somebody, on their behalf, could produce a passport that the Home Office was prepared to accept as indicating that they were settled. Even then, they were questioned about the way in which they had entered the country. That sort of action should not be conceivable in any circumstances.
§ Mr. Bob Cryer (Keighley)My hon. Friend has not made clear on what basis the immigration officers or police selected for questioning the people who were moving around the store and who were not employed there. What was the basis of selection?
§ Mr. LyonWe are still awaiting some public explanation, but I understand that there was no criterion for selection. The police had gone to the store because they had a tip-off that some people employed there were illegal entrants. But the police had no ground whatever for stopping the people who were shopping in the store. On 1129 that basis, the police could just as well have stopped people in the street or on the Underground. The police are likely to do that only to black people, and that is the fear that black people have.
The kinds of decisions that have been taken, in relation to people who thought they were settled here, have now alarmed many people whose status is not being questioned, but who feel that if it can happen to other people it can also happen to them. That is the dilemma facing the black community at the moment.
I am seeking, by the amendment, to give reassurance to a great many people who are not illegal entrants. The vast majority of the people in the black community are not illegal entrants, but they want to be sure that when the conditions have been removed from their passport they will be regarded as being settled here and will not in the future have their status called into question. If they are allowed to settle, in the sense that the Home Office has removed the conditions, that should, prime facie, be a barrier to any further investigation. If the Home Office then wishes to say "You are still an illegal entrant by the definition of the courts", it will be up to the Home Office to bring evidence to prove it. The case will then have to go to the adjudicator and to the tribunal to decide whether the allegation is correct.
At present, because such people are regarded as illegal entrants, they can be removed, under the powers given in schedule 2, just as if they entered at London airport on the very day on which they are challenged. That can be done, even though they may have been living here for years and may have a job and may have bought a house. Such people can be seized and put on an aeroplane on that very day. Usually, they are seized and put into prison and kept there for several weeks while the Home Office decides what to do about them. But then they can be put on an aeroplane and they have no right of appeal.
It is not like deportation. If the Minister were to come to the Dispatch Box and tell us that in those cases he would be prepared to act as if they were subject to deportation and not to removal, that would give them an immediate right of appeal. The Minister has the absolute power to do it if he wishes. He is not obliged to act under schedule 2; he can act under the deportation provisions.
I know that the Minister has issued a discussion document in which he is proposing possibly to allow a right of appeal in such cases, but he could do it at this minute by telling the civil servants that he would prefer to use the deportation provisions rather than the removal provisions.
In cases of this sort the burden of proof should lie on the Home Office. The Home Office should have to prove the case because it has removed the conditions in the first place. I accept that, if my amendment is passed, the Home Office will have to go into matters very much more carefully, and with a considerable degree of scrutiny, before it removes the conditions. But if it does so, the assurance can be given to anyone who has had the conditions removed that he has nothing further to worry about and is secure.
Even if it meant some delay, I would rather the Home Office did that. It would be better than continuing with the cat-and-mouse game of sending out the shock troops of the immigration service in order to land on some poor unsuspecting black person and tell him that, even though he has a passport with no conditions on it, he might still 1130 be sent back to his country of origin. That is not good for race relations, and the Minister knows as well as I do that nothing has caused more anxiety than this issue.
We have tried several times in Committee to get him to change his mind on this issue. I hope that, even at this late stage, he will be prepared to do so.
§ Mr. RaisonI am in a little difficulty because the hon. Gentleman has taken the opportunity of his amendment to complain—and I understand his case—about the way in which the courts have made entry by deception illegal entry. He has hardly spoken to his amendment and has, if I may say so, hardly bothered to relate his arguments to the question of nationality. I think that it would be proper if I tried to respond to the contents of the amendment.
§ Mr. LyonThe whole purpose of my amendment is to define settlement. Settlement is the very basis on which nationality is granted, and it is because it is defined in a different way in the Bill that I have sought to change it. I thought that the Minister might understand that.
§ Mr. RaisonThe hon. Gentleman has now prudently, at my invitation, related his remarks to the Bill.
§ Mr. RaisonI had assumed that the hon. Gentleman would be relating his remarks to the Bill. I believe that we can now agree that he has done so. I shall therefore say a little about the impact and consequences of his amendment. My remarks will have a bearing on his argument.
I cannot accept the amendment to the concept of "settled" in the Bill. The definition used is broadly the same as that used for many years in immigration control. A person who is free of conditions on his stay will be so regarded unless he is entitled to diplomatic immunity or is a member of the visiting forces. A person here in breach of the immigration laws is not regarded as settled. That is at the heart of what the hon. Gentleman was talking about.
The immediate effect of the amendment would be greatly to enlarge the ambit of the Bill. It would cover everyone who had ever been made free of conditions after his arrival in the United Kingdom regardless of whether he had left the country for years on end. I suppose that the hon. Gentleman argues that by so enlarging the ambit of the Bill he would make sure that people who at present might be liable to lose what they had thought to be their settled status, as a result of the discovery of deception, would be excluded. The hon. Gentleman did not argue whether that was his aim in the first part of his amendment. I can only assume that it was his objective.
A perhaps unintended restriction in the amendment would be to exclude from being settled those admitted unconditionally in the first place—that is to say, those whose conditions never had to be lifted. That is a technical point.
The second part of the amendment relates to the burden of proving that deception has taken place. In practice, a person who maintains that he or his parent is or was settled in circumstances in which the Home Office considered that deception had been practised so as to vitiate a lease could challenge the Home Office view in two ways. He could apply for judicial review and seek an order of mandamus, but such proceedings would not resolve the dispute of fact.
1131 That dispute could be resolved in the second way in proceedings for a declaratory judgment. A full trial would take place at which the issue would be decided on a balance of probabilities. The court would not look to the plaintiff to show that there had been no deception whether by fraud, false representation or concealment of a material fact. The court would look to the Home Office to show, on a balance of probabilities, that there had been. The amendment would have no practical purpose.
The final part of the amendment provides that someone whose conditions are found to have been removed as a result of fraud, false representation or concealment of any material fact shall have the right of appeal against the Home Secretary's decision to the adjudicator under the Immigration Act 1971. Such a person would normally have the right of appeal against the consequences that would flow in immigration terms from the decision on the removal of his conditions. He would normally be liable to be removed as an illegal entrant. Under section 16 of the 1971 Act, there would be a right of appeal against removal, exercisable, as the hon. Gentleman said, from abroad.
The Government published recently a consultation paper about the appeal procedures in the course of which we raised the question whether a right of appeal should be conferred to take place here before removal rather than from overseas. We indicated our sympathy in principle with some change in this respect and also with the possibility of introducing a right to bail. We pointed out that there are considerable practical problems, particularly relating to the question about how far back the illegal entry would have had to take place.
Alternatively, the person concerned would be liable to deportation under section 3(5)(a) of the 1971 Act and would have a right of appeal which can be exercised while he is in the United Kingdom under section 15 of the 1971 Act. It does not therefore seem necessary to give such a person a separate right of appeal against the decision on the removal of his conditions. It would seem particularly inappropriate to do so under the provisions of this Bill. After all, the matter is essentially one of immigration control and not nationality.
Although we do not believe that the children of illegal entrants should be able to stay here if their parents are removed—unless they are 10 years old under the provision that we introduced in Committee—it is not the invariable practice to remove illegal entrants who are detected. All the factors of the case are taken into account before a decision is reached. Where discretion to allow an illegal entrant to remain is exercised, leave to enter is normally granted for an indefinite period. The parents would thereupon be settled and any minor children would have an entitlement to be registered under clause 1(3). The same goes for overstayers whom we decide can remain for an indefinite period. If neither parent had been lawfully settled a child would not be entitled to citizenship. If, however, the parents are allowed to stay, an entitlement will come into being.
The effect is that someone could be discovered to be an illegal entrant. The child as a consequence, would not have citizenship because the parent was not settled. However, as soon as we had made the decision that the 1132 person could remain in the country, a new entitlement would come into being as the parents acquired settled status by virtue of being allowed to remain in this country.
In practical terms, within the context of the Bill and clause, my remarks meet part of what I take to be the hon. Gentleman's concern. The hon. Gentleman may argue that it is wrong that the child of the illegal entrant should be removed under all circumstances. He may argue that this is a consequence of our move away from jus soli. My remarks mean, however, that where parents are permitted to stay, even though illegal or overstayers, their children will be able to acquire a new entitlement that will be of importance to them.
I hope that my remarks meet the context of the amendment. I believe that the system we have put forward is reasonable. The hon. Gentleman's broader attack on what the courts have decided goes much wider than this case. I urge the House to reject the amendment.
§ Question put, That the amendment be made:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 227, Noes 279.
1135| Division No. 202] | [7.37 pm |
| AYES | |
| Abse, Leo | Douglas, Dick |
| Adams, Allen | Douglas-Mann, Bruce |
| Allaun, Frank | Dubs, Alfred |
| Anderson, Donald | Duffy, A. E. P. |
| Archer, Rt Hon Peter | Dunn, James A. |
| Ashley, Rt Hon Jack | Dunwoody, Hon Mrs G. |
| Ashton, Joe | Eadie, Alex |
| Bagier, Gordon A.T. | Eastham, Ken |
| Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) | Ellis, R. (NE D'bysh're) |
| Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (H'wd) | English, Michael |
| Beith, A. J. | Ennals, Rt Hon David |
| Bennett, Andrew(St'kp't N) | Evans, Ioan (Aberdare) |
| Bidwell, Sydney | Evans, John (Newton) |
| Booth, Rt Hon Albert | Ewing, Harry |
| Bottomley, Rt Hon A. (M'b'ro) | Faulds, Andrew |
| Bradley, Tom | Field, Frank |
| Bray, Dr Jeremy | Flannery, Martin |
| Brocklebank-Fowler, C. | Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) |
| Brown, Hugh D. (Provan) | Foot, Rt Hon Michael |
| Brown, R. C. (N'castle W) | Ford, Ben |
| Brown, Ron (E'burgh, Leith) | Forrester, John |
| Buchan, Norman | Foster, Derek |
| Callaghan, Rt Hon J. | Foulkes, George |
| Callaghan, Jim (Midd't'n & P) | Fraser, J. (Lamb'th, N'w'd) |
| Campbell, Ian | Freeson, Rt Hon Reginald |
| Campbell-Savours, Dale | Garrett, John (Norwich S) |
| Canavan, Dennis | Garrett, W. E. (Wallsend) |
| Cant, R. B. | George, Bruce |
| Carmichael, Neil | Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John |
| Carter-Jones, Lewis | Golding, John |
| Cartwright, John | Grant, George (Morpeth) |
| Cocks, Rt Hon M. (B'stol S) | Grimond, Rt Hon J. |
| Coleman, Donald | Hamilton, James (Bothwell) |
| Conlan, Bernard | Hamilton, W. W. (C'tral Fife) |
| Cook, Robin F. | Harrison, Rt Hon Walter |
| Cowans, Harry | Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy |
| Cox, T. (W'dsw'th, Toot'g) | Haynes, Frank |
| Craigen, J. M. | Heffer, Eric S. |
| Crawshaw, Richard | Hogg, N. (E Dunb't'nshire) |
| Crowther, J. S. | Holland, S. (L'b'th, Vauxh'll) |
| Cryer, Bob | Home Robertson, John |
| Cunliffe, Lawrence | Homewood, William |
| Cunningham, G. (Islington S) | Hooley, Frank |
| Dalyell, Tam | Horam, John |
| Davies, Ifor (Gower) | Howell, Rt Hon D. |
| Davis, Clinton (Hackney C) | Howells, Geraint |
| Davis, T. (B'ham, Stechf'd) | Huckfield, Les |
| Deakins, Eric | Hudson Davies, Gwilym E. |
| Dempsey, James | Hughes, Mark (Durham) |
| Dewar, Donald | Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N) |
| Dixon, Donald | Hughes, Roy (Newport) |
| Dobson, Frank | Janner, Hon Greville |
| Dormand, Jack | Jay, Rt Hon Douglas |
| Johnson, Walter (Derby S) | Roberts, Allan (Bootle) |
| Johnston, Russell (Inverness) | Roberts, Ernest (Hackney N) |
| Jones, Barry (East Flint) | Roberts, Gwilym (Cannock) |
| Jones, Dan (Burnley) | Robinson, G. (Coventry NW) |
| Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald | Rooker, J. W. |
| Kerr, Russell | Roper, John |
| Kilroy-Silk, Robert | Ross, Ernest (Dundee West) |
| Kinnock, Neil | Ross, Stephen (Isle of Wight) |
| Lambie, David | Rowlands, Ted |
| Leadbitter, Ted | Ryman, John |
| Leighton, Ronald | Sandelson, Neville |
| Lestor, Miss Joan | Sever, John |
| Lewis, Arthur (N'ham NW) | Sheldon, Rt Hon R. |
| Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) | Shore, Rt Hon Peter |
| Litherland, Robert | Short, Mrs Renée |
| Lofthouse, Geoffrey | Silkin, Rt Hon J. (Deptford) |
| Lyon, Alexander (York) | Silkin, Rt Hon S. C. (Dulwich) |
| Lyons, Edward (Bradf'd W) | Skinner, Dennis |
| Mabon, Rt Hon Dr J. Dickson | Smith, Cyril (Rochdale) |
| McDonald, Dr Oonagh | Smith, Rt Hon J. (N Lanark) |
| McElhone, Frank | Soley, Clive |
| McKay, Allen (Penistone) | Spearing, Nigel |
| McKelvey, William | Spriggs, Leslie |
| MacKenzie, Rt Hon Gregor | Stallard, A. W. |
| Maclennan, Robert | Steel, Rt Hon David |
| McNally, Thomas | Stewart, Rt Hon D. (W Isles) |
| McNamara, Kevin | Stoddart, David |
| McTaggart, Robert | Stott, Roger |
| Magee, Bryan | Straw, Jack |
| Marks, Kenneth | Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley |
| Marshall, D(G'gow S'ton) | Thomas, Dafydd (Merioneth) |
| Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole) | Thomas, Jeffrey (Abertillery) |
| Marshall, Jim (Leicester S) | Thomas, Dr R.(Carmarthen) |
| Martin, M (G'gow S'burn) | Thorne, Stan (Preston South) |
| Maxton, John | Tilley, John |
| Maynard, Miss Joan | Tinn, James |
| Meacher, Michael | Torney, Tom |
| Mellish, Rt Hon Robert | Varley, Rt Hon Eric G. |
| Mikardo, Ian | Wainwright, E. (Dearne V) |
| Millan, Rt Hon Bruce | Wainwright, R. (Colne V) |
| Mitchell, Austin (Grimsby) | Watkins, David |
| Mitchell, R. C. (Soton Itchen) | Weetch, Ken |
| Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe) | Wellbeloved, James |
| Morris, Rt Hon C. (O'shaw) | Welsh, Michael |
| Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon) | White, Frank R. |
| Morton, George | White, J. (G'gow Pollok) |
| Moyle, Rt Hon Roland | Whitlock, William |
| Newens, Stanley | Wigley, Dafydd |
| Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon | Willey, Rt Hon Frederick |
| O'Halloran, Michael | Williams, Rt Hon A. (S'sea W) |
| Orme, Rt Hon Stanley | Wilson, Gordon (Dundee E) |
| Owen, Rt Hon Dr David | Wilson, Rt Hon Sir H. (H'ton) |
| Palmer, Arthur | Wilson, William (C'try SE) |
| Parker, John | Winnick, David |
| Parry, Robert | Woodall, Alec |
| Pavitt, Laurie | Woolmer, Kenneth |
| Penhaligon, David | Wright, Sheila |
| Powell, Raymond (Ogmore) | Young, David (Bolton E) |
| Prescott, John | |
| Race, Reg | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Radice, Giles | Mr. Joseph Dean and Mr. Hugh McCartney. |
| Richardson, Jo | |
| Roberts, Albert (Normanton) |
| NOES | |
| Adley, Robert | Bevan, David Gilroy |
| Aitken, Jonathan | Biffen, Rt Hon John |
| Alexander, Richard | Biggs-Davison, John |
| Amery, Rt Hon Julian | Blackburn, John |
| Ancram, Michael | Blaker, Peter |
| Arnold, Tom | Bonsor, Sir Nicholas |
| Atkins, Robert(Preston N) | Boscawen, Hon Robert |
| Baker, Kenneth(St.M'bone) | Bottomley, Peter (W'wich W) |
| Baker, Nicholas (N Dorset) | Boyson, Dr Rhodes |
| Banks, Robert | Braine, Sir Bernard |
| Beaumont-Dark, Anthony | Bright, Graham |
| Bendall, Vivian | Brittan, Leon |
| Benyon, W. (Buckingham) | Brooke, Hon Peter |
| Best, Keith | Brotherton, Michael |
| Brown, Michael (Brigg & Sc'n) | Hicks, Robert |
| Browne, John (Winchester) | Hill, James |
| Bruce-Gardyne, John | Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm) |
| Bryan, Sir Paul | Holland, Philip (Carlton) |
| Buchanan-Smith, Alick | Hooson, Tom |
| Buck, Antony | Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey |
| Budgen, Nick | Howell, Rt Hon D. (G'ldf'd) |
| Burden, Sir Frederick | Hunt, David (Wirral) |
| Butcher, John | Hunt, John (Ravensbourne) |
| Butler, Hon Adam | Irving, Charles (Cheltenham) |
| Cadbury, Jocelyn | Jenkin, Rt Hon Patrick |
| Carlisle, John (Luton West) | Johnson Smith, Geoffrey |
| Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln) | Jopling, Rt Hon Michael |
| Carlisle, Rt Hon M. (R'c'n) | Kaberry, Sir Donald |
| Chapman, Sydney | Kershaw, Anthony |
| Churchill, W. S. | Kimball, Marcus |
| Clark, Hon A. (Plym'th, S'n) | King, Rt Hon Tom |
| Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S) | Kitson, Sir Timothy |
| Clegg, Sir Walter | Knox, David David Lamont, |
| Cockeram, Eric | Norman |
| Colvin, Michael | Lang, Ian |
| Cope, John | Langford-Holt, Sir John |
| Corrie, John | Latham, Michael |
| Costain, Sir Albert | Lawrence, Ivan |
| Cranborne, Viscount | Lawson, Rt Hon Nigel |
| Critchley, Julian | Lee, John |
| Crouch, David | Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark |
| Dean, Paul (North Somerset) | Lester, Jim (Beeston) |
| Dorrell, Stephen | Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) |
| Douglas-Hamilton, Lord J. | Lloyd, Ian (Havant & W'loo) |
| Dover, Denshore | Lloyd, Peter (Fareham) |
| du Cann, Rt Hon Edward | Loveridge, John |
| Dunn, Robert (Dartford) | Luce, Richard |
| Durant, Tony | Lyell, Nicholas |
| Dykes, Hugh | McCrindle, Robert |
| Eden, Rt Hon Sir John | MacGregor, John |
| Edwards, Rt Hon N. (P'broke) | MacKay, John (Argyll) |
| Eggar, Tim | Macmillan, Rt Hon M. |
| Elliott, Sir William | McNair-Wilson, M. (N'bury) |
| Emery, Peter | McNair-Wilson, P. (New F'st) |
| Eyre, Reginald | McQuarrie, Albert |
| Fairbairn, Nicholas | Madel, David |
| Fairgrieve, Russell | Major, John |
| Faith, Mrs Sheila | Marland, Paul |
| Farr, John | Marlow, Tony |
| Fell, Anthony | Marshall, Michael (Arundel) |
| Fenner, Mrs Peggy | Marten, Neil (Banbury) |
| Finsberg, Geoffrey | Mates, Michael |
| Fisher, Sir Nigel | Mather, Carol |
| Fletcher, A. (Ed'nb'gh N) | Maude, Rt Hon Sir Angus |
| Fletcher-Cooke, Sir Charles | Mawby, Ray |
| Forman, Nigel | Mawhinney, Dr Brian |
| Fowler, Rt Hon Norman | Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin |
| Fox, Marcus | Mayhew, Patrick |
| Fraser, Peter (South Angus) | Mellor, David |
| Fry, Peter | Meyer, Sir Anthony |
| Gardner, Edward (S Fylde) | Miller, Hal (B'grove) |
| Garel-Jones, Tristan | Mills, Iain (Meriden) |
| Glyn, Dr Alan | Mills, Peter (West Devon) |
| Goodhew, Victor | Miscampbell, Norman |
| Goodlad, Alastair | Moate, Roger |
| Gorst, John | Molyneaux, James |
| Gower, Sir Raymond | Monro, Hector |
| Gray, Hamish | Montgomery, Fergus |
| Griffiths, E. (B'y St. Edm'ds) | Moore, John |
| Griffiths, Peter Portsm'th N) | Morgan, Geraint |
| Grist, Ian | Morris, M. (N'hampton S) |
| Grylls, Michael | Morrison, Hon C. (Devizes) |
| Gummer, John Selwyn | Morrison, Hon P. (Chester) |
| Hamilton, Hon A. | Mudd, David |
| Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) | Murphy, Christopher |
| Hampson, Dr Keith | Myles, David |
| Hannam, John | Neale, Gerrard |
| Haselhurst, Alan | Needham, Richard |
| Hastings, Stephen | Nelson, Anthony |
| Havers, Rt Hon Sir Michael | Neubert, Michael |
| Hawkins, Paul | Nott, Rt Hon John |
| Hawksley, Warren | Onslow, Cranley |
| Hayhoe, Barney | Oppenheim, Rt Hon Mrs S. |
| Henderson, Barry | Page, John (Harrow, West) |
| Page, Rt Hon Sir G. (Crosby) | Stanbrook, Ivor |
| Page, Richard (SW Herts) | Stanley, John |
| Parkinson, Cecil | Steen, Anthony |
| Parris, Matthew | Stewart, Ian (Hitchin) |
| Patten, Christopher (Bath) | Stewart, A. (E Renfrewshire) |
| Patten, John (Oxford) | Stokes, John |
| Pattie, Geoffrey | Stradling Thomas, J. |
| Pawsey, James | Tapsell, Peter |
| Percival, Sir Ian | Taylor, Robert (Croydon NW) |
| Pink, R. Bonner | Taylor, Teddy (S'end E) |
| Pollock, Alexander | Temple-Morris, Peter |
| Porter, Barry | Thomas, Rt Hon Peter |
| Powell, Rt Hon J.E. (S Down) | Thompson, Donald |
| Prentice, Rt Hon Reg | Thorne, Neil (Ilford South) |
| Price, Sir David (Eastleigh) | Thornton, Malcolm |
| Prior, Rt Hon James | Townend, John (Bridlington) |
| Proctor, K. Harvey | Townsend, Cyril D, (B'heath) |
| Pym, Rt Hon Francis | Trippier, David |
| Raison, Timothy | Trotter, Neville |
| Rathbone, Tim | van Straubenzee, W. R. |
| Rees, Peter (Dover and Deal) | Vaughan, Dr Gerard |
| Rees-Davies, W. R. | Viggers, Peter |
| Renton, Tim | Waddington, David |
| Rhodes James, Robert | Wakeham, John |
| Ridley, Hon Nicholas | Waldegrave, Hon William |
| Ridsdale, Sir Julian | Walker, Rt Hon P. (W'cester) |
| Rifkind, Malcolm | Walker, B. (Perth) |
| Roberts, Wyn (Conway) | Walker-Smith, Rt Hon Sir D. |
| Rossi, Hugh | Wall, Patrick |
| Rost, Peter | Waller, Gary |
| Sainsbury, Hon Timothy | Ward, John |
| Scott, Nicholas | Warren, Kenneth |
| Shaw, Giles (Pudsey) | Wells, John (Maidstone) |
| Shaw, Michael (Scarborough) | Wells, Bowen |
| Shelton, William (Streatham) | Wheeler, John |
| Shepherd, Colin (Hereford) | Whitelaw, Rt Hon William |
| Shepherd, Richard | Whitney, Raymond |
| Shersby, Michael | Wickenden, Keith |
| Silvester, Fred | Williams, D.(Montgomery) |
| Sims, Roger | Winterton, Nicholas |
| Skeet, T. H. H. | Wolfson, Mark |
| Speed, Keith | Young, Sir George (Acton) |
| Speller, Tony | Younger, Rt Hon George |
| Spence, John | |
| Spicer, Michael (S Worcs) | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Sproat, Iain | Mr. Spencer Le Marchant and Mr. Anthony Berry. |
| Squire, Robin | |
| Stainton, Keith |
§ Question accordingly negatived.
§ Miss Jo Richardson (Barking)I beg to move amendment No. 90, in page 37, line 22, leave out subsection (9) and insert—
'(9) For the purposes of this Act an illegitimate child shall be treated as the legitimate child of his mother and his father.'.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this we may take the following amendments:
§ No. 54, in page 37, line 23, after 'of, insert 'father or'.
§ No. 55, in line 24, after 'a', insert 'man or'.
§ No. 56, in line 25, after `to', insert 'him or'.
§ No. 57, in line 25, leave out from 'her' to end of line 28.
§ Miss RichardsonI hesitate to draw attention to the amendments that are linked with my amendment, because of the rather uneasy company in which I find myself. I only hope that it will not be held against me.
I hope that the Minister of State will relent and agree to accept my amendment. I say that because on two occasions in Committee he said that if the Law Commission—to which I shall come later—brought out its report on illegitimacy later this summer the Government 1136 would look kindly on changing the law yet again to incorporate its proposals. I hope, therefore, that I can persuade him to do that now.
The Bill introduces a concept of nationality that passes through the mother as well through the father. That is a welcome concept, but it applies only to the children of people who are married, even if the parents are divorced. I find that discriminatory. It is discriminatory to the father, and it discriminates against the child. It is the child about whom we must concern ourselves in all our discussions on the Bill.
There are all sorts of circumstances that lead people not to get married. There are personal circumstances, and I do not wish to comment on them, because everyone has his own view, and we do not know the circumstances of individual couples. A couple may prefer not to get married, or may not be able to marry, because of a previous marriage by one of the partners. It will be a great pity if, by allowing the Bill to pass with the clause as it stands, we shall not give the right to the father to pass on nationality by descent. Other countries have that provision in their law, and they do not appear to have any difficulties with it. Such a provision is operated in New Zealand, France, Italy, the Netherlands and other countries. I do not understand why Britain cannot also operate that provision.
We have some distinguished opinion on which to draw. As those right hon. and hon. Members who follow these matters will know, the Law Commission is conducting a comprehensive examination of family policy. It produced a working paper on illegitimacy in March 1979, and it has since been receiving further evidence on the whole question of legitimacy and illegitimacy. I understand that a further report is to be published in the summer.
7.45 pm
During the past decade there have been a number of attempts, mainly through Private Members' Bills, to narrow the differences in the treatment of legitimate and illegitimate children—for example, inheritance, maintenance and so on.
The Law Commission's working paper, apart from proposing the abolition of the other forms of discrimination to which I referred, specifically considers the reform of our nationality law. I wish to read to the House a couple of short quotations from working paper No. 74, entitled "Family Law: Illegitimacy". It states:
The second out-dated aspect of the 1948 Law … is the discrimination, in the matter of the transmission of citizenship, between those born in wedlock (or subsequently legitimated) on the one hand, and illegitimate children on the other. Consistently with the general arguments contained in this paper, we think that steps should be taken to remove that discrimination; and it seems to us that the argument for doing so is considerably fortified by the fact that such a change in the law would simultaneously solve the sexual discrimination problem which would arise if an illegitimate child could inherit citizenship from his mother only.That is a pretty positive statement.The paper continues:
We cannot see any compelling argument for preserving, in this area of the law, what would look like a relic of the legitimacy/illegitimacy distinction after that distinction has been expunged from the law as a whole.The Minister will recollect that in Committee he said:The Law Commission is due to report on illegitimacy and the Government will take account of its views … Any agreed changes could be incorporated in any legislation stemming from the Law Commission's report as soon as the opportunity offers."—[Official Report, Standing Committee F, 24 February 1981; c. 187.]1137 Why cannot we do that now? The Minister and the House know that once we have passed a law it can be years—assuming that one Administration remains and another Administration, which I hope it will, does not sweep aside the whole thing—before amendments can be made. Many reasons are brought forward explaining why it is not convenient or workable to amend the law to make things better. The Minister's phraseas soon as the opportunity offerscould turn out to mean never. I want to ask him yet again to consider the matter and agree to the change now.The argument against passing citizenship by descent through the father in illegitimate cases is—and I accept that it can be difficult—the necessity to prove paternity, but that is not an argument against change. It is a problem for the individuals concerned. They, rather than the House, should look after that problem. The working paper is clear. I cannot believe that, having produced a working paper—albeit it has invited further evidence—the Law Commission is likely to change its mind. I believe that the words that I have quoted are too positive and that they will stick.
I hope that the House will agree that we are only wasting time if we leave clause 46 as it stands and wait for a long time to go through all the arguments again. In the meantime, great inequality will be caused to some children. It is difficult to quantify the position. The matter is causing great concern to organisations such as the National Council for One Parent Families, and Gingerbread. which have the interests of one-parent families at heart. It would be a good and generous gesture if the Government would agree to give in. I hope that the Minister will take into account what I have said.
§ Mr. RaisonThe House respects the seriousness and the determination with which the hon. Member for Barking (Miss Richardson) has approached the problem—at some stages in an improbable alliance with my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton, North (Mr. Marlow). We understand and sympathise with the purpose of the amendment.
As I explained in Committee on several occasions, we cannot at present allow an illegitimate child to derive citizenship from his or her father, in the same way as any other child can. I say that not as a matter of principle, but because of the uncertainties about the identity of the father. As the hon. Lady said, the Law Commission is considering the whole problem of recognising paternity. When it reports we shall be glad to reconsider the position of illegitimate children in relation to their fathers. If an acceptable solution can be found, the matter can be dealt with when any legislation recommended by the Law Commission is enacted.
We did not say that we would instantly implement the Law Commission's report. We said that we would consider it sympathetically. One crucial feature will be the extent to which the Law Commission's proposals provide for a procedure that satisfactorily identifies the father. We must get it right. Almost certainly, the law on nationality will be changed if that is feasible at the same time as the law on illegitimacy is changed.
Even in its present form the Bill substantially improves on the status of the illegitimate child under our citizenship laws. At present, an illegitimate child born abroad—for instance, to a woman who is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies—does not acquire his or her 1138 mother's citizenship unless the child would otherwise be stateless. However, under the Bill an illegitimate child will be able to derive citizenship from his or her mother in exactly the same way as any other child. I hope that that will show the House that we are very much aware of the problems of the illegitimate child, and that we are doing our best to meet them. I also hope that in the light of that explanation the hon. Lady will feel able to withdraw her amendment. If she does so, I assure her that we shall always be prepared to listen when she presses her case in future. I can well see that the day will come when, if we find the right answer, it will be possible to incorporate such a change in legislation.
§ Question put, That the amendment be made:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 231, Noes 281.
1141| Division No. 203] | [8 pm |
| AYES | |
| Abse, Leo | Dunwoody, Hon Mrs G. |
| Adams, Allen | Eadie, Alex |
| Allaun, Frank | Eastham, Ken |
| Anderson, Donald | Ellis, R. (NE D'bysh're) |
| Archer, Rt Hon Peter | English, Michael |
| Ashley, Rt Hon Jack | Ennals, Rt Hon David |
| Ashton, Joe | Evans, Ioan (Aberdare) |
| Bagier, Gordon A.T. | Evans, John (Newton) |
| Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) | Ewing, Harry |
| Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (H'wd) | Faulds, Andrew |
| Beith, A. J. | Field, Frank |
| Bennett, Andrew(St'kp't N) | Flannery, Martin |
| Bidwell, Sydney | Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) |
| Booth, Rt Hon Albert | Foot, Rt Hon Michael |
| Bottomley, Rt Hon A. (M'b'ro) | Ford, Ben |
| Bradley, Tom | Forrester, John |
| Bray, Dr Jeremy | Foster, Derek |
| Brocklebank-Fowler, C. | Foulkes, George |
| Brown, Hugh D. (Provan) | Fraser, J. (Lamb'th, N'w'd) |
| Brown, R. C. (N'castle W) | Freeson, Rt Hon Reginald |
| Brown, Ron (E'burgh, Leith) | Garrett, John (Norwich S) |
| Buchan, Norman | Garrett, W. E. (Wallsend) |
| Callaghan, Rt Hon J. | George, Bruce |
| Callaghan, Jim (Midd't'n & P) | Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John |
| Campbell, Ian | Ginsburg, David |
| Campbell-Savours, Dale | Golding, John |
| Canavan, Dennis | Grant, George (Morpeth) |
| Cant, R. B. | Grant, John (Islington C) |
| Carmichael, Neil | Grimond, Rt Hon J. |
| Carter-Jones, Lewis | Hamilton, James (Bothwell) |
| Cartwright, John | Hamilton, W. W. (C'tral Fife) |
| Cocks, Rt Hon M. (B'stol S) | Harrison, Rt Hon Walter |
| Coleman, Donald | Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy |
| Conlan, Bernard | Heffer, Eric S. |
| Cook, Robin F. | Hogg, N. (E Dunb't'nshire) |
| Cowans, Harry | Holland, S. (L'b'th, Vauxh'll) |
| Cox, T. (W'dsw'th, Toot'g) | Home Robertson, John |
| Craigen, J. M. | Homewood, William |
| Crawshaw, Richard | Hooley, Frank |
| Crowther, J. S. | Horam, John |
| Cryer, Bob | Howell, Rt Hon D. |
| Cunliffe, Lawrence | Howells, Geraint |
| Cunningham, G. (Islington S) | Huckfield, Les |
| Dalyell, Tam | Hudson Davies, Gwilym E. |
| Davies, Ifor (Gower) | Hughes, Mark (Durham) |
| Davis, Clinton (Hackney C) | Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N) |
| Davis, T. (B'ham, Stechf'd) | Hughes, Roy (Newport) |
| Deakins, Eric | Janner, Hon Greville |
| Dean, Joseph (Leeds West) | Jay, Rt Hon Douglas |
| Dempsey, James | Johnson, Walter (Derby S) |
| Dewar, Donald | Johnston, Russell (Inverness) |
| Dixon, Donald | Jones, Barry (East Flint) |
| Dobson, Frank | Jones, Dan (Burnley) |
| Dormand, Jack | Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald |
| Douglas, Dick | Kerr, Russell |
| Douglas-Mann, Bruce | Kilroy-Silk, Robert |
| Dubs, Alfred | Kinnock, Neil |
| Duffy, A. E. P. | Lambie, David |
| Dunn, James A. | Leadbitter, Ted |
| Leighton, Ronald | Rooker, J. W. |
| Lestor, Miss Joan | Roper, John |
| Lewis, Arthur (N'ham NW) | Ross, Ernest (Dundee West) |
| Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) | Ross, Stephen (Isle of Wight) |
| Litherland, Robert | Rowlands, Ted |
| Lofthouse, Geoffrey | Ryman, John |
| Lyon, Alexander (York) | Sandelson, Neville |
| Lyons, Edward (Bradf'd W) | Sever, John |
| Mabon, Rt Hon Dr J. Dickson | Sheerman, Barry |
| McCartney, Hugh | Sheldon, Rt Hon R. |
| McDonald, Dr Oonagh | Shore, Rt Hon Peter |
| McElhone, Frank | Short, Mrs Renée |
| McKay, Allen (Penistone) | Silkin, Rt Hon J. (Deptford) |
| McKelvey, William | Silkin, Rt Hon S. C. (Dulwich) |
| MacKenzie, Rt Hon Gregor | Skinner, Dennis |
| Maclennan, Robert | Smith, Cyril (Rochdale) |
| McNally, Thomas | Smith, Rt Hon J. (N Lanark) |
| McNamara, Kevin | Soley, Clive |
| McTaggart, Robert | Spearing, Nigel |
| Magee, Bryan | Spriggs, Leslie |
| Marks, Kenneth | Stallard, A. W. |
| Marlow, Tony | Steel, Rt Hon David |
| Marshall, D(G'gow S'ton) | Stewart, Rt Hon D. (W Isles) |
| Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole) | Stoddart, David |
| Marshall, Jim (Leicester S) | Stott, Roger |
| Martin, M (G'gow S'burn) | Straw, Jack |
| Maxton, John | Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley |
| Maynard, Miss Joan | Thomas, Dafydd (Merioneth) |
| Meacher, Michael | Thomas, Jeffrey (Abertillery) |
| Mellish, Rt Hon Robert | Thomas, Dr H. (Carmarthen) |
| Mikardo, Ian | Thorne, Stan (Preston South) |
| Millan, Rt Hon Bruce | Tilley, John |
| Mitchell, Austin (Grimsby) | Tinn, James |
| Mitchell, R. C. (Soton Itchen) | Torney, Tom |
| Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe) | Varley, Rt Hon Eric G. |
| Morris, Rt Hon C. (O'shaw) | Wainwright, E. (Dearne V) |
| Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon) | Wainwright, R. (Colne V) |
| Morton, George | Watkins, David |
| Moyle, Rt Hon Roland | Weetch, Ken |
| Newens, Stanley | Wellbeloved, James |
| Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon | Welsh, Michael |
| O'Halloran, Michael | White, J. (G'gow Pollok) |
| Orme, Rt Hon Stanley | Whitlock, William |
| Owen, Rt Hon Dr David | Wigley, Dafydd |
| Palmer, Arthur | Willey, Rt Hon Frederick |
| Parker, John | Williams, Rt Hon A. (S'sea W) |
| Parry, Robert | Wilson, Gordon (Dundee E) |
| Pavitt, Laurie | Wilson, Rt Hon Sir H. (H'ton) |
| Penhaligon, David | Wilson, William (C'try SE) |
| Powell, Raymond (Ogmore) | Winnick, David |
| Prescott, John | Woodall, Alec |
| Race, Reg | Woolmer, Kenneth |
| Radice, Giles | Wright, Sheila |
| Richardson, Jo | Young, David (Bolton E) |
| Roberts, Albert (Normanton) | |
| Roberts, Allan (Bootle) | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Roberts, Ernest (Hackney N) | Mr. Frank R. White and Mr. Frank Haines. |
| Roberts, Gwilym (Cannock) | |
| Robinson, G. (Coventry NW) |
| NOES | |
| Aitken, Jonathan | Boscawen, Hon Robert |
| Alexander, Richard | Bottomley, Peter (W'wich W) |
| Amery, Rt Hon Julian | Boyson, Dr Rhodes |
| Ancram, Michael | Braine, Sir Bernard |
| Arnold, Tom | Bright, Graham |
| Atkins, Robert(Preston N) | Brittan, Leon |
| Baker, Kenneth(St.M'bone) | Brooke, Hon Peter |
| Baker, Nicholas (N Dorset) | Brotherton, Michael |
| Banks, Robert | Brown, Michael(Brigg & Sc'n) |
| Beaumont-Dark, Anthony | Browne, John (Winchester) |
| Bendall, Vivian | Bruce-Gardyne, John |
| Benyon, W. (Buckingham) | Bryan, Sir Paul |
| Best, Keith | Buchanan-Smith, Alick |
| Bevan, David Gilroy | Buck, Antony |
| Biffen, Rt Hon John | Budgen, Nick |
| Biggs-Davison, John | Burden, Sir Frederick |
| Blackburn, John | Butcher, John |
| Blaker, Peter | Butler, Hon Adam |
| Bonsor, Sir Nicholas | Cadbury, Jocelyn |
| Carlisle, John (Luton West) | Hunt, David (Wirral) |
| Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln) | Hunt, John (Ravensbourne) |
| Carlisle, Rt Hon M. (R'c'n) | Irving, Charles (Cheltenham) |
| Chapman, Sydney | Jenkin, Rt Hon Patrick |
| Churchill, W. S. | Johnson Smith, Geoffrey |
| Clark, Hon A. (Plym'th, S'n) | Jopling, Rt Hon Michael |
| Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S) | Kaberry, Sir Donald |
| Clegg, Sir Walter | Kershaw, Anthony |
| Cockeram, Eric | Kimball, Marcus |
| Colvin, Michael | King, Rt Hon Tom |
| Cope, John | Kitson, Sir Timothy |
| Corrie, John | Knox, David |
| Costain, Sir Albert | Lamont, Norman |
| Cranborne, Viscount | Lang, Ian |
| Critchley, Julian | Langford-Holt, Sir John |
| Crouch, David | Latham, Michael |
| Dean, Paul (North Somerset) | Lawrence, Ivan |
| Dickens, Geoffrey | Lawson, Rt Hon Nigel |
| Dorrell, Stephen | Lee, John |
| Douglas-Hamilton, Lord J. | Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark |
| Dover, Denshore | Lester, Jim (Beeston) |
| du Cann, Rt Hon Edward | Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) |
| Dunn, Robert (Dartford) | Lloyd, Ian (Havant & W'loo) |
| Durant, Tony | Lloyd, Peter (Fareham) |
| Dykes, Hugh | Loveridge, John |
| Eden, Rt Hon Sir John | Luce, Richard |
| Edwards, Rt Hon N. (P'broke) | Lyell, Nicholas |
| Eggar, Tim | McCrindle, Robert |
| Elliott, Sir William | MacGregor, John |
| Emery, Peter | MacKay, John (Argyll) |
| Eyre, Reginald | Macmillan, Rt Hon M. |
| Fairbairn, Nicholas | McNair-Wilson, M. (N'bury) |
| Fairgrieve, Russell | McNair-Wilson, P. (New F'st) |
| Faith, Mrs Sheila | McQuarrie, Albert |
| Farr, John | Madel, David |
| Fell, Anthony | Major, John |
| Fenner, Mrs Peggy | Marland, Paul |
| Finsberg, Geoffrey | Marshall, Michael (Arundel) |
| Fisher, Sir Nigel | Marten, Neil (Banbury) |
| Fletcher, A. (Ed'nb'gh N) | Mates, Michael |
| Fletcher-Cooke, Sir Charles | Mather, Carol |
| Forman, Nigel | Maude, Rt Hon Sir Angus |
| Fowler, Rt Hon Norman | Mawby, Ray |
| Fox, Marcus | Mawhinney, Dr Brian |
| Fraser, Peter (South Angus) | Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin |
| Fry, Peter | Mayhew, Patrick |
| Gardner, Edward (S Fylde) | Mellor, David |
| Garel-Jones, Tristan | Meyer, Sir Anthony |
| Glyn, Dr Alan | Miller, Hal (B'grove) |
| Goodhew, Victor | Mills, Iain (Meriden) |
| Goodlad, Alastair | Mills, Peter (West Devon) |
| Gorst, John | Miscampbell, Norman |
| Gower, Sir Raymond | Moate, Roger |
| Gray, Hamish | Molyneaux, James |
| Griffiths, E. (B'y St. Edm'ds) | Monro, Hector |
| Griffiths, Peter Portsm'th N) | Montgomery, Fergus |
| Grist, Ian | Moore, John |
| Grylls, Michael | Morgan, Geraint |
| Gummer, John Selwyn | Morris, M. (N'hampton S) |
| Hamilton, Hon A. | Morrison, Hon C. (Devizes) |
| Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) | Morrison, Hon P. (Chester) |
| Hampson, Dr Keith | Mudd, David |
| Hannam, John | Murphy, Christopher |
| Haselhurst, Alan | Myles, David |
| Hastings, Stephen | Neale, Gerrard |
| Havers, Rt Hon Sir Michael | Needham, Richard |
| Hawkins, Paul | Nelson, Anthony |
| Hawksley, Warren | Neubert, Michael |
| Hayhoe, Barney | Newton, Tony |
| Henderson, Barry | Nott, Rt Hon John |
| Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael | Onslow, Cranley |
| Hicks, Robert | Oppenheim, Rt Hon Mrs S. |
| Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L | Page, John (Harrow, West) |
| Hill, James | Page, Rt Hon Sir G. (Crosby) |
| Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm) | Page, Richard (SW Herts) |
| Holland, Philip (Carlton) | Parkinson, Cecil |
| Hooson, Tom | Parris, Matthew |
| Hordern, Peter | Patten, Christopher (Bath) |
| Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey | Patten, John (Oxford) |
| Howell, Rt Hon D. (G'ldf'd) | Pattie, Geoffrey |
| Pawsey, James | Stewart, A. (E Renfrewshire) |
| Percival, Sir Ian | Stokes, John |
| Pink, R. Bonner | Stradling Thomas, J. |
| Pollock, Alexander | Tapsell, Peter |
| Porter, Barry | Taylor, Robert (Croydon NW) |
| Powell, Rt Hon J.E. (S Down) | Taylor, Teddy (S'end E) |
| Prentice, Rt Hon Reg | Temple-Morris, Peter |
| Price, Sir David (Eastleigh) | Thomas, Rt Hon Peter |
| Prior, Rt Hon James | Thompson, Donald |
| Proctor, K. Harvey | Thorne, Neil (Ilford South) |
| Pym, Rt Hon Francis | Thornton, Malcolm |
| Raison, Timothy | Townend, John (Bridlington) |
| Rathbone, Tim | Townsend, Cyril D, (B'heath) |
| Rees, Peter (Dover and Deal) | Trippier, David |
| Ronton, Tim | Trotter, Neville |
| Rhodes James, Robert | van Straubenzee, W. R. |
| Ridley, Hon Nicholas | Vaughan, Dr Gerard |
| Ridsdale, Sir Julian | Viggers, Peter |
| Rifkind, Malcolm | Waddington, David |
| Roberts, Wyn (Conway) | Wakeham, John |
| Rossi, Hugh | Waldegrave, Hon William |
| Rost, Peter | Walker, Rt Hon P. (W'cester) |
| Sainsbury, Hon Timothy | Walker, B. (Perth) |
| Scott, Nicholas | Walker-Smith, Rt Hon Sir D. |
| Shaw, Giles (Pudsey) | Wall, Patrick |
| Shaw, Michael (Scarborough) | Waller, Gary |
| Shelton, William (Streatham) | Ward, John |
| Shepherd, Colin (Hereford) | Warren, Kenneth |
| Shepherd, Richard | Wells, John (Maidstone) |
| Shersby, Michael | Wells, Bowen |
| Silvester, Fred | Wheeler, John |
| Sims, Roger | Whitelaw, Rt Hon William |
| Skeet, T. H. H. | Whitney, Raymond |
| Speed, Keith | Wickenden, Keith |
| Speller, Tony | Williams, D,(Montgomery) |
| Spence, John | Winterton, Nicholas |
| Spicer, Michael (S Worcs) | Wolfson, Mark |
| Sproat, Iain | Young, Sir George (Acton) |
| Squire, Robin | Younger, Rt Hon George |
| Stainton, Keith | |
| Stanbrook, Ivor | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Stanley, John | Mr. Spencer Le Marchant and Mr. Anthony Berry |
| Steen, Anthony | |
| Stewart, Ian (Hitchin) |
§ Question accordingly negatived.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerI am now required by the terms of the resolution that the House passed on Tuesday to put the Question on any amendments up to the end of clause 49 moved by a member of the Government.