logo
Plan to strip citizenship from ‘extremists' during appeals clears Commons

Plan to strip citizenship from ‘extremists' during appeals clears Commons

The Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill was passed at third reading by MPs, and will now go to the House of Lords for further scrutiny.
Under the legislation, alleged extremists who lose their British citizenship but win an appeal against the decision will not have it reinstated before the Home Office has exhausted all avenues for appeal.
Certain communities are often wary of legislation that touches on citizenship, because it almost always - whether it is the stated intention or not - disproportionately impacts them Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy
During the Bill's committee stage, Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy said black, Asian and ethnic minority communities will be 'alarmed' by the proposals.
Home Office minister Dan Jarvis said the legislation has 'nothing to do with somebody's place of birth, but everything to do with their behaviour'.
Speaking in the Commons on Monday, Conservative former minister Kit Malthouse said: 'My trouble with this legislation is that it puts a question mark over certain citizens.
'When it's used with increasing frequency, it does put a question mark over people's status as a citizen of the United Kingdom, and that, I think, is something that ought to be of concern.'
Intervening, Mr Jarvis said: 'He's making his points in a very considered way, but he is levelling quite serious charges against the Government.
'Can I say to him, in absolute good faith, that our intentions here have nothing to do with somebody's place of birth, but everything to do with their behaviour.'
Mr Malthouse said: 'I'm not concerned about it necessarily falling into his hands as a power, but we just don't know who is going to be in his place in the future, and we're never quite sure how these powers might develop.'
He continued: 'What I'm trying to do with my amendment is to explain to him that this is an area of law where I would urge him to tread carefully, where I would urge him to think about the compromises that he's creating against our basic freedoms that we need to maintain.'
Conservative former minister Kit Malthouse (Geoff Pugh/PA)
The MP for North West Hampshire had tabled an amendment which would allow a person to retain their citizenship during an appeals process if they face 'a real and substantial threat of serious harm' as a result of the order.
It would also have required a judge to suspend the removal of citizenship if the person's ability to mount an effective defence at a subsequent appeal was impacted, or the duration of the appeal process was excessive because of an act or omission by a public authority.
Ms Ribeiro-Addy spoke in support of the amendment, she said: 'Certain communities are often wary of legislation that touches on citizenship, because it almost always – whether it is the stated intention or not – disproportionately impacts them.
'And to put this clearly to the minister, I'm talking about people of black, Asian and minority ethnic communities, those who have parents who may have been born elsewhere, or grandparents, for that matter, they will be particularly alarmed by this legislation.
'Those of us who have entitlement to citizenship from other countries for no other reason than where our parents may have been born, or where our grandparents may have been born, or simply because of our ethnic origin, we know that we are at higher risk of having our British citizenship revoked.
'And when such legislation is passed, it creates two tiers of citizenship. It creates second-class citizens.'
Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Jonathan Brady/PA)
The MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill added: 'I would like to ask why the minister has not seen it fit to conduct an equality impact assessment on this Bill? I know it's an incredibly narrow scope, but these potential implications are vastly potentially impact-limited to specific communities.'
At the conclusion of the committee stage, Mr Jarvis said: 'The power to deprive a person of British citizenship does not target ethnic minorities or people of particular faiths, it is used sparingly where a naturalised person has acquired citizenship fraudulently, or where it is conducive to the public good.
'Deprivation on conducive grounds is used against those who pose a serious threat to the UK, or whose conduct involves high harm. It is solely a person's behaviour which determines if they should be deprived of British citizenship, not their ethnicity or faith.'
'The impact on equalities has been assessed at all stages of this legislation,' he added.
The Bill was passed on the nod.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Labour's votes for teenagers ruse will backfire
Labour's votes for teenagers ruse will backfire

Spectator

time15 minutes ago

  • Spectator

Labour's votes for teenagers ruse will backfire

Our economy is on the rocks, legal and illegal immigration remains out of control, public services are creaking, and a looming debt crisis is on the horizon. But fear not. Labour has announced its big idea for turning around Britain's fortunes: votes for children. Around 1.5 million 16 and 17-year-olds will be able to vote at the next general election, under government plans to lower the voting age. Keir Starmer says older teenagers are 'old enough to go out to work, they are old enough to pay taxes' and, so, they are old enough to vote. Democracy Minister Rushanara Ali has pretentiously described the change as 'seismic' – as if this is somehow comparable with the extension of the franchise to women or the working class. Let's be clear: Labour is not striking a blow for electoral equality. They are engaging in student gesture politics. Votes for 16-year-olds is the kind of policy that wins a cheap round of applause on university campuses, but for which there is little public demand and even less intellectual reasoning. Labour has never been able to make up its mind about when adulthood truly begins. In 2003, the Licensing Act made it illegal to sell alcohol to under-18s at licensed premises. In 2005, the Gambling Act set the minimum age for gambling at 18. You're not even allowed to play the National Lottery until your 18th birthday. In 2008, the school leaving age was effectively raised to 18. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which the UK is a signatory, says no person under the age of 18 should participate in hostilities. And, in 2022, the age at which someone can marry was increased from 16 to 18. So if 16 is too young to fight, marry, drink, gamble or leave school – why is it somehow old enough to vote? The most nauseating response is that teenagers are increasingly affected by government decisions, whether about education, climate change or online regulation. But as GB News's Tom Harwood brilliantly demonstrated with his satirical 'Votes at 12' campaign a few years ago: the same argument can be made about children of almost any age. If you accept the need for the line to be drawn somewhere when it comes to voting, surely it makes sense to draw it at the point of adulthood? There is a reasonable case that adulthood begins at 16, but if Labour truly believes that, then it should first begin by undoing the prohibitive legislation of recent decades. The Reform party's appointment of teenage councillors to run local services was met with fierce criticism from Labour types; yet the Starmer's party is now advocating votes at 16. Will the government's new Elections Bill also allow 16 and 17-year-olds to run for office? If so, will Labour MPs keep schtum when the councillor in charge of children's services is themselves a child? I have long suspected that Labour's real reason for wanting votes at 16 is to further its own electoral interests. But this, too, is wrong on a number of levels. Firstly, no constitutional change should ever happen for party political reasons. Secondly, it is deeply naive to assume that 16 and 17-year-olds are more likely to be attracted to Starmer's technocratic government than to the radicalism of Reform or a new left-wing party led by Jeremy Corbyn. There is a reason Nigel Farage is by some distance the most followed British politician on TikTok. As unlikely as it may seem, the tweed-clad former City boy connects with younger voters in a way the Labour leadership simply doesn't. If Morgan McSweeney and the bright sparks in Downing Street think this teenage voting ruse will help Starmer's prospects at the next election, they should be careful what they wish for.

Lefty MPs accept Glastonbury tickets in freebie U-turn
Lefty MPs accept Glastonbury tickets in freebie U-turn

Spectator

time15 minutes ago

  • Spectator

Lefty MPs accept Glastonbury tickets in freebie U-turn

Well, well, well. It transpires that a number of left-wing MPs enjoyed some time away from their constituencies at this year's Glastonbury festival, soaking up the sun, music and, of course, the pleasure of being there for free. Former Labour MP Zarah Sultana – who may or may not have patched things up with Jeremy Corbyn following a rather botched party launch announcement – was gifted two tickets by Glastonbury Festival Events Ltd worth £630 after attending as a guest speaker. Green MP Ellie Chowns also registered a single ticket for speaking at the festival, costing £390, while Labour's Clive Lewis accepted a ticket, after being invited to speak, at the same price. While the matter of speaking at public events is hardly something to complain about, Mr S is a little more interested in the hypocrisy displayed by the holier-than-thou lefties. They have been vocal about politicians accepting freebies in the past, with Sultana taking a pop at her former colleague, Labour Chancellor Rachel Reeves, for being out of touch by accepting donated gifts. Speaking in March, the MP for Coventry South made a pointed dig as she fumed: 'I ask the Chancellor – who earns over £150,000 annually, has accepted £7,500 worth of free clothing and recently took freebie tickets to see Sabrina Carpenter – does she think austerity 2.0 is the change people really voted for?' She makes a good point – so why then did Sultana, who receives at least £93,904 a year, accept her own pair of complimentary passes? Lewis is a Glasto regular – enjoying the music festival so much in 2016 that he stayed long enough to miss his debut appearance in the Commons as Corbyn's shadow defence secretary. And Chowns may wish to eat her words on gifting, after having pledged to her local constituency paper in October that she will both give away half her annual salary to various charities and, er, refuse freebies. 'My policy,' the Green MP declared, 'is to politely decline gifts.' How's that working out, eh? Sultana didn't take too kindly to having her double standards pointed out by Steerpike, however. After Mr S got in touch, the Independent MP took to social media to rage: 'By all means, run your story. It'll end up in the same gutter as the rest.' See you in the gutter comrade!

Falkirk Labour party gives 'full support' to Grangemouth MP after suspension
Falkirk Labour party gives 'full support' to Grangemouth MP after suspension

Daily Record

time15 minutes ago

  • Daily Record

Falkirk Labour party gives 'full support' to Grangemouth MP after suspension

Falkirk East CLP has said that Brian Leishman 'belongs in the Labour Party' The local Labour party in Falkirk has given its "full support" to suspended MP Brian Leishman, saying it is clear that he "belongs in the Labour Party". ‌ Mr Leishman is one of four MPs who have been suspended by the party after repeatedly criticising the UK government on various issues and voting against its plans to reform welfare. ‌ Mr Leishman represents Grangemouth and Alloa, which is part of the Falkirk East Constituency Labour Party (CLP) and the local party has shown its support in a statement posted on social media. ‌ ‌ It says: "In light of the whip being withdrawn from Brian Leishman MP, Falkirk East CLP would like to state that he has the full support and backing of our members. "During his year in office, Brian has stood firm in his support for Grangemouth and Alloa as well as representing the ideals of our membership. ‌ "Falkirk East CLP appreciate that the Labour Party has its due process to follow. These processes are in place to ensure and uphold trust in our elected officials. "We trust that following investigation, the decision will be clear that Brian belongs in the Labour Party. "In the meantime, we know that Brian will continue to represent his constituents, protect the interests of the area and stay true to the mandate that he was elected on." ‌ Clackmannanshire and Dunblane CLP, which includes the town of Alloa, also issued a supportive statement, saying the news that "Brian has had the whip removed, whilst standing up for issues that are important to his constituents, is deeply disappointing". Mr Leishman was an outspoken critic of the UK government's refusal to step in to save Grangemouth refinery from closure. Most recently, he was one of 47 MPs who refused to vote for the Labour government's welfare reform plans. ‌ In a statement, he said: "I have voted against the Government on issues because I want to effectively represent and be the voice for communities across Alloa and Grangemouth. "I firmly believe that it is not my duty as an MP to make people poorer, especially those that have suffered because of austerity and its dire consequences." However, Mr Leishman has made clear that he wants to remain a member of the Labour Party and is hoping that the whip will be restored. The others to be suspended were English Labour MPs Neil Duncan-Jordan, Chris Hinchcliff and Rachael Maskell.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store