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

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


STV News
35 minutes ago
- STV News
Public's views sought on domestic abuser registration law
Public views are being sought for a new law that would create a register for perpetrators of domestic violence. The proposal was tabled by Scottish Tory MSP Pam Gosal and is currently being considered by the Criminal Justice Committee at Holyrood. If enacted, the Prevention of Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill would create a register of people who have been convicted of domestic abuse offences in the past and requires abusers to keep the state informed of their addresses and passport details. Among its other provisions, the Bill would also require schools to educate pupils on domestic abuse and relationships. Committee convener Audrey Nicoll said: 'Our committee is acutely aware of the devastating impact domestic abuse has on individuals, families and communities across Scotland, and the latest statistics on domestic abuse show the scale of this issue. 'This Bill presents a range of proposals aiming to prevent domestic abuse, including statutory data collection and improving school education, but we want to hear views from individuals and organisations on whether they support these proposals. 'We are particularly keen to hear from those with lived experience, their families and frontline professionals on if they agree with the proposals in this Bill, or if they feel other actions are required to tackle domestic abuse in Scotland.' The call for views will close on September 15. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country


The Herald Scotland
36 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Young, angry and in debt: why Gen Z could turn to Corbyn
The opportunities are out there – to almost be a left-wing version of the populist right Reform. Standing for subterfuge and scapegoating, Reform seeks to protect the elite few. Corbyn can offer hope of a better future for the many. Last month More In Common polled 1,408 people on whether they'd vote for a Corbyn-led party. Regardless of gender, it found 10% would, with the Farage-led Reform on 27% and Labour on 20%. Much more interestingly and importantly, 32% of 18-24-year-olds – the highest for this age group for any party – said they would also do so. Reform was on just 7% for this age group. Among 25-34-year-olds, Reform moved ahead with 21% support compared to Corbyn's 14%. Support amongst older age groups continued to decline at roughly the same rate as it grew for Reform, suggesting a battle of the generations. In other words, the Gen Z generation – those born between 1997-2012 – are far more attracted to Corbyn and his politics than to Farage and his. And support across all ages in Scotland, at 18%, was the highest amongst any of the nations and regions in Britain. Without any policies yet declared, what will Gen Z be looking for and what will Corbyn and his comrades need to offer to keep them away from the clutches of a charlatan like Farage? The far left that hopes to have a home in the Corbyn party suggests a plethora of platitudes, whether it be welfare not warfare, ending austerity, taxing the rich, freedom for Palestine, climate action, and anti-racism. And since Corbyn lost the Labour leadership in 2020, he has led his Peace and Justice Project, focusing upon environmentalism, international peace cooperation, social inequality and corporate power. Read more by Gregor Gall None of these issues should be lightly dismissed but there needs to be something much more concrete to get Gen Z to turn up en masse at the polling booth to vote for the Corbyn party. It's called the security of self-interest. Unless Gen Zers have rich parents, they're the first generation that will be poorer than their parents were when they had them. So top of the priority list of policies must be housing, debt, and employment. Unless helped by the "bank of mum and dad", Gen Z-ers cannot afford, let alone get, a mortgage to put a foot on the property ladder. Forced to rent, they have no security of residence as rents rapidly rise. As demand outstrips supply, what they get for their money is pretty grotty. Thus, policies of house price control, council house building and more first-time buyer financial support as well as rent controls for flats and landlords licensed only where minimum quality standards are met. Next many have gone to college or university and graduated with debt. And that's with having worked through the time they did their degrees. Though student loan debt repayment only kicks in when earning above a certain level, the irony is that many do not get to that point for some years. Thus, reintroduction of student grants, abolishing fees, cancellation of student debt, price controls on basic food stuffs, free public transport, and a new national state bank offering low interest loans. Upon entering the jobs market these days, many will end up in jobs that are no better paid and with no more security or prospects than the ones they did during their degrees. Artificial intelligence will reduce, not increase, job opportunities at this end of the labour market. Thus a doubling of the minimum wage to £25 per hour, ending temporary employment contracts, and job security for the first five years of a job. To bastardise Oscar Wilde's saying, you can only look at stars when you're not lying in the gutter. So, only then with that firm basis securely established can the policy platform then add on those more altruistic aspects like "world peace". But before we run away thinking it's just about the policies on offer, we need to remember that the issues of the personalities and processes are important too. With chants of "Oh, Jeremy" still heard today, a party built too much around a single leader comes with dangers. Yes, it needs a clearly identifiable and credible leadership but putting too many of its eggs into one basket can be a ticking timebomb. We know this from the experience of the likes of Tommy Sheridan and George Galloway. Corbyn could easily suffer a stroke under the strain of it all. Zarah Sultana has stepped up to the plate by leaving Labour (Image: PA) Now Zarah Sultana MP has stepped up to the plate by leaving Labour. She is a still young – but not quite Gen Z - 31 year-old woman with Pakistani heritage. It could be a case of replicating the current practice of the Green parties either side of the Border of having two co-leaders. And, just as many young people flocked into Labour when Corbyn became leader in 2015, many also became disillusioned by their inability to change the party to sing in tune with him. This should not be a problem in the new political party but that does not mean that members will be happy to become just the shock troops that knock on doors and hand out leaflets come election times. All is to play for. There will be competition with the Greens because there might be some policy overlap, especially if the radical candidates win the leadership here and down south shortly. Time is of the essence, as a party not yet established and with no name has a hard hill to climb to fend off Farage. The youth and vigour of the 32% of the young Gen Zers need to be tapped into now to bring on board their peers and others. Professor Gregor Gall is a Research Associate at the University of Glasgow


BBC News
39 minutes ago
- BBC News
Legacy Act: Hilary Benn accuses Conservatives of making false promises to veterans
The Northern Ireland secretary has accused the Conservatives of making "false promises" to veterans with the controversial Legacy Act, as he defended Labour's plans to replace Benn was speaking during a three-hour debate in Parliament, which saw MPs clash over legacy in the presence of some military act, which was brought in by the Conservatives, introduced a ban on inquests and civil actions related to incidents during the also sought to offer a conditional amnesty for people suspected of Troubles-related crimes in exchange for co-operating with a new information recovery body - that was later ruled unlawful. Labour is in the process of repealing the act, but has faced a backlash from some who say it could reopen prosecutions against military in Westminster on Monday evening, Benn said that 202 live inquiries into Troubles-related killings of members of the armed forces were brought to a stop in May 2024 and a further 23 involving veterans - as a result of the controversial legacy was responding to a petition signed by more than 170,000 people calling for Labour to safeguard "protections for veterans around prosecutions for Troubles-related incidents".Benn said hundreds of military families were still seeking answers, and that the government was "listening carefully" to veterans as well as victims and their relatives."I and the defence secretary are engaging with our veterans community and with all interested parties over future legislation, and we will ensure that there are far better protections in place," he Conservative MP and Shadow Armed Forces Minister Mark Francois described the government's plans as "two-tier justice at its worst".He said many veterans now effectively had a "sword of Damocles hanging over them again". Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) leader Gavin Robinson accused the government of seeking to "rewrite the history of the past", and said his party had opposed the Legacy Act for "very different reasons" than Sinn Féin."We're asking for the government to protect those who protected us," he Unionist Party (UUP) MP Robin Swann hit out at what he called "point-scoring" between Conservative and Labour MPs during the debate, adding that any party in power had a duty to "get this right to make sure those people who served aren't dragged through the courts".Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) leader Jim Allister said the secretary of state needed to take veterans' concerns seriously."This government is said to be tackling legacy issues and if this government is going to tackle it, then it needs to stem it by tackling inquests and that route which is now producing potential prosecutions of some of the bravest of our citizens," he of the debate, hundreds of military veterans protested in Westminster against Labour's plans to change the say they fear it could reopen the possibility of more prosecutions against Army veterans. 'Labour fell for this' Almost 170,000 people signed a petition backed by Francois, demanding Labour not make any changes to the law that would allow Northern Ireland veterans to be prosecuted – a level which means the subject has to be debated by those at the protest were Geoff Butler and Glen Espie, who each served tours in Northern Butler said his message to the government was to "get rid" of its plans and listen to veterans."It's totally ridiculous the way this has come to a head... Labour fell for this, half the MPs in the Commons weren't born during the Troubles, what do they know about it?"Mr Espie said he attended the protest to support colleagues who he felt were at risk of being "put in court as elderly veterans"."It's not right. Successive British governments have let down the veterans community." What is the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act? The act was passed by the Conservative government in September 2023 despite opposition from Labour, all Northern Ireland parties, several victims' groups and the Irish created a new legacy body known ICRIR to take over all Troubles-era cases from 1 May 2024, including those on the desk of the Police Service of Northern act shut down all historical act's most controversial element, the offer of conditional immunity to suspects, was disapplied following legal action by bereaved court ruled this part of the act was incompatible with human rights' legislation and the Windsor July, the Labour government wrote to the Belfast courts abandoning an appeal against the striking out of the amnesty clause in the December, the secretary of state formally started the process to repeal the act, but as well as prompting a backlash from veterans who do not want to see the law repealed, he was criticised by some political parties and victims' groups for not moving quickly enough.