The Minister says that, but I have been through the proceedings with a fine-toothed comb and his performance was not that bad.
Perhaps the Minister is now in a position to offer a little more clarity about the intended timing. He will understand that the phrase"““in all likelihood it may not””"
is not an especially firm reassurance to those who believe that it would be entirely wrong to abolish appeals before the points system is up and running and proven to be working.
We need to focus on amendment No. 6, because the quality of initial decision making is so low that an adequate independent appeals system is essential to the credibility and fairness of our immigration system.
I am sure that the Home Office view is that appeals are expensive and time consuming for the applicant and especially for the Government, but they would be far less expensive and time consuming if there were not so many basic errors in the initial handling of cases.
Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Cheryl Gillan
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 16 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill 2005-06.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c985-6 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 22:17:50 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_274951
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_274951
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_274951