I shall try to be even briefer than the hon. Member for Woking (Mr. Malins).
I fully endorse what the hon. Gentleman said about amendments Nos. 17, 18 and 21. It seems sensible that the captain of a ship, who is likely to be in charge, should be the person responsible.
On amendment No. 19, the hon. Gentleman is fully justified in saying that information could be given orally instead of in writing but put in writing within 48 hours.
We support amendment No. 20, which would reduce the specified period for the requirement from six months to one month.
I am not sure why the hon. Gentleman feels that amendment No. 22 is necessary. The provisions in clause 31(2) and (3) and clause 32(2) are restricted to police officers of superintendent or a higher level whereas under the amendment any immigration officer could be used.
We do not support amendment No. 23 but we do support amendments Nos. 24 and 25.
Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill
Proceeding contribution from
John Leech
(Liberal Democrat)
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 c1049 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 22:26:11 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275062
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275062
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275062