Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill

I thank the Minister for her response to my amendment. In spite of the quite indifferent acoustics of this Room, I was able to pick up one or two crumbs of comfort. I was glad to hear that there would be further consultation with UNHCR and that each individual case will be considered separately. This consideration will give a right of appeal to individual refugees if it is a question of changing or revoking their status. Nevertheless, I am left with considerable concerns. Genuine, bona fide, refugees who have got here by hook or by crook, having overcome all the very major obstacles that prevent them getting here in any case, will be placed in a state of limbo for five years. It is natural to assume that refugees having arrived here and been accepted, will make the worst assumption about the conditions in their country of origin and the way in which those are likely to go. Given that their appreciation of what is going on in their home country is unfavourable, they will want to make definite plans to integrate themselves into British society and to do the best they can for their relatives and children. The Bill’s general thrust seems to make the process of planning by individuals and families unnecessarily difficult. I hope that that gives the noble Baroness something more on which to reflect. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, that this is a bad clause and almost certainly unnecessary. I hope very much that he will come back to it at the next stage. Meanwhile, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 52 agreed to. Clause 53 [Deprivation of citizenship]: