Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL]

My Lords, perhaps noble Lords have had a chance to see the ninth report of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, which is hot off the press; it was published this afternoon. The committee, of which I am a member, went to great trouble to rush it out in order that it would be available for Report. It is in the PPO and I recommend that noble Lords have a copy, as it is rather relevant. I am speaking to support this amendment on behalf of the committee. The best way that I can do that is by referring to the report, which is unanimous, all-party and beyond party. Paragraph 1.50, under the heading "Retrospectivity", says: ""The Bill does not make clear what the effect of the new provisions will be on those whose applications for citizenship are pending on the date at which the Act comes into force, or on others further down the path to citizenship, such as those with limited leave to remain who have not yet qualified for indefinite leave to remain. There are no transitional arrangements ... We expressed our concern about the injustice done by retrospective changes to rules which affect migrants’ eligibility to settle in the UK in our report on the Highly Skilled Migrants Programme"." That was in 2007. ""Those concerns were subsequently upheld by the High Court and the Government was forced by court order to do what we had sought to persuade them to do in Parliament: honour the legitimate expectations of those who had planned their future lives in the UK on the basis of the law as it stood when they came to this country ... The Minister told the House of Lords that ‘we have yet to make a final decision on how our proposals will impact on people who are already in the immigration system.’ He promised to provide a note explaining to whom the transitional arrangements will apply"." We put the following in bold, and it is entirely on all fours with the powerful speech that the noble Baroness has just made. ""We urge the Government not to repeat the unedifying spectacle of riding roughshod over migrants’ legitimate expectations of settlement, which undermined many migrants’ faith in the UK’s commitment to basic fairness ... We recommend that clear transitional provisions are made which meet the legitimate expectations of those already in the system"." That, as I understand it, is the basis of this amendment. It is a matter of great importance in terms of public confidence and we hope that Ministers will feel able to support it and not oppose it.