Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL]

My Lords, I have looked at cols. 531-33 of the Official Report on 2 March. The Minister gave my noble friend and the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, and others the reassurance that the Government would, ""think about a further discretion to cover the time periods taken for the consideration of protection cases".—[Official Report, 2/3/09; col. 532.]" If that is translated and turned into these government amendments, I am still unclear as to whether they accept the principle that all recognised refugees, and not just the gateway refugees, should not have to go through the hurdles of the qualifying period and active citizenship. I do not think that these amendments go that far. Amendments 28 to 30 and Amendments 33 and 34 merely provide for discretion. In exceptional circumstances, the period during which the claim was pending may count towards the qualifying period. I hope that the Government will reflect hard on these amendments, which I support, and perhaps move others in due course. As to penalisation, covered by Amendment 41 to Clause 41, the Minister seemed to imply that any breach of immigration law would only become relevant during the period after an asylum seeker had achieved refugee status. If that is the case, it would be welcome. Many of us are arguing for more than that. We argue that the qualifying period for subsequently recognised refugees should begin at the point of their entry to the UK. Therefore, the Minister would have to give a further assurance that any breach of the law at the time of entry, when a refugee might have been forced to enter illegally—and we have heard countless examples of that—would have taken place before the qualifying period starting at that time. Could the Minister give that reassurance?