My Lords, it is right to put on record that the noble Lord, Lord Macdonald, has been sitting here for over nine and a half hours in order to say that. It adds to the weight of his points, which I very much support, and I know that colleagues will speak to this.
12.30 am
I will say a word about another alarming provision which is dealt with by Amendment 125. The Government may say that they would not regard it as an offence for a lawyer who is paid by a client to represent his client, but it looks as if Clause 40 says that.
That was not in fact my first thought, which was about all those humanitarian organisations—some of them quite formally organised and some of them fairly loose-knit groups of volunteers and concerned citizen—who aid asylum seekers, including people who have yet to make a claim. To take out the words “for gain” from Section 25A(1)(a) seems to put them in its sights, and I am quite clear that it is not adequate to say that a provision will not be used against them. I am quite confused about quite a lot of things at 12.30 am. Why do the Government want to take out the words “for gain” from that section when they already have Section 25A(3), which says
“Subsection (1) does not apply to anything done by a person acting on behalf of an organisation which … aims to assist asylum-seekers, and … does not charge for its services”?
I hope I have not just suggested another change to Section 25A.
All this amounts to the fact that the Government are, so far, defeated by the task of describing directly what a smuggler is. We should be dealing with this in the positive, not potentially criminalising other people because we cannot find the right way to define smugglers, who are the ones who should be in our sights.
I have three tiddlers—or maybe they are not—in this group. Amendment 128A probes the significance of what is meant in new Section 25BA by an individual being “first” in danger. It occurred to me that it might be government generosity in extending the relevant period. Amendment 129A asks for confirmation that there will be consultation on the penalties relating to failure to secure a goods vehicle. Similarly, Amendment 129B asks for confirmation about consultation on regulations relating to offshore workers.