My Lords, as my noble friend Lady Hamwee said, we do not believe that Clause 69 should stand part of the Bill. The clause allows visa penalties to be imposed on a country if the Home Secretary thinks—forms an opinion—that the country is not co-operating in relation to the return to the country from the United Kingdom of any of its nationals who require leave to enter or remain.
The penalties include not granting entry clearance to the UK to the country’s nationals, suspending entry clearance, requiring any application to be considered invalid, or to require the applicant to pay £190 in addition to the normal fee. Can the Minister explain how the Government arrived at £190? As the noble Baroness has just said, why should the ordinary citizens of a particular country be penalised for the actions of their Government, either by fining them or refusing them entry to the UK? What consultation has there been—and will there be—with the Foreign Office about the wider diplomatic picture concerning relations with countries that the Home Secretary intends to target with these measures?
I cannot imagine the Foreign Office being too impressed with a vengeful Home Secretary upsetting the diplomatic apple cart because she cannot have her way on deporting foreign nationals. A decade ago, there was no need for such measures. Why is there a need for them now? As Amendment 151B suggests, while the Home Secretary is making peace with the Foreign Office, perhaps she could ask it not to trespass on her territory by making trade agreements that include granting visa-free entry to the UK as part of the deal. I too agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe. I look forward to the Minister’s reply.