My Lords, the short point that my noble friend Lord Paddick wanted to make, as he generally does, in leaving out Clause 74(3) is that, again, this seems to conflate immigration and terrorism. It extends powers to question people about involvement in terrorism at the border and applies the powers to people being detained under a provision of the immigration Acts, and so on. The objection runs like a thread through the Bill, to so many points. Immigration and terrorism are not the same. Not all terrorists are immigrants. Terrorists who have succeeded in the UK have been British, and if the Government allow, in legislation, the bias implied by the conflation of these two, no wonder others display the same bias. I beg to move.
Nationality and Borders Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hamwee
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 10 February 2022.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Nationality and Borders Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
818 c1938 
Session
2021-22
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2022-03-08 18:00:00 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2022-02-10/220210101000176
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2022-02-10/220210101000176
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2022-02-10/220210101000176