Illegal Migration Act: Government appeal paused by NI court
The government's attempt to overturn a court ruling that found parts of the UK Illegal Migration Act were unlawful in Northern Ireland has been paused by judges.The act was introduced by the last government in a bid to stop people coming to the UK in small boats by giving authorities the power to send migrants to Rwanda.Last May, a High Court judge in Belfast ruled the act should not apply in Northern Ireland as it was incompatible with the post-Brexit Windsor Framework.On Tuesday, the Court of Appeal was told the Labour government's new border laws to repeal the Rwanda legislation will render the case academic.
However, government lawyers resisted calls for its appeal to be thrown out. Counsel for the Home Secretary claimed there could be a wider effect on asylum and immigration control within the UK if last year's ruling was not challenged. The case had been listed for a full hearing at the Court of Appeal next month.But that hearing is to be removed from its allocated date on the orders of Appeal Court judges, including Lady Chief Justice Dame Siobhan Keegan."The right course is to stay this matter given the imponderables that arise," she said. "The court itself will keep this matter under review given expected legal developments in this area."
Law was challenged by 16-year-old boy
The previous Conservative government's Illegal Migration Act faced two separate legal challenges in Northern Ireland.It was opposed by the NI Human Rights Commission and also by a 16-year-old asylum seeker who is staying at a children's home in Northern Ireland. The boy, who is originally from Iran, arrived in the UK on a small boat last July after travelling to Britain alone in a bid to claim refugee status. Lawyers acting for the boy - referred to in court only as JR 295 - said he was "terrified" of being sent back to Iran, claiming he would be killed or sent to prison.Concerns were also raised that the act would encourage unaccompanied children in his position to run away once they turn 18, to avoid removal from the UK.The Human Rights Commission argued the Illegal Migration Act breached the UK's obligations under the Windsor Framework to ensure no reduction in rights, safeguards or equality of opportunity safeguarded by the Good Friday Agreement.The High Court judge agreed that several elements of the act would cause a "significant" diminution of the rights of asylum seekers in Northern Ireland. At the time, the then prime minister Rishi Sunak said the Belfast judge's decision would not change the government's plan to send illegal migrants to Rwanda.
Sunak's government has since been replaced by Labour and lawyers for both the Human Rights Commission and the boy argued the appeal should be dismissed. However, the current Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has maintained plans to appeal the May 2024 ruling. The Labour government wants to determine the impact and scope of the Windsor Framework on asylum cases in Northern Ireland."I can't think of a topic that has raised more challenging legal issues for these courts than the application of the Windsor Framework and the consequences that will apply where it overrides domestic legislation," a government barrister said. "These are some of the most groundbreaking and novel legal issues that these courts have grappled with in the last decade."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
24 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Pembrokeshire activists join 4,000 strong March to Gaza
Jim Scott, a tree surgeon and activist from Mathry, and Tamsin Nash, a Pembrokeshire art curator and mother of four are joining the Global March to Gaza. The march involves more than four thousand people from 54 different countries walking on foot on a three-day, 30-mile hike through the Sinai desert to the border crossing at Gaza. They aim to demand a stop to the genocide and demanding that Israel re-opens the border to allow a humanitarian corridor to be established. (Image: Jim Scott) The campaigners set off on Friday, June 13, aiming to reach Rafah by Sunday, June 15. Pembrokeshire campaigner Jim Scott joins the march as part of the official delegation from CND Cymru. 'I am aware that by marching 30 miles on foot through the Sinai desert to the Rafah border we may face arrest, detention, deportation or imprisonment,' said Jim. 'A worse outcome might be that if we do reach Rafah which is a militarised zone, we may face military aggression and could even be killed ourselves by the Israeli army.' Upon his arrival in Egypt Jim published an open letter sent to Pembrokeshire's Labour MP, Henry Tufnell, Eluned Morgan MS and other elected representatives in Wales including secretary of state for Wales Jo Stevens heavily criticising them for inaction over the Gaza genocide. 'As one of your constituents and as a citizen of the United Kingdom, I feel I must act where you have not acted and take steps to prevent the further genocide in Gaza where your government has failed to do so,' the letter begins. 'As the British government and yourself have failed in your international duty and legal obligation to effectively oppose and prevent war crimes, ethnic cleansing and genocide in occupied Palestine over the last 19 months, I feel I have no choice but to take action myself. 'Only those of us who resist, oppose and fight back against Israel's crimes now will be on the right side of history.' (Image: Jim Scott) The letter concludes by imploring politicians to demand that a humanitarian corridor to be opened via Rafah and criticised the UK Government for not taking meaningful steps such as ending arms sales and proper economic sanctions on the entire Israeli state. Pembrokeshire mother of four, Tasmin, described herself as an 'empathetic human', when asked why she'd travelled to Egypt to join the delegation. 'Yesterday I saw four bewildered children bleeding on a hospital bed, from another bomb attack. How can I carry on as normal?' she said. 'With tens of thousands murdered as Israel continues to destroy and burn people alive, I cannot rest. I cannot stay silent. 'We have witnessed atrocities enacted with impunity for 20 months. Poets killed, journalists assassinated, children snipered, fathers murdered for being hungry, newborns denied critical care and left to die, children orphaned, women shot - the crimes are colossal. I have protested, lobbied, fundraised, talked, disrupted." "Now is the time to mobilise our passion and humanity. Alongside the 12 hearts aboard the Freedom Flotilla I endeavour to do what our governments have failed - rise and move to show it's the people who will make the difference. "We are united for justice and solidarity for Palestine." (Image: Jim Scott) The members of the delegation said they were moved by the high levels of support offered from many people who have pledged to donate to a crowdfunder to help with the costs of attending the march. A spokesperson for CND Cymru said: 'We are proud to support this important march by sending a delegation. 'In the face of the genocide of the Palestinian people, western governments have been silent. In being part of this march, we are telling the Palestinian people we bear witness. And we will not forgive those who have committed these acts of brutality. 'As the Madleen and Conscience carried both material aid and the hope and goodwill of the people of the world, so too does this international march.'
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
How Labour's winter fuel fiasco paves the way for means-testing the state pension
As Rachel Reeves announced an about-turn on her winter fuel policy this week, she opened a whole new can of worms for pensioners. The Chancellor's decision to return the payments to those with an income of under £35,000 has created a complicated means-test and reignited calls from some commentators to claw back other benefits, such as the state pension, from those deemed 'wealthy'. Means-testing the state pension system would be a radical move that no British chancellor has dared attempt before. But Labour is desperate for cash and has shown it is not afraid to anger older voters. Could Ms Reeves possibly get away with it? Introduced in 1909 and originally worth five shillings a week, the state pension is a cornerstone of the welfare state. Today, workers pay National Insurance contributions for 35 years to receive its full benefit. The full new state pension is £230.25 a week, while the old 'basic' pension – for those who reached state pension age before April 2016 – is £176.45 a week. However, the benefit has become increasingly unaffordable to administer. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) predicts the country's spending on pensioners will reach £180bn by 2029. The idea of reserving the payment for those who need it most has therefore become increasingly attractive. Both Labour and the Tories pledged to keep the 'triple lock' that means pensions are increased each April by the highest of wage growth, inflation or 2.5pc. Means-testing could be one way to dramatically cut costs, without breaking that pledge. In January, Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, caused uproar when she said her party would 'look at means-testing' the state pension. Key Labour advisers, think tanks and academics have also voiced support for the plan. Means-testing would completely upend the system. But this week's winter fuel policy reversal could make it slightly easier. Under the latest changes, all pensioners will receive the winter fuel payment, worth up to £300 a year. However, those who earn more than £35,000 will be expected to return it to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). To administer the new system, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) will tell HMRC who they've paid the winter fuel payment to. HMRC will then apply the income test to determine who will need to repay the money. Government departments have long shared data about taxpayers, including doing so specifically to pay or not pay a pensioner benefit, such as free TV licences. But is this Whitehall bureaucracy really a slow slide towards a means-tested state pension? Telegraph Money reader Jim Humphrey fears so. The 69-year-old, a part-time financial adviser from St Albans, is one of the estimated two million pensioners who will still not receive the winter fuel payment. This is because his income exceeds the £35,000 threshold. He is worried Labour is on a 'slippery slope' to means-testing the state pension. He said: 'I don't need the money, but it is a question of principle... I have paid tax for many, many years.' Other state benefits have been means-tested in recent years. Free TV licences for all over-75s were scrapped in August 2020 and restricted to those who qualify for pension credit. Last year's restriction of the winter fuel payment to those on pension credit was also a form of means-testing – as is the payment of pension credit to those on the lowest incomes. Campaigners and economists have also pushed for free prescriptions for the over-60s to be similarly restricted. Last October, Dr Kristian Niemietz, of the Institute for Economic Affairs think tank, said: 'Means-testing old-age benefits is a way to make fiscal savings while insulating the poorest from cuts.' Labour is also gearing up to ban over-60s from taking student loans from 2027, as it introduces a 'Lifetime Learning Entitlement'. Ben Ramanauskas, of think tank Policy Exchange, said: 'The Government's approach to cutting spending through means-testing is the right one. 'However, this alone will not significantly lower the cost of the UK's unsustainable welfare bill, improve public finances, or give younger taxpayers a fair deal.' Other countries already operate means-testing on their state pension payouts. In Canada, which operates a flat-rate benefit system, a maximum of $1,433 (£773.30) is paid each month, and is topped up for those on low incomes. In Chile, a pension is paid to those over 65, unless your family's wealth is deemed to be in the top 10pc of the population. Those with an income of less than $1,210,828 (£955.30) a month are eligible, whether they are still working or not. In Australia, the state pension – or 'age pension' – has no reference to how long a person has worked. Instead, it is granted as an age-based means-tested benefit. About a third of pensioners have their pension cut because they have other sources of income. Moving to an Australian-style system would be highly controversial, angering those who say if you have 'paid in' you should get the full amount irrespective of your income. Mike Ambery, of pension provider Standard Life, said: 'There would need to be a change in applying for state pension as well as the detail to replicate means-testing in other countries. The practicality and change to a universal system now would be operationally significant.' There would be other barriers to overcome. The Government could only make significant savings if people are able to generate big enough private pension savings. But despite the 'automatic enrolment' reforms that made workplace pensions compulsory, millions of people are on course for meagre retirement incomes. Research by the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) found that the cost of all but the most basic retirement has increased over the past year. Two retirees running one small car, eating out weekly and taking a four-star foreign holiday each year would now need an income of almost £35,000 each before tax to retire comfortably, rising to £52,000 if they live alone. Meanwhile, anyone living alone on the state pension would even fall short of a basic retirement, which now requires an income of £13,400 a year, the PLSA said.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's latest freebie: British sovereignty in exchange for nothing
While we can't rely on the French to help police the Channel – despite paying them £500 million for the privilege – we can always trust our Gallic cousins to bear a grudge. We already knew that the Prime Minister's great EU 'reset ' was a sham; that much was clear when all we got in return was the use of e-gates that were already operational in many European countries. Now, we learn that we may not even be granted access to the bloc's industrial defence programme, despite Sir Keir Starmer's insistence that defence and security was a central tenet of the deal. As he boasted last month after selling us out to Brussels: 'We've also struck a new defence and security partnership to strengthen our cooperation and strengthen our security – which is vital in this dangerous new era. 'And it will open the door to working with the EU's new defence fund – providing new opportunities for our defence industry, supporting British jobs and livelihoods.' Except, of course, the French have other ideas. In yet another example of just how bad Labour is at negotiating anything (see also the Chagos surrender and, more recently, the 'deal' to allow Spanish border guards to check passports on Gibraltar) we now learn that Emmanuel Macron is trying to shut out British arms firms from the European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP). While different to the defence fund, which is known as SAFE (Security Action for Europe), EDIP will see cash pumped into joint procurement projects and the production of weapons, ammunition and other military hardware. It was created for the benefit of the EU and 'allies' but French diplomats have insisted the tool should be solely used to boost firms based inside the EU, as well as Norway and Ukraine – shutting out the UK. So much for Starmer's boast that the reset deal would put Britain 'back on the world stage' and give us 'unprecedented access to the EU market, the best of any country.' Labour is yet to reveal how many billions is being squandered on a reset that has already prompted another big fat 'non' from Paris.
