Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Safe Countries for Removal: LGBT Rights

Monday 21 October 2024 · 3 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 3 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Nadia Whittome questioned the merits of removing Georgia from the list of safe countries for removals due to recent LGBT rights legislation.
  • The Minister stated that assessments of LGBT rights and safety in countries are regularly updated and informed by independent reports.
  • Jim Shannon raised concerns about persecution of Christians, ethnic minorities, and LGBT individuals in Georgia, emphasizing the need to engage with these issues.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Nadia Whittome Lab Nottingham East
Immigration Women & Equalities
Context

The question pertains to the inclusion of Georgia in a list of safe countries where individuals can be removed without individual assessment, given recent legislation affecting LGBT rights.

Question

If she will make an assessment of the potential merits of removing Georgia from her Department's list of safe countries for removals, in the context of the recent passage of legislation on LGBT rights in that country.

Answer from Angela Eagle

We constantly update our assessment of LGBT rights and other factors affecting the safety of different countries, working closely with the Foreign Office and informed by regular independent reports from the chief inspector of borders and immigration. The latest update for Georgia was published last month and is available on the gov.uk website.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The questioner specifically asked about removing Georgia from the list, but no commitment to reassess or remove Georgia was provided.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Nadia Whittome Lab Nottingham East
Asylum & Refugees
Context

The question addresses the safe state designation for Georgia and India, where persecution of certain minorities is on the rise, highlighting issues with blanket inadmissibility based on nationality.

Question

The safe state designation that the previous Government introduced was intended to allow Georgian and Indian nationals to be returned without any individualised assessment of the safety of the country for each person. In both countries, persecution of certain minorities is on the rise; that makes their inclusion on the list particularly wrong, but also highlights the wider dangers of blanket inadmissibility of asylum claims based on nationality. What steps will the Government take to ensure that individuals' asylum claims are always properly assessed?

Answer from Angela Eagle

We regularly monitor and review the situation in countries of origin, working closely with the Foreign Office, and our resulting country policy and information notes are published on the gov.uk website. Should we assess that the troubling new law fundamentally affects the justification for Georgia's designation, we will seek to remove it from the list, using the correct parliamentary process.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The questioner asked about steps to ensure proper individualised assessment of asylum claims but no specific commitments were made.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Jim Shannon DUP Strangford
Foreign Affairs Women & Equalities Religion & Faith
Context

The question pertains to the evidence of persecution of Christians, ethnic minorities, and LGBT individuals in Georgia, seeking engagement with Georgia's Government on these issues.

Question

In Georgia in particular, but also in other countries, there is an evidential base to prove that the persecution of Christians and ethnic minorities and other human rights abuses are taking place. It is also important that LGBT rights issues are engaged with. Has the Minister had the opportunity to address those issues directly with Georgia's Government?

Answer from Angela Eagle

Addressing such issues is more of a Foreign Office responsibility, which is why we liaise closely with the Foreign Office when considering the production of information notes. If laws that are passed and put into effect in other countries lead to persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution for individuals, that is one of the contexts we use to make a decision.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The questioner asked about direct engagement with Georgia's Government on human rights issues but no specific actions were committed to.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)