Following on previous reports by the Committee on the human rights implications of the Asylum & Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Bill, this report examines the effects of new Government amendments to the Bill (made on June 9th 2004). These new clauses relate to: the provision of accommodation for a failed asylum seeker to be made conditional upon performance of community work; the determination of 'local connection' in homelessness legislation in relation to the dispersal of asylum seekers; the abolition of backdated welfare benefits to refugees; restrictions on the right to marry of persons subject to immigration control; and the removal of appeal rights on specific grounds. The Committee's findings include criticism for the Government's late tabling of amendments during the Bill's passage through Parliament without adequate warning or clear explanation of the human rights implications; and concern that there is a significant risk that some of these amendments breach various articles of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Joint Committee on Human Rights accepts that the measures in the Immigration Bill serve the legitimate aim of immigration control, but is concerned that some of them may be applied in practice in a way which breaches human rights in particular cases. The Committee is particularly concerned about the risk of the new provisions relating to residential tenancies giving rise in practice to homelessness in the case of people who have no right to remain in the UK but face genuine barriers to leaving. The Committee is also concerned to ensure that these measures do not give rise to an undue risk that migrant children will be exposed to homelessness or separation from family members. The provisions in the Bill on access to residential tenancies may heighten the risk of racial discrimination against prospective tenants, notwithstanding the fact that such discrimination is unlawful under the Equality Act. The First Tier Tribunal, not the Secretary of State, should decide whether it is within

The report The Implications For Access To Justice Of The Government's Proposals To Reform Legal Aid (HL100, HC 766) concludes that the government should reconsider its proposals for the reform of legal aid. The government has so far made welcome exemptions to its proposed residence test in the light of responses to its consultation, but the Committee is still not satisfied that the proposed test will not affect vulnerable groups. While accepting that it is legitimate for the government to introduce a residence test for civil legal aid and to restrict the scope of prison law funding, the Committee calls for more and broader exemptions from these proposals to avoid breaches of the fundamental right of effective access to justice in individual cases. The exceptional funding framework may not be working as intended and could therefore leave certain groups unable to access legal aid when human rights law requires it. The proposal to remove cases with

This report welcomes the Bill's potentially human rights enhancing objectives of taking measures to protect the public from crime, at the same time as focusing on rehabilitation and extending positive support to those vulnerable people who receive short-term prison sentences. However, it remains concerned that insufficient information was provided by the Government (i) to demonstrate the compatibility of the provisions of the Bill with relevant international standards other than the ECHR and (ii) to support its assertion that the proposals have been considered fully in line with the requirements of the Equality Act 2010. The Committee calls on the Government to publish the information which demonstrates this without delay. The Committee welcomes the Government's assurance that private providers of probation services are obliged to act compatibly with human rights law but recommends that there should be statutory provision in the Bill setting out the providers' duties. The Committee calls on the Government to develop clear guidance on the human rights obligations of private probation providers, and to set out how it will monitor the performance of the contracted providers in this regard

While it accepts that there may be a pressing need to reform non-party campaigning, the report Legislative Scrutiny: Transparency Of Lobbying, Non-party Campaigning And Trade Union Administration Bill (HL 61, HC 755) calls on the Government to pause the passage of the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill to allow for further scrutiny and for further consultation with the Electoral Commission, the Commission on Civil Society and Democratic Engagement and relevant stakeholders. The report recommends that there be more careful consideration of the potential impact on campaigners' rights to free speech and freedom of association. The Committee welcomes the Government improvements made to Part 2 during its passage though the Commons, but suggest that concerns remain. The Joint Committee express concerns regarding: the lack of clarity about the practical effects of the provision in this Part of t