Speeches by Jopp.

“The hon. Member is describing the Bill, but we are not here to debate the Bill; we are here to debate the remedial order. I asked him why he was comfortable with the fact that the Government are guillotining a piece of law without putting something else in place, and he has not answered that yet. He has answered that t…”

“As the hon. Member says, we are considering this order alongside the Bill. I am grateful to the Joint Committee on Human Rights, on which he sits, for producing this very good report, but I would like to try to get an answer that I did not get earlier. How is he reconciled with the fact that this remedial order is bein…”

“rose—”

“I will not. I challenged the hon. Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) earlier, asking him to speak to veterans and the people of Halesowen to justify why that triple whammy is okay, and why he is prepared to go through the Lobby to vote for it tonight. And he said, “The Prime Minister has told me that that’s okay, an…”

“Can I just look at the mechanics of how the compartment of a super-injunction gets extended? For example, was it your decision? Do you apply to the court saying, “We think the Speaker should be read into this”? Or does the judge just come to his own position?”

“Going down a level from the institutional frustration and the butting of heads between the Home Office and the MoD, would it be right to say that the Domestic and Economic Affairs Committee of the Cabinet had wanted, basically, to limit any extension to the numbers eligible for resettlement to the lowest possible numbe…”

“Has my right hon. Friend noticed, like me, that all the military veterans in the Government and on the Labour Benches—with one notable exception—seem to have abandoned their post today? I have counted about nine veterans on our Benches. If more veterans had been on the Labour Benches, perhaps they could have told the F…”

“Rubific?”

“But, in effect, you were driving for a new entitlement—not ARAP or ACRS, but for people who were put in jeopardy by the breach.”

“No. Ideally we would win, so they could stay.”

“I have a quotation from something you have written, and I just want you to contextualise it, because it does not make a lot of sense to me: “The suggestion I was driving a new entitlement for those not eligible for ARAP or ACRS but affected by the breach is untrue”. Did you say that?”

“I see, so it was about getting them to the front of the queue.”

“And also, it sets the conditions, were we ever to do expeditionary operations in someone else’s country in the future. It is not just a short-term thing.”

“A very short question, to which there will hopefully be a very short answer. Were we paying Pakistan to accommodate people there while that bit of the valve worked itself out?”

“We can examine that with the Secretary of State next week.”

“I am intrigued by the ever-increasing demand signal being set by the judges. We have heard from others this morning that, politically, this is now starting to give you a problem because of the pressure and the juxtaposition with people who have come here illegally being in accommodation and the way that drives up rent …”

“But I do not think that that answers my question, which is on what basis the judges were extending the remit, if they were only getting their information from the MoD. The MoD is the source of the knowledge of the threat to life.”

“You have characterised the judges’ decision making as increasingly activist. You have also said that they were also getting secret information from elsewhere.”

“I do not know whether the Secretary of State gives instructions to his lead counsel on issues as important as this. Are you aware of the motivation for suggesting that the Speaker be read in? Was it so that, in some way at least, Parliament would “know”, in inverted commas? Or was it to thwart his granting an urgent qu…”

“So it was more to ensure that there would be no further parliamentary scrutiny, not to ensure parliamentary scrutiny.”