DOCSLIB.ORG

The Detention of Windrush Children

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Detention of Windrush Children House of Commons House of Lords Joint Committee on Human Rights Windrush generation detention Sixth Report of Session 2017–19 HC 1034 HL PAPER 160 House of Commons House of Lords Joint Committee on Human Rights Windrush generation detention Sixth Report of Session 2017–19 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 27 June 2018 Ordered by the House of Lords to be printed 27 June 2018 HC 1034 HL PAPER 160 Published on 29 June 2018 by authority of the House of Commons and House of Lords Joint Committee on Human Rights The Joint Committee on Human Rights is appointed by the House of Lords and the House of Commons to consider matters relating to human rights in the United Kingdom (but excluding consideration of individual cases); proposals for remedial orders, draft remedial orders and remedial orders. The Joint Committee has a maximum of six Members appointed by each House, of whom the quorum for any formal proceedings is two from each House. Current membership House of Commons Ms Harriet Harman QC MP (Labour, Camberwell and Peckham) (Chair) Fiona Bruce MP (Conservative, Congleton) Ms Karen Buck MP (Labour, Westminster North) Alex Burghart MP (Conservative, Brentwood and Ongar) Joanna Cherry QC MP (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh South West) Jeremy Lefroy MP (Conservative, Stafford) House of Lords Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat) Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon (Labour) Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne (Conservative) Baroness Prosser (Labour) Lord Trimble (Conservative) Lord Woolf (Crossbench) Powers The Committee has the power to require the submission of written evidence and documents, to examine witnesses, to meet at any time (except when Parliament is prorogued or dissolved), to adjourn from place to place, to appoint specialist advisers, and to make Reports to both Houses. The Lords Committee has power to agree with the Commons in the appointment of a Chairman. Publication Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/jchr by Order of the two Houses. Evidence relating to this report is published on the relevant inquiry page of the Committee’s website. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Eve Samson (Commons Clerk), Simon Cran-McGreehin (Lords Clerk), Eleanor Hourigan (Counsel), Samantha Godec (Deputy Counsel), Katherine Hill (Committee Specialist), Penny McLean (Committee Specialist), Shabana Gulma (Specialist Assistant), Miguel Boo Fraga (Senior Committee Assistant), Heather Fuller (Lords Committee Assistant) and Calli Haramaras (Hansard scholar). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, Committee Office, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 2467; the Committee’s email address is [email protected] Windrush generation detention 1 Contents Summary 3 1 Introduction 6 Purpose of this report 6 Our inquiry 7 2 Background 8 Right to liberty 8 Windrush generation and the Compliant/Hostile Environment 9 3 Detention of Windrush generation: Case Studies 10 Mr Bryan and Ms Wilson 10 Mr Bryan 10 Ms Wilson 11 4 Conclusions drawn from case studies 14 Cases illustrative of wider problems with the UK’s approach to immigration detention 14 Lack of awareness of rights of Commonwealth citizens who settled in the UK before 1973 15 Officials ignoring evidence 15 Burden of proof 17 Use of detention powers 18 Home Office culture 20 Other issues 21 Limited support after being released from detention 21 5 The need for a proper review of the Windrush episode 23 Conclusions and recommendations 24 Annex 1: Committee’s Analysis of Timeline of Key Events from Home Office Case File on Ms Wilson 27 Annex 2: Committee’s Analysis of Timeline of Key Events from Home Office Case File on Mr Bryan 35 Declaration of Lords’ Interests 42 Formal minutes 43 Witnesses 44 List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament 45 Windrush generation detention 3 Summary Liberty is a core right. An individual should not be deprived of their liberty without good reason and adequate safeguards. In our work on cases of wrongful detention of members of the Windrush generation, we took the example of two individuals, Mr Anthony Bryan and Ms Paulette Wilson, to seek to understand why they had been wrongfully detained. The experience of detention is traumatising and debilitating, as shown by the evidence we heard from these two members of the Windrush generation, who were detained wrongfully, despite the fact that they had leave to remain in the UK, under the Immigration Act 1971. We are very grateful to Mr Anthony Bryan and Ms Paulette Wilson, and Ms Janet Mackay and Ms Natalie Barnes, who accompanied them, for being prepared to revisit their experience, which was of enormous help to us in our work. Our analysis of their case files confirmed that Home Office officials discounted ample information and evidence—the individuals’ accounts of their lives; evidence and pieces of information on the case files; representations from family members, lawyers and people who had known them for decades; letters and representations from MPs—all of which were consistent and clear representations on behalf of these individuals meeting their accounts of their lives which should have sufficed to ensure that such individuals were not deprived of their liberty. However, somehow it did not trigger the appropriate response and these people were not listened to and were wrongfully detained. The evidence session suggested that in these cases, none of the safeguards to prevent against wrongful detention worked. These people were consequently detained unlawfully and inappropriately. We examined the case files of two people who were wrongfully detained and it was clear that the case files shared the same characteristics: • Information and evidence on the case file, which supported the individual’s account, was ignored; • Family protestations were not heeded; • Representations by MPs failed to elevate concerns; • There were numerous different people involved in the handling of each file but all proceeded with the wrongful detention of those individuals; and • There was inadequate oversight of these cases by more senior officials to guarantee that proper steps were being taken to ensure just and timely progress of the cases. In relation to the wrongful detentions of Mr Bryan and Ms Wilson, the Home Office told us that they were a result of “a series of mistakes over a period of time.”1 We did not find that explanation credible or sufficient. We take the view that there was in all likelihood a systemic failure. 1 Q24 [Rt Hon Sajid Javid MP] 4 Windrush generation detention The Home Office does not appear to have acted like an organisation that had discovered it had made serious mistakes. When an organisation comes across a serious mistake, they take steps to address it—by identifying the staff involved, arranging extra training, extra supervision, or even disciplinary action. Yet the Home Office has not reported taking any action in respect of any of the individuals who played a part in wrongly depriving these two people of their liberty. Other than one senior civil servant being moved out of the Home Office to the Cabinet Office, there have been no reports of staffing changes or disciplinary action against staff at the Home Office.2. In our view this suggests that in these cases the Home Office has an inadequate regard for the human rights of those who might wrongly be subject to their immigration procedures and that there is neither sufficient internal or external challenge to prevent the system depriving individuals of the fundamental right not to be detained. It is unusual for a Committee to make criticisms in the terms that we have before our inquiry is concluded. However, we regard this as being a quite exceptional situation and it is important that as the criticisms we have made are fully justified by the information already available to us, our views should be made known and not be delayed by the desirability of there being further inquiries. It is welcome that the new Home Secretary, Rt Hon Sajid Javid MP, shares our concern for the protection of human rights and in swiftly sharing these two case files has displayed a welcome transparency. We welcome his acknowledgement that “something went massively wrong” and note his commitment to find out “why did it happen and what lessons can we learn from it? […] We are all sorry for it, but how can we make sure that nothing like this happens to others?”3 We appreciate the Home Secretary’s determination to ensure fundamental change takes place with regard to his officials’ handling of such matters, and his comment that our Committee’s work can help his Department to respect human rights. In order to understand further how the system came to deprive individuals of the fundamental right not to be detained without justification and adequate safeguards, we have asked the Home Office for further information including: • the guidance given to officials dealing with individuals who are challenging the prospect of detention or proposed detention; • the case files of other Windrush detention cases, in order to establish whether these were, as the Home Office claims, “mistakes” or whether they were part of a wider systemic problem. We have therefore asked for the case files of all the other Windrush generation who were detained prior to being deported. The Home Secretary has told the Home Affairs Select Committee that he
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SCO Appendix- Correspondence
    Your NHS partner for improving health and integrating care Consultation on a Strategic Commissioning Organisation for Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Appendix: Correspondence Monday, 2 September 2019 midlandsandlancashirecsu.nhs.uk Table of Contents 1 Tamworth Council .................................................................................................................... 3 2 Healthwatch Stoke-on-Trent .................................................................................................... 4 3 North Staffordshire Combined Healthcare Trust ................................................................... 7 4 Reach (part of Assist) ............................................................................................................... 9 5 Stoke-on-Trent City Council .................................................................................................. 11 6 Adults and Neighbourhoods OS Committee, Stoke-on-Trent City Council ....................... 13 7 Paul Farrelly MP ...................................................................................................................... 15 8 Staffordshire Moorlands District Council ............................................................................. 16 9 Jeremy Lefroy MP ................................................................................................................... 17 10 University Hospitals North Midlands .................................................................................... 18 11 Staffordshire County
    [Show full text]
  • Register of All-Party Parliamentary Groups
    Register of All-Party Parliamentary Groups Published 29 August 2018 REGISTER OF ALL-PARTY PARLIAMENTARY GROUPS Contents INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 The Nature of All-Party Parliamentary Groups ...................................................................................................... 3 Information and advice about All-Party Parliamentary Groups ............................................................................ 3 COUNTRY GROUPS .................................................................................................................................................... 4 SUBJECT GROUPS ................................................................................................................................................... 187 2 | P a g e REGISTER OF ALL-PARTY PARLIAMENTARY GROUPS INTRODUCTION The Nature of All-Party Parliamentary Groups An All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) consists of Members of both Houses who join together to pursue a particular topic or interest. In order to use the title All-Party Parliamentary Group, a Group must be open to all Members of both Houses, regardless of party affiliation, and must satisfy the rules agreed by the House for All-Party Parliamentary Groups. The Register of All-Party Parliamentary Groups, which is maintained by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, is a definitive list of such groups. It contains the financial
    [Show full text]
  • Site Allocations Document (SAD)
    South Staffordshire Council South Staffordshire Local Plan Site Allocations Document (SAD) Pre-Submission Consultation Statement Appendices SAD Pre-Submission Consultation Statement – Appendices June 2017 Contents Appendices Appendix A List of Main Bodies/Organisations/People Consulted 1 Appendix B Sample Letter & Response Form 19 Appendix C Public Notice and Extracts from Review Newspaper 24 Appendix D Example Exhibition Poster 25 Appendix E Summary table of SAD consultation 26 Appendix F Breakdown of Responses by Site 27 Appendix G Links to Copies of and links to Responses 8 SAD Pre-Submission Consultation Statement – Appendices June 2017 Appendix A List of Main Consultation Bodies/Organisations South Staffordshire Parish Councils Acton Trussell, Bednall & Teddesley Hay Bilbrook Parish Council Blymhill and Weston under Lizard Parish Council Bobbington Parish Council Brewood and Coven Parish Council Cheslyn Hay Parish Council Codsall Parish Council Dunston with Coppenhall Parish Council Enville Parish Council Essington Parish Council Featherstone and Brinsford Parish Council Great Wyrley Parish Council Hatherton Parish Council Hilton Parish Council Himley Parish Council Huntington Parish Council Kinver Parish Council Lapley, Stretton and Wheaton Aston Parish Council Lower Penn Parish Council Pattingham and Patshull Parish Council Penkridge Parish Council Perton Parish Council Saredon Parish Council Shareshill Parish Council Swindon Parish Council Trysull and Seisdon Parish Council Wombourne Parish Council Staffordshire Authorities Cannock
    [Show full text]
  • Whole Day Download the Hansard
    Tuesday Volume 597 23 June 2015 No. 21 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Tuesday 23 June 2015 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2015 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 735 23 JUNE 2015 736 is my right hon. Friend taking to support such charities House of Commons and to ensure that offenders leave prison ready to face the world of work? Tuesday 23 June 2015 Michael Gove: I commend my hon. Friend for raising the work of those two voluntary sector organisations. The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock Without the work of voluntary and third sector organisations, we would not be able to provide the educational and rehabilitative services that enable people PRAYERS who are currently in our prisons to have a second chance. [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] Michael Fabricant: Not just voluntary services have a role to play, but private businesses such as Marks & Spencer, and indeed other well known department stores. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we should encourage Oral Answers to Questions private enterprise to help in the rehabilitation of offenders to get them back to work? Michael Gove: I absolutely agree—that is a very good JUSTICE point. May I single out for praise the John Lewis Partnership, which does such a fantastic job in helping people from a variety of backgrounds to be all they can The Secretary of State was asked— be? I stress that there are other organisations, such as Greggs the bakers and, of course, Timpson, the shoe Prisoner Rehabilitation Services and key repair firm.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
    Friday Volume 585 12 September 2014 No. 38 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Friday 12 September 2014 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2014 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 1165 12 SEPTEMBER 2014 1166 Featherstone, rh Miller, Andrew House of Commons Lynne Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Foster, rh Mr Don Moore, rh Michael Gauke, Mr David Mudie, Mr George Friday 12 September 2014 George, Andrew Murphy, rh Mr Jim Goodman, Helen Newmark, Mr Brooks The House met at half-past Nine o’clock Goodwill, Mr Robert O’Brien, rh Mr Stephen Gove, rh Michael Owen, Albert Gray, Mr James Phillipson, Bridget PRAYERS Greening, rh Justine Pritchard, Mark Griffith, Nia Pugh, John Hames, Duncan Rogerson, Dan [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] Hands, rh Greg Sandys, Laura Harris, Rebecca Scott, Mr Lee Sir Robert Smith (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) Heald, Sir Oliver Shuker, Gavin (LD): I beg to move, That the House sit in private. Heath, Mr David Skinner, Mr Dennis Hollobone, Mr Philip Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 163). Smith, Julian Horwood, Martin The House divided: Ayes 4, Noes 106. Howarth, rh Mr George Spellar, rh Mr John Spelman, rh Mrs Division No. 50] [9.34 am Howarth, Sir Gerald Hughes, rh Simon Caroline James, Margot Stride, Mel AYES Jarvis, Dan Stunell, rh Sir Andrew Leigh, Sir Edward Tellers for the Ayes: Johnson, Diana Swayne, rh Mr Desmond Mudie, Mr George Sir Malcolm Bruce and Jones,
    [Show full text]
  • Christine Keeler and Me JERRY HAYES 12 John Bercow’S Unspeakable Memoirs
    ME ER M M B E R R O S F H S O N U S O E M Order! Order! OF COM The Official Journal of the Association of Former Members of Parliament SPRING 2020 ALSO IN THIS EDITION... NICHOLAS BENNETT 6 Number crunching the General Election TERESA PEARCE 7 The abuse MPs suffer threatens democracy IVAN LAWRENCE 11 How the National Lottery began Christine Keeler and ME JERRY HAYES 12 John Bercow’s Unspeakable memoirs Two former MPs remember the young woman at the centre of the Sixties sex scandal p. 4 & 5 Order! Order! Spring 2020 Note From the Editor By Andy McSmith here are 165 more former MPs than before, and that the Conservatives were Parliamentary Constituencies – now in Tthere were since the last issue of Order likely to benefit from “having sucked at its 27th edition – at a 50 % discount for Order, many of whom were not expecting the pool of Brexit support”. Association members. their circumstances to change so suddenly. He added that – ominously for Labour * * * Five who were, because they chose to – the single word that cropped up most n a magazine written and read by stand down, have contributed to the on the doorstep was ‘Corbyn’, and the Iformer MPs, the books reviewed in the current issue. Many thanks to Stephen most common phrases were “this time” back are all about politics. But late last Pound – whose father, Pelham Pound, and “not this time” – but he detected year I received one delightful book by is pictured on the front cover, with his signs that Labour was retaking some of that polymath ex-MP, Gyles Brandreth friend Stephen Ward – Jeremy Lefroy, the Remain vote back off the Liberal – Dancing by the Light of the Moon, How Teresa Pearce, Paul Farrelly and Sarah Democrats.
    [Show full text]
  • Whole Day Download the Hansard
    Wednesday Volume 652 16 January 2019 No. 235 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Wednesday 16 January 2019 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2019 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 1143 16 JANUARY 2019 1144 12. Marion Fellows (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP): House of Commons What recent discussions he has had with the Home Secretary on the potential effect on Scotland of UK Wednesday 16 January 2019 immigration policy after the UK leaves the EU. [908517] 14. Drew Hendry (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock Strathspey) (SNP): What recent discussions he has had with the Home Secretary on the potential effect on PRAYERS Scotland of UK immigration policy after the UK leaves the EU. [908519] [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] The Secretary of State for Scotland (David Mundell): This has been a momentous week for Andy Murray, so I Speaker’s Statement am sure you will agree, Mr Speaker, that it is appropriate that at this Scottish questions we acknowledge in this Mr Speaker: Order. Colleagues will no doubt have House Andy’s extraordinary contribution to British seen a number of images taken by Members of scenes in sport, and his personal resilience and courage, and the Division Lobby last night. I would like to remind all express our hope that we will once again see Andy Murray colleagues that, as the recently issued guide to the rules on court. of behaviour and courtesies of the House makes explicitly I am in regular contact with the Home Secretary on a clear, Members range of issues of importance to Scotland, including “must not use any device to take photographs, film or make audio future immigration policy after the UK leaves the European recordings in or around the Chamber.” Union.
    [Show full text]
  • The Substantive Representation of Ethnic Minorities in the UK Parliament
    The Substantive Representation of Ethnic Minorities in the UK Parliament A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in the Faculty of Humanities 2017 Rebecca McKee School of Social Sciences Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................ ....................... 101010 Why is this important? .................................................................................................................. 14 Why now? ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Descriptive and Substantive Representation ................................................................................. 17 Theories and measurements of substantive representation .......................................................... 23 Chapter 2. Theory and Literature ................................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................... ....... 373737 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Invest, Don't Cut the Predicted Impact of Government Policy on Funding For
    Invest, Don’t Cut The predicted impact of Government policy on funding for schools and academies by 2020 A report by NUT and ATL This report presents findings from an NUT / ATL interactive website which demonstrates the likely impact on schools and academies of the Government’s current school funding policies and its plan to redistribute existing funding between schools in England - www.schoolcuts.org.uk The interactive website allows users to access detailed predictions for every school’s funding per pupil in real terms, as affected by the Government’s proposal to implement a new funding formula for schools alongside a freeze in funding per pupil and cost increases imposed by Government. The predictions are based on publicly available government data and the most robustly constructed proposed funding formula for schools currently available. With schools already struggling to cope, the Government plans what the Institute for Fiscal Studies has described as the largest real terms cut in school funding in a generation. We know that children are already suffering – class sizes are rising, curriculum choices are being cut, pupils with special educational needs and disabilities are losing vital support and school staff are losing their jobs. Instead of investing more money in education to address the funding shortages already hitting schools and academies, the Government plans only to move existing money around the country through a new funding formula. For every school which gains from this, others will lose – and almost every school will lose when the impact of inflation and other cost increases, against which the funding freeze offers no protection, are also taken into account.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeremy Lefroy MP
    Advisory Board Member Jeremy Lefroy MP Jeremy Lefroy has been the Member of Parliament for Stafford (UK) since 2010, representing the Conservative Party. He was formerly one of the three Conservative Councillors for the Westlands ward in Newcastle-under-Lyme Council. In his role as a Councillor, he served as a Cabinet Member for Resources. Since his election as MP, he has served on the International Development Select Committee and the Health and Social Care Bill Committee. He is a member of the All Party Parliamentary Groups on Africa, Energy Studies, Food Security in the Developing World, Fuel Poverty, Global Security and Non-Proliferation, Great Lakes Region of Africa, Guinea-Bissau, Human Rights, Human Trafficking, Interfaith, Overseas Development, Penal Reform, Prevention of Genocide and Crimes against Humanity, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, and Zambia, as well as the Britain-Palestine, British- American and British Swiss Parliamentary Groups. Lefroy believes in tackling poverty through enterprise and job creation and founded the charitable trust Equity for Africa, which provides equity-type funding for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Africa. In 2010, he helped to establish the charity Stafford Works, which promotes apprenticeships, job creation and entrepreneurship in Stafford constituency. Between 1989 and 2000, Lefroy worked in the coffee industry in Tanzania. On returning to the UK, he worked on assisting smallholder farmers in East Africa until his election to Parliament. Lefroy has also served on the Independent Monitoring Board of a Young Offenders Institution and as a school governor, and assists a local church youth group. Published 11/08/2014.
    [Show full text]
  • HS2 Property Compensation Consultation 2013
    High Speed Two: Property Compensation Consultation 2013 Consultation Summary Report March 2014 A report to HS2 Ltd and the Department for Transport Prepared by Dialogue by Design Contents Executive summary 3 Glossary of terms 7 Chapter 1 About the consultation 10 Chapter 2 Participation 15 Chapter 3 Methodology 20 Chapter 4 Reading the report 27 Chapter 5 General comments on the proposals for long-term discretionary property compensation 29 Chapter 6 Comments on the proposed assessment criteria 41 Chapter 7 Comments on the express purchase scheme 50 Chapter 8 Comments on the long-term hardship scheme 58 Chapter 9 Comments on the sale and rent back scheme and alternative approach to renting properties back to their former owners 69 Chapter 10 Comments on the voluntary purchase scheme 79 Chapter 11 Comments on property bond schemes 87 Chapter 12 Comments on the rural support zone 97 Chapter 13 Other comments 103 Appendix 1 List of participating organisations 113 Appendix 2 Organised submissions 117 Appendix 3 Codes by theme and by question 123 High Speed Two: Property Compensation Dialogue by Design 2 of 173 Consultation 2013 Classification: Not restricted Executive summary This report provides a summary of the responses to the Government’s Property Compensation Consultation 2013 for Phase One of High Speed Two (HS2) between London and the West Midlands. The consultation began on Thursday 12 September 2013 and closed on Wednesday 4 December 2013. The purpose of the consultation was to enable the Government to make informed decisions on a set of compensation measures, based on the views of those individuals and organisations who expressed their opinions on the proposals.
    [Show full text]
  • Open PDF 893KB
    HS2 HOL-037 Hybrid Bill Petition House of Lords Session 2019-21 High Speed Rail (West Midlands to Crewe) Bill Do not include any images or graphics in your petition. There will be an opportunity to present these later if you give evidence to the committee. Your petition does not need to be signed. Expand the size of the text boxes as you need. 1. Petitioner information In the box below, give the name and address of each individual, business or organisation(s) submitting the petition. Theo Clarke MP Unit 8, Pearl House, Staffordshire Technology Park Beaconside, Stafford. ST18 0GB In the box below, give a description of the petitioners. For example, “we are the owners/tenants of the addresses above”; “my company has offices at the address above”; “our organisation represents the interests of…”; “we are the parish council of…” I am the member of Parliament for the Stafford constituency. The proposed HS2a route cuts through my constituency, severely affecting Moreton, Great Haywood, Ingestre, Staffordshire Showground, Hopton, Marston and Yarlet in the Stafford constituency. On its route it will affect miles of beautiful countryside and has already seriously impacted hundreds of lives. 2. Objections to the Bill In the box below, write your objections to the Bill and why your property or other interests are specially and directly affected. Please number each paragraph. Only objections outlined in this petition can be presented when giving evidence to the committee. You will not be entitled to be heard on new matters. A. My predecessor (Jeremy Lefroy) has advised me that the announcement of the proposed route for HS2, Phase 2, on 28th January 2013, sent a shockwave across a considerable part of my constituency.
    [Show full text]