the princess of wales kate middleton has left hospital after a nearly two—week stay following abdominal surgery. and chinese property giant evergrande is ordered to liquidate by hong kong's high court. hello, i'm luxmy gopal, welcome to verified live, three hours of breaking stories and checking out the truth behind them. let's go live now to do or what we will do before that, we will start with this story. president biden has said the united states will respond to a drone attack on an american military base injordan

near the syrian border, at a time and in a manner of its choosing. mr biden blamed the attack on radical iran—backed militant groups operating in syria and iraq. tehran has denied any involvement in the attack in which three service personnel were killed and 3a injured. our world affairs correspondent paul adams has more. the americans say the attack happened at a base known as tower 22, right on the syrian—jordanian border. it's one of many american bases across the region. there have been dozens of drone and missile attacks in recent months, but no american personnel have been killed until now. joe biden, seen here attending church, was quick to point the finger. "we know it was carried out by radical iran—backed militant groups operating in syria and iraq," he said. it's not necessarily a tipping point into uncontrolled escalation between the united states and iran,

but it's another very dangerous step because, as i say, the us will have to respond even more strongly than it's done to previous attacks. carefully cultivated over years, iran has a wide network of allies and proxies operating in countries across the middle east. they're all opposed to israel and the united states. it's sometimes called the axis of resistance. there are pro—iranian militias in lebanon, the palestinian territories, gaza and the west bank, plus iraq and syria, and far to the south, there's also the houthis in yemen. over the weekend, the houthis have been launching their own attacks, hitting a tanker in the gulf of aden. british warship hms diamond used an air defense missile to bring down a houthi drone. with british help, the us have been hitting houthi military targets for a couple of weeks.

so far, the houthis seem undeterred. they say they'll stop attacking ships if and when there's a ceasefire in gaza. the problems america is dealing with across the region aren't all about gaza, but the war there has left the whole middle east a lot more dangerous. paul adams, bbc news. we can speak to bbc monitoring's middle east specialist. tell us a bit more about the reaction from jordan? it bit more about the reaction from jordan? ., , ., , jordan? it was an interesting reaction from _ jordan? it was an interesting reaction from jordan - jordan? it was an interesting | reaction from jordan because reaction from jordan because initially, due to the proximity of where this site is located to the syrian border, the first response from jordan last night was to say that these us soldiers were actually killed on syrian territory before later clarifying this morning that it did take place on their soil. and part of thejordanian response has been to pledge that it will continue fighting what it says is terrorism and also arms and drugs smuggling from across the border in syria. what's interesting about this is thatjordan has been carrying out

multiple military sites inside syria on suspected drug smugglers who themselves are accused of having connections to iran backed militant groups, so this reaction seems very much in line with those continued operations. find much in line with those continued operations-_ operations. and this is the latest in what have _ operations. and this is the latest in what have been _ operations. and this is the latest in what have been many - operations. and this is the latest in what have been many attacksl operations. and this is the latest l in what have been many attacks on operations. and this is the latest - in what have been many attacks on us basesin in what have been many attacks on us bases in the middle east in the past? bases in the middle east in the ast? ~ ~ ., ., bases in the middle east in the ast? . ~' ., ., , . bases in the middle east in the ast? ~ ., ., , . ., past? we know that since the gaza war be . an past? we know that since the gaza war began on _ past? we know that since the gaza war began on the _ past? we know that since the gaza war began on the 7th _ past? we know that since the gaza war began on the 7th of— past? we know that since the gaza war began on the 7th of october, i war began on the 7th of october, there have been more than 100 strikes on us bases in the region, in syria, iraq, now also injordan. but since about 2020—2022, there was a real spike in these attacks as well. and us forces would tend to take out retaliatory strikes in response. what has changed since the 7th of october is many of these groups have now rebranded into a groups have now rebranded into a group called the islamic resistance in iraq, and they are now carrying out these attacks in light of the gaza war. ., ~ , ., .,

out these attacks in light of the gaza war. ., ~' , ., ., , out these attacks in light of the gaza war. ., ~ , ., ., , , gaza war. thank you for bringing us an udate gaza war. thank you for bringing us an update on _ gaza war. thank you for bringing us an update on that. _ gaza war. thank you for bringing us an update on that. in _ gaza war. thank you for bringing us an update on that. in the _ gaza war. thank you for bringing us an update on that. in the past - gaza war. thank you for bringing us an update on that. in the past few. an update on that. in the past few minutes, king charles has left hospital in central london. he spent three nights there after receiving treatment for his prostate. it comes just hours after the princess of wales left the same hospital after nearly a two week stay. she is recovering from abdominal surgery. for more now, we can go live to our correspondent, daniela relph. it was a very different departure for the king than the princess of wales earlier today. she had left out of the public eye in a vehicle to recuperate in windsor after 13 nights are spent at this hospital behind me, the london clinic in marylebone. with queen camilla alongside him, it was a very different kind of departure. he came through the doors behind me with the queen at his side, there was a huge crowd waiting for him in this part of central london. he smiled, he

waved, he looked very happy to be out of hospital understandably. he didn't say much, there were a few questions asking him how he was and how he was doing, but he didn't answer. hejust smiled how he was doing, but he didn't answer. he just smiled and waved at people. he looked well, he was working fine, the queen at his side. she had arrived about an hour before to accompany him as he was discharged from hospital. he spent three nights here after having that surgery on friday for an enlarged prostate. the queen has been here with him each day. he i have some time to recuperate primary before any public engagements. it could be any public engagements. it could be a month before we see the king again carrying out any kind of royal duty, it will be even longer before we see the princess of wales, until after easter. she is going to have a couple of months to recover at her home in windsor after what was clearly very significant surgery, abdominal surgery here a couple of weeks ago. both of those senior

members of the royal family now out of hospital. we are told both are doing well, both of issued statements thanking their medical team for the care they received at this hospital, and the princess of wales saying in particular that she wanted to thank the dedicated care from the nurses who had looked after her while she spent almost two weeks year. her while she spent almost two weeks ear. ., ~' her while she spent almost two weeks ear. ., ~ , ., ., her while she spent almost two weeks ear. ., ~ i. ., , , year. thank you. that is my colleague — year. thank you. that is my colleague daniela _ year. thank you. that is my colleague daniela relph - year. thank you. that is my - colleague daniela relph they're updating us on the news that king charles has left hospital in central london after a routine procedure. i just want to take you life to the house of lords now, where the government's won the bill is being debated. let's take a look at those pictures. this is their planned legislation to send some migrants to rwanda, it is being debated today in the house of lords. it did pass through the commons earlier this month after a number of conservative rebels withdrew their opposition. we have now got a number of the house of lords members speaking. we are

expecting to hear from the archbishop of canterbury. it is absolutely _ archbishop of canterbury. it is absolutely clear _ archbishop of canterbury. it 3 absolutely clear that specifically in the raf there are another 55 positions that have been put in place on personnel support on theh our site to see that this is stopped. £15 our site to see that this is stepped-— our site to see that this is sto ed. , ., ,., ., stopped. 45 years ago, i did the study into _ stopped. 45 years ago, i did the study into whether _ stopped. 45 years ago, i did the study into whether women - stopped. 45 years ago, i did the i study into whether women should serve _ study into whether women should serve at _ study into whether women should serve at sea in the royal navy. i said they — serve at sea in the royal navy. i said they should and i think it has worked _ said they should and i think it has worked in — said they should and i think it has worked in fact very, very well. but there _ worked in fact very, very well. but there were — worked in fact very, very well. but there were people against it at the lime _ there were people against it at the time we _ there were people against it at the time. we have 55 destroyers and frigates, — time. we have 55 destroyers and frigates, we now have 16. does the noble _ frigates, we now have 16. does the noble lord. — frigates, we now have 16. does the noble lord, the minister, revealed that is_ noble lord, the minister, revealed that is too— noble lord, the minister, revealed that is too few? yes, ido yes, i do think it is too few. i think everybody knows that. but

however many frigates and destroyers we have the level of unacceptable behaviour must finish. that concludes _ behaviour must finish. that concludes all _ behaviour must finish. that concludes all the _ behaviour must finish. that concludes all the questions for today — concludes all the questions for today we _ concludes all the questions for today. we now— concludes all the questions for today. we now come - concludes all the questions for today. we now come to - concludes all the questions for - today. we now come to something previously — today. we now come to something previously debated _ today. we now come to something previously debated in _ today. we now come to something previously debated in the - today. we now come to something previously debated in the grand i previously debated in the grand committee _ previously debated in the grand committee. regulations- previously debated in the grand committee. regulations 2024. i previously debated in the grand i committee. regulations 2024. my lords, i committee. regulations 2024. lords, i beg to move the motion standing in my name in the order paper. standing in my name in the order -a er. , ., standing in my name in the order --aer. , ., , ., , paper. the question is that this order be agreed _ paper. the question is that this order be agreed to. _ paper. the question is that this order be agreed to. the - paper. the question is that this i order be agreed to. the contents have _ order be agreed to. the contents have it _ order be agreed to. the contents have it. financial— order be agreed to. the contents have it. financial services- order be agreed to. the contents have it. financial services act - order be agreed to. the contents. have it. financial services act 2021 overseas _ have it. financial services act 2021 overseas funds _ have it. financial services act 2021 overseas funds regime _ have it. financial services act 2021 overseas funds regime and - overseas funds regime and recognition _ overseas funds regime and recognition of— overseas funds regime and recognition of parts - overseas funds regime and recognition of parts of - overseas funds regime and - recognition of parts of schemes, amendment— recognition of parts of schemes, amendment and— recognition of parts of schemes, amendment and modification, . amendment and modification, regulation _ amendment and modification, regulation 2024 _ amendment and modification, regulation 2024 and _ amendment and modification, regulation 2024 and one - amendment and modification, | regulation 2024 and one other motion — regulation 2024 and one other motion 0n— regulation 2024 and one other motion. on behalf— regulation 2024 and one other motion. on behalf of- regulation 2024 and one otherj motion. on behalf of baroness regulation 2024 and one other i motion. on behalf of baroness of normanton _ motion. on behalf of baroness of normanton tria— motion. on behalf of baroness of normanton-_ motion. on behalf of baroness of normanton. g ., , , ., ., normanton. my lords, i beg to move the two motions. _

normanton. my lords, i beg to move the two motions. the _ normanton. my lords, i beg to move the two motions. the question - normanton. my lords, i beg to move the two motions. the question is - normanton. my lords, i beg to move the two motions. the question is two motions in the _ the two motions. the question is two motions in the name _ the two motions. the question is two motions in the name of— the two motions. the question is two motions in the name of the _ the two motions. the question is two | motions in the name of the baroness. as many— motions in the name of the baroness. as many of— motions in the name of the baroness. as many of that— motions in the name of the baroness. as many of that opinion, _ motions in the name of the baroness. as many of that opinion, say - as many of that opinion, say content _ as many of that opinion, say content the _ as many of that opinion, say content. the contents - as many of that opinion, say content. the contents have i as many of that opinion, say. content. the contents have it. safety— content. the contents have it. safety offer _ content. the contents have it. safety offer band _ content. the contents have it. safety offer band asylum - content. the contents have it. safety offer band asylum and i safety offer band asylum and innovation _ safety offer band asylum and innovation bill. _ welcome lord stewart. you are watchin: welcome lord stewart. you are watching activity _ welcome lord stewart. you are watching activity in _ welcome lord stewart. you are watching activity in the - welcome lord stewart. you are watching activity in the house l welcome lord stewart. you are | watching activity in the house of lords. before they talk about the government's flagship rhonda bill, facing its first test in the house of lords today. debating the main principles of the legislation which the lib dems are pushing to kill the bill in its entirety. let's just listen in.

bill in its entirety. let's 'ust listen rmd bill in its entirety. let's 'ust listen ind bill in its entirety. let's 'ust listen in. �* ,, ., , listen in. i'm speaking as a member ofthe listen in. i'm speaking as a member of the government _ listen in. i'm speaking as a member of the government for _ listen in. i'm speaking as a member of the government for the _ listen in. i'm speaking as a member of the government for the bill, - listen in. i'm speaking as a member of the government for the bill, notl of the government for the bill, not in my formal capacity. and my contributions and responses will reflect this. my lords, the united kingdom has a proud history of providing protection for those who are most in need through a provision of safe and legal roots. since 2015, we have offered over half a million people safe and legal roots into the united kingdom. through our afghanistan, ukraine and hong kong roots. this includes over 28,700 refugees, including over 14,000 children via a former refugee resettlement schemes. these established resettlement schemes play a key role in the global response to... of course. ijust wanted him to clarify his opening

remarks. is he saying he is speaking to this house as a general government minister and not in his capacity as a law officer, or did i miss hear him? your lordship heard me correctly. the convention that relates to noble officers, whereby we do not divulge whether or not our opinion has been sought, nor do we divulge the content of that opinion. and it was in order to clarify my position that i was not trespassing upon that convention that i spoke, and i hope that that satisfies the noble lord. my lords, i was discussing the refugee resettlement schemes which this country has in place. these established resettlement schemes play, as i would say, a key role in the global response to humanitarian crises, saving lives and offering stability

to those most in need of protection. but our willingness to help those fleeing war and persecution must be tied to a capacity to do so. and critical to this is tackling illegal migration. there is nothing generous about allowing the status quo to continue. that would only serve the deplorable people smugglers who facilitate these dangerous crossings, it would only put more lives at risk, and it would continue to strain our communities and our public services. as the prime minister has made clear, it is the government's priority to stop the boats and welcome the fact that this is a shared objective across the lordship's house. the government is making good progress in stopping the boats. last year, in 2023, small boats. last year, in 2023, small boat arrivals to the united kingdom fell by around a third, with albanian arrivals down by over 90%

whilst we saw illegal entry rise elsewhere in europe. we have ramped up elsewhere in europe. we have ramped up efforts to prevent crossings and disrupt the smugglers with particular success stemming from increased collaboration with the french authorities. ourjoint work with france prevented over 26,000 individual crossings by small boat to the united kingdom. sincejuly 2020, thejoint to the united kingdom. sincejuly 2020, the joint intelligence cell and french law enforcement partners have dismantled 82 criminal gangs responsible for people smuggling migrants via small boat crossings. as of september 2023, immigration enforcement visits were up 68% compared to the same period in 2022. last year, the home office arrested 92 individuals identified as small

boat pilots and 253 people smugglers. in addition, during financial year 22—23, the national crime agency conducted what is believed to be the biggest ever international operation targeting criminal networks suspected of using small boats to smuggle thousands to the united kingdom. the operation so the united kingdom. the operation so the seizure of 135 boats and... but my lords, the increase in crossings in recent years means around 51,000 otherwise destitute migrants are currently being accommodated in hotels. costing the taxpayer in excess of £8 million per day. the small boats problem is part of a global migration crisis. a challenge that most of us would accept has no

single solution. but this government remains resolute in its commitment to preventing the misuse and innovation of our systems by illegal migrants, stopping these dangerous crossings and addressing the concerns of the british people. operationalising the rwanda scheme is a key part of the government must make efforts to deliver this mission, a partnership that has always been part of the wider programme of work to deal with one of the most significant challenges of the most significant challenges of our time. it is only by fully implementing the migration and economic development partnership that we will create a strong deterrent necessary to stop these dangerous crossings and break the business model of the criminal gangs. doing nothing is not an option. my lords, the supreme court passjudgment on the 15th option. my lords, the supreme court pass judgment on the 15th of november 2023 concluded that

deficiencies in the government of rwanda's arrangements for determining asylum claims could lead to risks. the lordships also recognised explicitly and in terms that there is deficiencies could be addressed in future. in response, the home secretary signed a new internationally binding treaty between the united kingdom and the government of the republic of rwanda which responds to the concerns raised and resolves those issues. the government also introduced the safety of rwanda asylum and immigration bill which buttresses the treaty. confirming that the government of the republic of rwanda will fulfil its obligations under the treaty and supporting the relegation of a person to rwanda under the immigration act. the bell is limited solely to the issue of the safety of rwanda and relocations to that country. and makes clear

that with the new treaty rwanda is a safe country. this bill also makes clear that parliament is sovereign and its acts are valid, notwithstanding any interpretation of international law. let me make clear that this does not mean that doing so legislates away our international obligations nor does it seem to overrule or contradict the view of the supreme court, the purpose of the bill is to say that on the basis of the treaty and the evidence before it parliament believes there is obligations to have been met. and the concerns raised by the court are dealt with, i beg your lordship pass pardon. the concerns raised by the court dealt with, not that the government does not care whether or not have been. the bill creates a conclusive presumption that the secretary of state, immigration officers and

courts and tribunals must make decisions about relocation to rwanda and review any such decisions on the basis that rwanda is safe for the purposes of asylum, and in particular will not send someone onto another country, the practice to which i referred earlier, in breach of the refugee convention. the supreme's court conclusions were based on... and did not, indeed could not, consider subsequent work and efforts by and with the government of rwanda to strengthen the redness of rwanda to receive and support individuals relocated under the partnership. the support individuals relocated under the partnership-— support individuals relocated under the partnership. the house of lords there are starting _ the partnership. the house of lords there are starting to _ the partnership. the house of lords there are starting to debate - the partnership. the house of lords there are starting to debate the - there are starting to debate the rwanda bill. rishi sunak�*s flagship policy facing its first test in the house of lords. let's talk to our political correspondent who is following developments from westminster. take us through what is happening in the house of lords

today. happening in the house of lords toda . . . ., happening in the house of lords toda . , , ., , happening in the house of lords toda. ,, ., today. this is what is called the second reading _ today. this is what is called the second reading in _ today. this is what is called the second reading in the _ today. this is what is called the second reading in the house i today. this is what is called the second reading in the house of| second reading in the house of lords. we have already had the various different stages in the house of commons, it wasn't entirely plain sailing for the government in the elected chamber of the houses of parliament. there were around 60 conservative mps who try to make various changes to it, they ultimately failed in their efforts. and it went through with a pretty small rebellion in the end from right wing tory mps. now it is going to the lords where the bill is expected to face much more opposition. probably not in the vote today, though. they will be a couple of votes. the first on the fatal motion put forward by the liberal democrats. effectively, the clue is in the title, it would deal a fatal blow to the bill, it talks about why they should not vote for this bill because it places the uk at risk of breaching international law, the substantial cost to the taxpayer, fails to provide safe and legal

routes to refugees. the labour party is not going to back that liberal democrat motion so that will probably fail. as tends to be the convention when we get second reading the house of lords, they go along with what the elected chamber has decided and they will probably allow it through. that is not to say it is the end of the matter in the lords. in a couple of weeks' time, we are going to get committee stage, which is where members of the lords can table various amendments, make changes, and then i think we will see some substantial defeats for the government. once that has happened, it potentially then goes back to the house of commons and are into the situation known as parliamentary ping-bong, situation known as parliamentary ping—pong, a long, drawn—out game of table tennis where the two different houses pass the legislation to end further for probably the lords gives up. quite a lengthy debate today, probably one for the purists. around 66 speakers listed and some pretty big names in there, from british politics past and present. ken

clarke due to speak, lord frost, who is a very influential figure on the right of the conservative party, and also the archbishop of canterbury, the most senior clerk in the church of england. the most senior clerk in the church of england-— of england. peter, 'ust remind us. this of england. peter, 'ust remind us. this policy. _ of england. peter, 'ust remind us. this policy, which — of england. peter, just remind us. this policy, which has _ of england. peter, just remind us. this policy, which has become - of england. peter, just remind us. | this policy, which has become rishi sunak�*s flagship policy, and he has faced so much from the opposition. it was actually borisjohnson that came up with this idea. it feels like a lifetime ago that he was prime minister. he came up with this idea of sending asylum seekers who come over the english channel in small boats to rwanda, where they will have their claims processed and stay. after that was announced and brought in, the european court of human rights intervened to block flights from taking off. there were a series of court battles, eventually the supreme court in the

autumn of last year decided that it wasn't lawful, the policy, that rwanda was not a safe country, so the uk went back to the board and signed up to a treaty with rwanda to put various safeguards in place and this new piece of legislation, which it believes addresses some of the concerns of the supreme court. what it does is allow ministers the power to ignore last—minute injunctions from the european court of human rights. just last week, the president of the echr is said that no country that signed up to that court can ignore those kinds of injunctions. so whatever happens in parliament on this, and the government quite ultimately will get the legislation onto the statute book, there is the opportunity of some substantial legal challenges down the line. the government still working to the timetable that flights to rwanda will take off in some shape orform in flights to rwanda will take off in some shape or form in the spring. 0k, some shape or form in the spring. ok, peter, thank you for now. i will let you listen to it a little bit

more for us. we are going to return to the house of lords for a short time so that our viewers can listen back in. the bill permits, it does allow individuals to bring challenges against removal to rwanda in exceptionally narrow circumstances. where there is compelling evidence relating specifically to their particular individual circumstances. the basis upon which an individual may bring such a challenge is if an individual can demonstrate that there is a real and imminent risk that they would face serious or irreversible harm related to their particular individual circumstances if they were relocated. if people try to abuse this route by making claims that clear or compelling evidence, or in regard to general claims that they would be unsafe in rwanda, it will be dismissed by the

home office and they will be relegated from the uk before they can challenge that. it is possible but not necessarily likely that there is subject to removal it may be subject to injunctions from the european court of human rights. the bill is clear that it is only for a minister of the crown and the minister alone to determine whether to comply with an interim measure of the strasbourg court. it also makes clear that domestic courts may not have regard to the existence of any interim measure when considering any domestic application from a decision to relocate a person to respond in accordance with the treaty. the terms of the treaty we have negotiated with rwanda address the findings of the united kingdom domestic court and they make specific provision for the treatment of relocated individuals, guaranteeing that safety and protection. the rule of law partnership we have signed with rwanda is a partnership to which we

and rwanda are both completely committed, and this bill, along with the treaty, puts beyond legal doubt the treaty, puts beyond legal doubt the safety of rwanda. we want to make sure that this legislation works, my lords, and it is essential that we act now and do whatever it takes to stop people being manipulated into making dangerous crossings across the channel. illegal migration is one of the most significant challenges of our time. and the government is acting in the national interest. my lords, i beg to move. , ., , ., , to move. the question is that this bill be now _ to move. the question is that this bill be now read _ to move. the question is that this bill be now read a _ to move. the question is that this bill be now read a second - to move. the question is that this bill be now read a second time. . to move. the question is that this. bill be now read a second time. my lords, bill be now read a second time. lords, this is bill be now read a second time. mi lords, this is the third bill be now read a second time. ls’lg lords, this is the third time bill be now read a second time. mg lords, this is the third time in as many years that the government has asked this house to consider legislation to stop boatjourneys and to reform the asylum system. the third year of being presented with

increasingly rushed, unworkable and inhumane solutions to the problem of small boats and asylum. there is a very real problem that needs fixing. this bill, like its predecessors, will not do that. the opposition does not support this bill or the schemes that underpin it. the record of votes cast at the second reading in this place and the third reading in this place and the third reading in the other place will attest to this. this bill, however, completed all stages of the house of commons and so our role is not to undermine the will of the elected house, nor is it to rush through legislation without due consideration. we must treat this bill in the usual manner, we must scrutinise the details of the proposals and advice changes where we think the government has got it wrong. we should not deny ourselves the opportunity to do so and deny our neighbours the chance to consider our work, and it is in this spirit that we will not be

supporting the amendment by the noble lord. my lords, this bill as it stands threatens the uk's compliance with international law. i know this point will be spoken on at length and further stations and so i will not dwell on it for too long at this moment. nor will i speakfor the very long for what this bill demands of our domestic courts. when introducing this bill, the secretary of state claimed that the uk is a country that demonstrates to the whole world the importance of international law. is this the message that this bill sends to the world about the uk's respect for international law? how will the decisions we make now be cited in the future when other countries are asked to follow international law or respect human rights? is this the contribution we want to make? and what does the bill say about our

respect for our own courts if the treaty fails, if reform happens, if there is a coup or if asylum seekers are shot or killed, the government said that british courts cannot consider those facts? it is a large price to pay for what is ultimately a hugely limited scheme. the government has stated that the rwanda government has made an initial provision to receive a few hundred people. to put this figure in context, over the first nine months of 2023, 60 3000 people claimed asylum. so this bill and this plan, even if somehow worked out in exactly the way the government hopes, would only relocate a small proportion of asylum cases. can the government confirm whether rwanda can still only receive a few hundred people? can they outline what is to happen

to everyone else? given that the illegal migration act, the majority of which has not yet been brought into force, rests on the idea of a use of third countries rather than returns to original countries of origin, are we right to question what will happen to the 99% of people who will not be sent to rwanda? we still do not know the full cost of this scheme. the government has been reluctant at every stage to divulge the cost of this flagship policy. in december, the secretary of state appear to indicate that around £400 million would have been sent to the rwandan government by 2027. can the minister confirmed this figure? it is an extraordinary sum of money but not the whole picture. according to the treaty, there are additional per person costs of the scheme. the economic impact assessment for the illegal migration bill was only

published after considerable pressure from noble lords from across the house.