text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill - Excuse employers who employed illegal immigrants but took reasonable steps to comply with the necessary requirements - rejected
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  The majority No voters rejected an amendment[1] to the [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/070/2006070.htm Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill]. 
  
  The Bill penalises employers who knowingly employ illegal immigrants (or those who don't have the right to work in the UK). However, as the Bill stood, employers can be excused from prosecution if they can show they complied with any "prescribed requirements"[2].
  
  The intention of the amendment was to change this wording so that employers could be excused from prosecution if they "took reasonable steps to comply with any prescribed requirements". However, it was defeated.
  
  The Conservatives justified their amendment as follows:
  
  :'Prescribed requirements, which are not defined although the employer has to comply with them, mean inspection of documents. Anybody with the slightest knowledge of the immigration world realises that we are now entering a minefield. Picture yourself, Mr. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/glossary/?gl=6 Deputy Speaker], or any of us here, running a small business taking on labour. Then, one asks to see certain documents. Bearing in mind that many documents that are not real seem to pass the test with our immigration officials and those at airports, I do not see how the innocent employer will spot them.'[3]
  
  However, the government argued that:
  
  :'secondary legislation to support the clauses will fulfil the purpose of amendment No. 10 by laying out clearly the practical steps that people can take, and I hope that it reassures the [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/glossary/?gl=174 hon. Gentleman] that first-time offenders will not be clobbered. The penalty will vary according to how many times the employer has breached the provisions and the extent to which the employer has taken steps to tackle the problem.'[4]
  
  
  The Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill became law in 2006. Its main aims were to:[5]
  
  * Restrict appeals from those are refused entry to the UK to work or study. Only rejected asylum applications can have a full appeal
  * Criminalise employers who knowingly employ illegal immigrants
  * Allow biometric data to be taken from people entering the UK
  * Requires that asylum is refused to anyone who is involved in terrorist activities
  
  ----
  
  * [1] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2005-11-16b.1044.0 Humfrey Malins MP], House of Commons, 16 November 2005
  * [2] [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/070/06070.5-8.html#j002 Clause 14(3) of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill]
  * [3] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2005-11-16b.1031.1 Humfrey Malins MP], House of Commons, 16 November 2005
  * [4] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2005-11-16b.1042.3 Andy Burnham MP], House of Commons, 16 November 2005
  * [5] [Based on The Guardian's [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/jan/15/immigration-asylum-nationality-act A-Z of legislation]
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  