text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Immigration Bill - Require Appointment of Child Trafficking Guardians for Children Suspected to Have been Trafficked
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  
  @ MP voted aye not to require the appointment of an independent child trafficking guardian to represent the best interests children suspected to have been brought to the UK as part of a trade in human beings.  
  @ MP voted no to require the appointment of an independent child trafficking guardian to represent the best interests children suspected to have been brought to the UK as part of a trade in human beings.  
  
  The majority of MPs voted not to require the appointment of an independent child trafficking guardian to represent the best interests children suspected to have been brought to the UK as part of a trade in human beings. 
  
  Human trafficking can involve forced labour or commercial sexual exploitation. 
  
  MPs were considering the Immigration Bill[1]. The motion accepted in this vote was:
  
  :That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 16.
  
  Amendment 16[2] introduced a new clause titled: "Child trafficking guardians for all potential child victims of trafficking in human beings". The new clause stated:
  
  :If a relevant child has arrived in the United Kingdom and is a potential victim of trafficking in human beings, an independent child trafficking guardian shall be appointed to represent the best interests of that child
  
  The clause goes on to set out the detailed responsibilities of the child trafficking guardian.  
  
  
  ==
  
  * [1] [http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/immigration.html Parliament's webpage on the Immigration Bill] 
  * [2] [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2013-2014/0206/14206.1-7.html Lords' Amendments to the Immigration Bill - 9 April 2014]
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  