Clause 10 ‘stateless minors’ What is wrong with Clause 10? Section 36 of the BNA gives effect to Schedule 2 expressly “for the purpose of reducing statelessness”. Paragraph 3 of Schedule 2 prevents children born in the UK from growing up without a nationality. As Ministers made clear during the passage of the BNA, this provision was needed to ensure continued compliance “with our international obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness”.1 The proposed Clause 10 of the NBB inserts a new Paragraph 3A into Schedule 2 of the BNA for stateless children aged 5-17, requiring that the Secretary of State be “satisfied” that the child is unable to acquire another nationality before they may be permitted to register as a British citizen. It considers that a child is able to acquire a nationality where (i) that nationality is the same as one of the parents; (ii) the person has been entitled to acquire that nationality since birth; and (iii) in all the circumstances, it is reasonable to expect them (or someone acting on their behalf) to take steps to acquire that nationality. Clause 10 therefore unnecessarily restricts the vital safeguard in the BNA intended to protect the rights and best interests of children born stateless in the UK, who have always and remain stateless. For those affected, statelessness can mean problems accessing rights and services, denied opportunities, unfulfilled potential, and a sense of never quite belonging. Clause 10 would effectively give the Secretary of State wide discretion to prevent a stateless child born in the UK from acquiring British citizenship, perpetuating their statelessness. Our research has demonstrated that there are already significant law, policy and practice gaps preventing many stateless children in the UK from realising their right to acquire British citizenship. Clause 10 is clearly not intended to prevent or reduce childhood statelessness in the UK as it does not address any of these identified issues. In fact, it has the potential to prolong and even increase instances of childhood statelessness. Children and young people in the UK have described how their inability to acquire British citizenship leaves them feeling alienated and excluded. The UK Government has provided no evidence to justify restricting children’s rights in this way. The Joint Committee on Human Rights expressed concern about the impact of Clause 10 stating that it is doubtful that the clause complies with Article 3 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and that it does not comply with the obligation to grant stateless children born in the UK British nationality in line with Article 1 of the 1961 UN Statelessness Convention. Recommendation: remove Clause 10 from the Bill We strongly support the removal of Clause 10 from the Bill and, to this end, the amendment of Lord Paddick and others giving notice of their intention to oppose the Question that Clause 10 stand part of the Bill. 1 Hansard HC, Standing Committee F, 6 May 1981 : Col 1730; see also Standing Committee F, 6 May 1981 : Col 1726 & Report, 3 June 1981 : Col 986