---

Mr. Bernie Grant : Surely the only way in which immigration officers can exercise some control at the ports of entry is by looking at the colour of a person and stopping all those who do not look white--stopping people like me--and asking them to produce a passport. That is the only way in which they can do it.

Mr. Shore : That is a high-profile way to do it. It is very obvious and conspicious. How does the Home Secretary think that the millions of people who are not of European origin, living in the rest of the Community and in this

---

Column 1130

country, will feel when they experience at first hand the operation of the procedures? How will they feel when one lot of people is simply let through and the other lot is stopped, interrogated and examined?

The Home Secretary said in his intervention that the Maastricht treaty adds nothing to what is contained in the Single European Act or articles 48 and 49 of the Rome treaty. Are we really to understand that the resounding declaration in the article on citizenship of the union--

"Every citizen of the Union shall have the right to move freely and reside freely within the territory of the Member States"-- does not mean anything and has not added anything? Are we to understand that it is all guff, wind, noise and words?

Mr. Kenneth Clarke : I shall have to look up the quotation. The right hon. Gentleman is quoting from the citizenship provisions, which we shall debate in due course. New rights are given to European citizens, such as the right to vote in certain municipal and European elections and to stand as candidates. The other rights are to consular protection and so forth. I am content to discuss that. The free movement of persons is not affected by the Maastricht treaty and by the Bill, except to the extent that, as a sovereign Government subject to the rule of a sovereign Parliament, we choose to co-operate in some changes. No one will reduce the free movement within the Community which has already been agreed for EC nationals. The important issue that the right hon. Gentleman is debating is how far we have already committed ourselves to that free movement under article 8a of the treaty of Rome which, for some reason, is soon to be called article 7a. The obligations imposed by article 8a are not affected by the Bill or by the Maastricht treaty. He has raised an important matter, but it is completely outside the ambit of our discussions.

Mr. Shore : The right hon. and learned Gentleman is telling us that the basic rights of free movement and of residence were already conceded under the Single European Act. They certainly were not conceded under the treaty of Rome.

Sir Teddy Taylor : Does the right hon. Gentleman accept--as he, I and the Home Secretary were all here--that when debating the Single European Act we were not told that it could lead to the removal of internal frontiers? In fact, we were told exactly the reverse. Such things will now be decided by the European Court, not by the Home Secretary. If it decides that internal frontiers should go, there is nothing that the Home Secretary, the right hon. Gentleman or Parliament can do about it.

Mr. Shore : We shall need a searching examination of what the Government are committed to and what regulations and directives seek to implement clauses 48 and 49 of the Rome treaty and the relevant part of the Single European Act. It could be the case--I am not saying that it is, but I should like to know--that people can come into this country without any income. They might not be particularly attracted to this country, but some people might do that. They might have no intention of working here, be unable to look after themselves and thus become a burden on the state. Is that the case? I suspect that it is not, but I want to know. I want to know what we have entered into and what rights we have reserved.

---

Column 1131

Mrs. Edwina Currie (Derbyshire, South) : If the right hon. Gentleman's new-found concern about illegal immigrants--which comes as a big surprise to the rest of us--is so genuine, is he aware that the majority of them come here with valid papers and visas and overstay their welcome? Would he not support, at least in part, my view that we might deploy our immigration officers far more intelligently by sending them to the east end of London and to Leicester and Derby? That is how we will find the illegal immigrants and send them home.

Mr. Shore : I do not think that the hon. Lady followed clearly my remarks or my concern. I am worried about the fact that two standards are being created and I am conscious of that fact because many of my constituents are conscious of it. All that I know is that when I try to help to bring together families in my constituency they first have to cross the hurdle of the primary purpose rule. Secondly, they have to show that they will not be a burden on the state. Thirdly, they have to show that they have adequate accommodation. The relatives who may be brought in are limited to a very narrow range of people

---

Column 1132

and they may enter only in very special circumstances. There is no such constraint in the case of people moving from continental Europe into the United Kingdom. It seems to me that this is discrimination, which will be resented greatly by immigrant communities in this country.

In addition, there are the approximately 8 million residents in continental Europe who are non-EC citizens. They will be stopped in the same way. They will not enjoy the free movement to which the Home Secretary referred. This is ridiculous. I am in favour of letting people come in to find jobs and of giving them reasonable rights, but I am not in favour of treating the rest of Europe as if its people were my fellow citizens.

It being Ten o'clock, The Chairman-- left the Chair to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Committee to report progress ; to sit again tomorrow.

ADJOURNMENT

Resolved, That this House do now adjourn.-- [Mr. MacKay.] Adjourned accordingly at Ten o'clock.

---