---

Column 1068

employees had not confirmed in their application forms that they required a work permit to work in the United Kingdom, or that they were prohibited from taking employment by the conditions of their stay here. The two individuals were dismissed before the immigration service was given the opportunity to establish their status in this country, and as yet they have not been found.

The hon. Gentleman has mentioned a list of 600 employees, which he believes was obtained by the immigration service unlawfully. The immigration service received two manuscript lists containing what appeared to be details of persons employed by Hackney council. They were unsolicited. One was received in December 1994, the other in February 1995.

They were not extracts from a computer payroll record, and contained no sign that they had originated from within the council. The immigration service cannot be held responsible for the fact that they contained names almost exclusively of African origin; nor is it for me to comment on the motives of the person or persons who supplied the lists.

The hon. Gentleman has accused the Home Office of refusing to co-operate fully in an investigation to establish whether the Data Protection Act 1988 had been breached. He has also suggested that the information was unlawfully provided to the Home Office by the supporters of Mr. Bernard Crofton, the housing director of Hackney council, who is currently under suspension.

He notes that the associates of Mr. Crofton have now shown themselves in their true colours. In the motion dated 22 June 1995 the hon. Gentleman says that they have shown themselves

"to be barmy, racist and criminal in character".

Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North): Will the Minister give way?

Mr. Baker: The hon. Gentleman will forgive me, but I am very short of time. I have many points that I wish to put to the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch, and I am sorry that, on this occasion, I cannot give way as I would normally like to do.

I understand that the data protection registrar has been asked to conduct an inquiry into possible breaches of the Data Protection Act. It would therefore be wrong for me to comment in further detail, but the Home Office will, of course, co-operate fully with any such inquiry. What I shall say is that all information alleging breaches of the immigration laws is thoroughly researched, both within the Department and with other agencies, where an abuse of public funds is suspected.

The Government are committed to firm but fair immigration control, and will continue to welcome genuine visitors to our shores. But when overseas nationals abuse the immigration laws, they must expect to be dealt with firmly and returned to their own countries. Those who flout the immigration laws cannot expect to evade investigation simply by the status of their employer or the nature of their employment.

The immigration service receives denunciatory information from many sources. It would be inappropriate to reveal publicly the source of the information. The London borough of Hackney requested an interview with the immigration officer involved in many of the

---

Column 1069

investigations that I have outlined today, in order--the hon. Gentleman will confirm this--to ask her from whom or where her information was coming.

The general question of such disclosure is a matter for the Home Office, not for individual immigration officers. For that reason, the Home Office offered to respond to any written inquiries but not to allow individual immigration officers to be interviewed about matters that go beyond their responsibilities. The council has not taken up that offer of co-operation.

The Home Office has never received information from Mr. Crofton. The hon. Gentleman will know that, in 1993, Mr. Crofton established his tenancy audit team, consisting of members recruited from outside the authority, to investigate allegations of widespread corruption in the housing department of Hackney council. The council's own appointed team found evidence that many council properties were inhabited by people who had no right to live in them and who in some cases had no right to be in the United Kingdom.

The team asked the immigration service to co-operate with its investigation into the misuse of council property, which has led to the apprehension of a number of immigration offenders and the return of several properties to the council--properties that it was then able to reallocate to genuine applicants. The immigration service will continue to investigate any breaches of the immigration laws if asked to do so by the tenancy team.

The immigration service has sought the council's co-operation to try to resolve this matter sensibly. It has pointed out the judgment in the Court of Appeal case of the Queen v. the Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte London borough of Tower Hamlets, which

---

Column 1070

concerned the duties of local housing authorities under the homelessness provisions. I draw the hon. Gentleman's attention to that case.

That judgment confirmed that not only was there no bar to local authorities telling the Immigration and Nationality Department if they came across a suspected immigration offender; rather, it was their duty to do so.

Guidance following the judgment issued by the Department of the Environment in February 1994 recommended that local authorities should register a point of contact with the Immigration and Nationality Department for the handling of all inquiries by an authority. Although Hackney council has registered its benefit staff for the purposes of exchanging information on persons claiming housing benefit or council tax benefit, it has yet to register a contact point in accordance with that guidance.

The immigration service has also met council officials to discuss improvements in its recruitment procedures. It can surely only be to the benefit of people who are legally here that those who are not should be readily identifiable if they seek work.

The evidence that I have laid before the House tonight should give the hon. Gentleman cause to cease his bluff and think again. I urge him to retract his baseless allegations. I am satisfied that the immigration service has acted reasonably and with considerable restraint in its dealings with the London borough of Hackney. The council does not appear to have acted in a spirit of true co-operation--

The motion having been made after Ten o'clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, Madam Deputy Speaker-- adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order. Adjourned accordingly at Eleven o'clock.

---

Column 1069

---