| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Asylum Seekers
8. Mr. Tony McNulty (Harrow, East): If he will make a statement on the measures being taken to prevent asylum seekers attempting to enter the United Kingdom illegally by hiding in vehicles. [69112]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Mike O'Brien): We shall tackle the problem of illegal immigration rather than specifically asylum seekers. We are developing increased European and international co-operation to crack down on traffickers. The Immigration and Asylum Bill contains several important provisions, including a civil penalty that will apply to drivers of vehicles found transporting clandestine entrants to Britain.
Mr. McNulty: I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Does he accept that everyone will welcome a fairer, faster and firmer system for immigrant applicants and asylum seekers? Does he accept that, despite some whingeing in the press, there is widespread support for fining those who bring in illegal immigrants, particularly via freight lorries? The time is past when drivers could turn a blind eye and say, "I did not know what was going on," when there were up to 100 people in the back of a lorry. Now is the time for action for a faster, firmer and fairer system all round.
Mr. O'Brien: My hon. Friend is right: 8,000 illegal immigrants were brought into Britain in the backs of lorries last year, at a cost to the taxpayer of tens of thousands of pounds. Lorry drivers are neglecting to check their loads. It is difficult to resist the idea that most drivers are either culpable, because they accept bribes, or, at best, negligent, because they do not check their loads. The civil penalties of £2,000 per illegal immigrant will concentrate their minds. We do not want to be forced to fine anyone. Indeed, the best result would be that we never have to fine anyone because no illegal immigrants are being brought in.
Mr. James Clappison (Hertsmere): How can the Minister lecture lorry drivers in that way, when the Government's message is that they have granted what is in effect an asylum to up to 30,000 asylum seekers? Is it not highly likely that many of those 30,000 are not properly entitled to asylum and may be economic migrants? What sort of message is that sending to other would-be asylum seekers about trying to get into the United Kingdom?
Mr. O'Brien: In 1992-93, the Tory Government made a secret concession that granted exceptional leave to remain to more than 26,000 asylum seekers. Parliament was never informed. That is a greater number than we will involve in our special procedures announced in the White Paper entitled "Fairer, Faster and Firmer--a modern approach to immigration and asylum". Unless we clear the inherited backlog, we cannot create a faster system. The Tory Government left us with so many cases
that it would take five years to train the staff needed and to clear the backlog. The problem is too great and we cannot afford that much time to solve it. We had to take a tough decision, and we have taken it. We expect criticism, but it ill becomes the people who created the problem to complain when we are clearing up their mess.South Yorkshire Police
9. Helen Jackson (Sheffield, Hillsborough): What discussions he has had with the chief constable of South Yorkshire about the funding of the defence costs for members of the police force involved in civil suits. [69113]
The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. Paul Boateng): My right hon. Friend has had no discussions with the chief constable on this matter. I understand that the South Yorkshire police authority has set aside from its reserves the sum of £500,000 for legal costs in connection with the Hillsborough disaster. The funding of the defence costs of police officers is entirely a matter for the police authority.
Helen Jackson: My hon. Friend will be aware of the great concern in Liverpool and Sheffield that the South Yorkshire police authority may have acted outside its authority in offering to fund the defence costs in a private prosecution of former police officers Duckenfield and Murray. Who will fund the costs of settling the matter in the High Court? If any expenditure has been unlawfully authorised to date, will my hon. Friend ensure that it will be repaid to the South Yorkshire police authority? Does he agree that the public in South Yorkshire do not deserve to suffer reduced resources now, as a result of shortcomings that led to the tragic loss of life at Hillsborough on 15 April 1989?
Mr. Boateng: The House shares a continuing sense of loss at the tragedy surrounding Hillsborough. The decision of the South Yorkshire police authority is, of course, a matter for that authority. It has decided to stop funding the defence costs of the two former officers. Whether the matter is vires is for the courts to decide, and it is not something on which I wish to comment. Any matters to do with the misuse of funding are the business of the district auditor. However, if it will assist my hon. Friend, I shall write to her in connection with any detailed matters that she might wish me to address.
Mr. Richard Allan (Sheffield, Hallam): I hope that the Minister will agree that the police authority has behaved properly in recently seeking fresh legal advice and withdrawing the funding for the former officers' defence costs. However, is he aware that the police are worried that, whatever decisions are taken, they may face the prospect of judicial review? Will he consider offering assistance to forces, such as South Yorkshire, when they face judicial review, which is very expensive? Such consideration would have less to do with the local case than with the need to clarify national guidelines. The Hillsborough case has revealed how desperately such clarification is needed.
Mr. Boateng: We are always prepared to look at guidelines and their review whenever matters emerge that
require us to reassess them. Of course, police authorities must act according to Home Office circulars and guidelines, when they are applied. It is clear that section 88 of the Police Act 1996 does not apply to criminal proceedings but, if there is any necessity to tighten or clarify the guidelines, we shall certainly take that on board.The hon. Gentleman will understand why it would be improper of me to comment on the other matters that he raised if there is any question of judicial proceedings being initiated. However, I shall bear his comments in mind.
Prisoners (Drug Smuggling)
10. Mr. Bill Rammell (Harlow): If he will make a statement on the Government's policy towards prisoners who smuggle drugs into prisons. [69114]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. George Howarth): We are committed to reducing the use of illegal drugs in prison. As part of an overall strategy, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced proposals on 25 January to introduce a co-ordinated range of measures against both prisoners and visitors who smuggle drugs into prison.
Mr. Rammell: I thank the Minister for that reply. Does he agree that deterrence is the best mechanism by which to stop drugs being smuggled into prison? Evidence suggests that drugs most commonly get into prisons through domestic visits. Where that is proven to have occurred, should not the prison authorities have the ability to ban domestic visits for a set period? Will my hon. Friend ensure that, when such powers become available to the prison authorities from 1 April, they are rigorously enforced to ensure that we continue to see, as we have over the past couple of years, a reduction in the number of drugs smuggled into prisons?
Mr. Howarth: My hon. Friend is quite right to say that restrictions on visits to prisoners are likely to act as a strong deterrent to visitors and prisoners. Visitors found smuggling drugs will normally be banned from visiting the prison for at least three months. Prisoners found to be, or believed to be, engaging in such activity will normally take all visits in closed conditions for a period equivalent to three months in total. Those regulations will be introduced on 1 April, and they will be enforced.
Mr. Edward Garnier (Harborough): Is not one of the best ways in which to inhibit drug smuggling and trading within prisons to prevent overcrowding? Last week, the Minister was unable to answer my written parliamentary question on that subject, which was designed to find out how many people were sharing three to a cell meant for two prisoners. If the Minister were to visit, among others, Belmarsh prison near Greenwich, he would find a number of prisoners sharing cells in such conditions. If the Minister viewed that problem, he would perhaps learn a little about how to solve the problems of drug smuggling and trading in prisons.
Mr. Howarth: The hon. and learned Gentleman is being somewhat imaginative in making that connection. There are difficulties in disentangling that information and, as I explained in my written answer last week, the statistics are not recorded in the manner that he
suggested. I am satisfied that the problem raised by the hon. and learned Gentleman is not a major one, and that the real problem lies not in what passes between prisoners inside a prison, but in how the drugs get into the prison in the first place. That is the area on which we are right to concentrate our attention. If we followed the logic of the hon. and learned Gentleman, we would bother not with what went into prisons, but about what was circulating in them. Clearly, that would not be equal to the problem.
Mr. Martin Linton (Battersea): Is my hon. Friend aware that the smuggling of drugs into prison is the cause not only--and obviously--of drug taking, but of a great deal of prisoner-on-prisoner violence and feuding, and a great many tragic suicides in prison? Is he further aware that it causes a great deal of theft outside prison as relatives steal money to buy drugs to smuggle to their drug-taking relatives in prison?
Mr. Howarth: My hon. Friend is right. It is important that we should get two messages across. First, prisoners found guilty, through mandatory drug testing, of trading or using drugs in prison will be punished in serious cases. More importantly, those who visit prisoners should know that, as of 1 April, serious measures will be enforced if they decide to take drugs into prisons. Violence, theft and much else are caused by drugs. We shall not tolerate what has happened in the past in our prisons, and we intend to start dealing with the problem severely.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |