APPENDIX 4
Memorandum by HM Customs and Excise
INQUIRY INTO PHYSICAL CONTROLS AT UK PORTS
OF ENTRY
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Frontier control activity in the UK
has become increasingly complex in recent years. Traditional routine
checking of goods entering or leaving the country has largely
disappeared, to be replaced by a more sophisticated risk-based
and intelligence-led approach to intervention. The advent of the
single market in 1993 created a distinction between the overt
frontier activity which could continue at the EU's external borders
and the more light-touch forms of activity which are acceptable
in relation to traffic between Member States. In addition there
has been a shift in the objectives of frontier controls carried
out by Customs—away from a focus on the collection of import
duty and toward intelligence-led anti-smuggling operations and
frontier checks carried out on behalf of other departments.
2. CURRENT AND
FUTURE CHALLENGES
TO UK'S
CONTROLS AT
PORTS OF
ENTRY
2.1 Facilitation
The international trading community expects customs
procedures to have at best nil, or at worst minimum, impact on
the movement of their goods. There will always be a tension between
effective control and facilitation. But there is meaningful dialogue
between UK Customs and the legitimate international trading community
about how best to work together to meet the legitimate needs of
both parties.
2.2 Freedom of movement
Similarly, the travelling public have increasingly
high expectations about being able to cross frontiers with minimum
fuss, especially within the EU.
2.3 The Human Rights Convention
This is a further Freedom of Movement issue.
When the Convention takes effect in England, Wales and Northern
Ireland in October (already effective in Scotland), Human Rights
issues will be triable in the courts. We have trawled Customs
Law and procedures to ensure that what we do is Human Rights "proof",
and we have faced no challenges in Scotland. There may of course
be challenges that we have failed to anticipate.
2.4 Single EU Frontier Force
The present agreed position is that the member
state customs services should "act as one". Extending
that to the wider EU justice and home affairs responsibilities,
a single frontier force could well be proposed at some time in
the future. There would be advantages through achieving consistency
and uniformity for the whole of the external frontier, but we
would no longer be able to use UK resources to meet particular
UK needs. Politically, this would also trigger sensitivities about
sovereignty.
2.5 Schengen
The United Kingdom has requested to take part
in the provisions of the 1990 Schengen Information System (SIS),
but not to the extent that these provisions serve the purpose
of applying the provisions of the Convention relating to the free
movement of persons in the territories of the participating States
(Article 96). The UK has concerns that this aspect of the SIS
would be incompatible with our position on the maintenance of
frontier controls and our decision not to seek participation in
the frontiers provision of the Schengen Convention (Title II).
Discussions are continuing in Council, the UK policy lead is held
by Home Office.
2.6 Tobacco and Alcohol
Within the Community excise duty becomes chargeable
on alcohol and tobacco products when they are released for consumption
on the home market. The commercial movement of excise goods between
member states may take place free of excise duty under the terms
of the 1992 "REDS Regulations". (Excise Goods (Holding,
Movement and Warehousing and REDS) Regulations 1992). With the
lower excise duty levels in France and Belgium the smuggling of
excise goods for illegal sale ("bootlegging") has become
a serious problem. Customs operate controls both at points of
entry and inland to detect illicit trade in excise goods. These
controls are being sufficiently enhanced with the additional resources
made available to the Department in the recent budget. Inevitably,
although we can enforce our controls anywhere in the country,
we concentrate our resources near the entry points to the UK.
There is a risk that we will be seen as acting contrary to Single
Market rules as operating an internal border control for fiscal
purposes.
3. UK CONTROLS
AND THE
EU BORDER
3.1 At both internal and external frontiers
we target our controls on the areas of highest risk, informed
by intelligence. Our arrangements are decided and agreed through
discussion with our EU partners. Where our needs differ from those
of our EU partners, eg for Article 30 TEC reasons (pornography,
drugs etc), we are free to determine our own priority targets.
4. USE OF
TECHNOLOGY
4.1 The Committee is already aware of our
use of x-ray scanners at ports of entry. We also use smaller mobile
and static x-ray facilities, and a range of other technology,
eg ion trace detectors (an electronic sniffer dog). We work closely
with the Police Scientific Development Branch to consider technological
developments. We monitor the Market for new developments which
might enhance our effectiveness whilst remaining within the funding
limits.
5. ORGANISATION
AND RESOURCING
5.1 In 1999-2000 Customs have some 2,592
staff years engaged on the full range of frontier control activities,
for example, combating alcohol and tobacco smuggling, Class A
drugs and fraud; and the intelligence-led or risk-based challenge
of passenger traffic. This represents the resources present at
the frontier, of course we also allocate resources in support
of this activity, for example, corporate services and policy.
More importantly, a significant amount of effort goes into Compliance
activity within the UK which is directly related to the enforcement
of the prohibitions and restrictions on the import and export
of goods.
5.2 There is already co-operation between
the three main frontier organisations; the Immigration Service,
dealing with controls on the movement of people; the Police Ports
Special Branch (police units under the control of the local Chief
Constable) whose primary responsibility is for the prevention
of terrorism; and Customs, dealing primarily with controls on
the movement of goods and the contravention of import/export regulations.
This co-operation is carried out under a national framework Memorandum
of Understanding which is supported by more detailed local agreements.
Legislative arrangements are in place to permit the exchange of
information between Immigration and Customs and to allow Customs
Officers to act as Immigration Officers where necessary. The Terrorism
Bill currently before Parliament will provide for open information
exchange between Ports Special Branch, Customs, Immigration and
will enable Customs and Immigration Officers to act as "Examining
Officers" for anti-terrorism purposes.
5.3 Customs has a pivotal role in co-operating
with other departments and agencies which have an interest in
frontiers activity. We operate a diverse set of checks and controls
on behalf of MAFF, DETR, DoH, DTI and others. Some of this work
is carried out under Customs legislation, some under legislation
sponsored by the relevant lead policy department. This form of
activity in Customs is growing and we are under resource pressure
to meet the enforcement expectations of others.
6. LIAISON WITH
OTHER COUNTRIES
6.1 Joint Surveillance Exercises
The UK actively participates in and organises
joint surveillance operations. These are funded by the European
Union. The subject matter is diverse eg drug trafficking, container
traffic and movement of paedophiles. They provide an ideal opportunity
to see how other countries' controls operate, not only at the
internal, but also at the external borders of the European Union.
6.2 Benchmarking
Benchmarking is used internationally by customs
administrations, to measure and compare performance with each
other. Within the EU, the UK and the Netherlands have been working
together on benchmarking over the last two years. Our international
benchmarking partners include Australia and the USA, and the subjects
have included paedophile controls, detector dogs, and customer
satisfaction. The European Union Customs 2002 programme is providing
funding to enable this work to continue.
7 April 2000
| 
