---

15 Jan 2004 : Column 870W—continued

Asylum

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent discussions he has had with EU partners concerning asylum. [145414]

Beverley Hughes: Government Ministers have regular discussions with counterparts in other member states on asylum issues. These discussions take place within formal bilaterals and Justice and Home Affairs Councils, as well as in the margins of other meetings.

Mr. Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum applications were made in 2003; what the countries of origin were; and if he will make a statement.

Beverley Hughes: The table shows asylum applications to the UK by nationality for the first three quarters of 2003.

15 Jan 2004 : Column 871W

Information on asylum applications is published quarterly. Data for the fourth quarter and consequently the whole of 2003 will be available in the next publication

15 Jan 2004 : Column 872W

at the end of February 2004 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.

Applications⁽³⁾ received for asylum in the United Kingdom, excluding dependants, by nationality and location where made, January-September 2003Number of principal applicants

	Quarter 1			Quarter 2
Nationality	Total	Applied at port	Applied in country	Total	Applied at port	Applied in country
Europe
Albania	230	10	215	140	10	125
Czech Republic	20	15	5	20	15	5
Macedonia	35	5	30	10	*	10
Moldova	185	5	170	5	10	65
Poland	35	0	25	20	10	15
Romania	245	30	215	95	15	75
Russia	70	15	55	65	5	60
SAM(4)	345	20	325	175	15	155
Turkey	645	355	290	585	325	260
Ukraine	95	15	80	65	20	50
Other Former USSR	175	20	155	135	25	105
Other Former Yugoslavia	215	*	25	10	*	10
Europe other	2055	5	20	20	10	10
Europe total	2,125	525	1,605	1,415	465	950
Americas
Colombia	90	15	70	60	20	40
Ecuador	65	15	55	40	10	30
Jamaica	390	65	325	215	35	180
Americas other	80	25	55	60	25	35
Americas total	625	120	505	370	85	285
Middle East
Iran	655	190	465	625	190	435
Iraq	2,135	270	1,865	635	65	570
Middle East other	265	85	180	230	80	150
Middle East total	3,055	540	2,515	1,490	340	1,155
Africa
Algeria	210	35	175	100	15	85
Angola	300	40	260	165	25	135
Burundi	210	35	175	145	25	120
Cameroon	185	20	165	95	25	70
Congo	145	25	120	55	15	45
Dem. Rep. Congo	460	100	360	300	65	235
Eritrea	245	115	135	185	80	110
Ethiopia	145	80	65	120	50	70
Gambia	15	5	10	30	15	20
Ghana	70	15	55	80	20	60
Ivory Coast	205	40	165	90	20	70
Kenya	85	20	65	60	10	50
Nigeria	350	180	170	250	130	120
Rwanda	120	15	105	70	30	40
Sierra Leone	165	90	75	85	40	50
Somalia	1,515	195	1,320	900	140	760
Sudan	95	25	75	135	30	105
Tanzania	10	5	5	5	*	5
Uganda	225	10	210	165	5	160
Zimbabwe	1,075	215	860	815	210	605
Africa other	410	210	200	340	170	170
Africa total	6,255	1,475	4,780	4,200	1,105	3,095
Asia
Afghanistan	950	200	755	485	185	300
Bangladesh	205	25	180	190	25	165
China	915	630	280	705	525	180
India	490	190	295	645	260	385
Pakistan	490	175	320	375	85	290
Sri Lanka	300	135	165	245	130	115
Vietnam	345	60	285	230	75	155
Asia other	215	45	170	210	80	130
Asia total	3,910	1,460	2,445	3,090	1,370	1,720
Other, and nationality	30	20	10	15	10	5
not known	0	0	0	0	0	0
Grand total	16,000	4,140	11,860	10,585	3,370	7,210

15 Jan 2004 : Column 873W

	Quarter 3			January-September 2003
Nationality	Total	Applied at port	Applied in country	Total	Applied at port	Applied in country
Europe
Albania	125	10	115	490	35	460
Czech Republic	25	15	10	65	45	20
Macedonia	10	*	5	55	5	45
Moldova	70	15	55	330	40	290
Poland	10	*	10	70	20	50
Romania	120	25	90	455	75	380
Russia	65	10	55	205	35	170
SAM(4)	170	10	155	690	50	640
Turkey	530	260	265	1,760	940	820
Ukraine	85	15	70	250	50	200
Other Former USSR	170	45	125	480	95	385
Other Former Yugoslavia	5	0	5	40	5	40
Europe other	15	5	5	55	20	35
Europe total	1,400	420	980	4,945	1,410	3,535
Americas
Colombia	40	10	30	190	45	145
Ecuador	25	*	25	130	25	110
Jamaica	190	20	170	790	115	675
Americas other	40	20	20	175	70	110
Americas total	290	50	245	1,290	250	1,035
Middle East
Iran	860	210	650	2,140	590	1,550
Iraq	690	50	640	3,465	385	3,080
Middle East other	285	105	180	780	270	505
Middle East Total	1,835	365	1,470	6,380	1,245	5,135
Africa
Algeria	125	10	110	430	60	375
Angola	215	40	175	680	105	570
Burundi	170	30	135	525	90	435
Cameroon	95	10	85	375	55	320
Congo	70	15	55	270	55	220
Dem. Rep. Congo	380	75	305	1,145	240	905
Eritrea	290	100	190	725	295	430
Ethiopia	190	55	135	455	185	275
Gambia	20	5	10	65	25	40
Ghana	85	20	70	235	55	185
Ivory Coast	50	15	30	345	75	265
Kenya	35	5	30	180	35	145
Nigeria	190	90	100	795	400	395
Rwanda	45	15	30	235	60	175
Sierra Leone	70	20	50	325	150	175
Somalia	1,440	200	1,240	3,850	535	3,320
Sudan	320	40	280	550	90	460
Tanzania	10	5	5	25	10	15
Uganda	170	10	160	560	25	535
Zimbabwe	710	145	565	2,595	565	2,030
Africa other	480	190	290	1,230	570	660
Africa total	5,155	1,100	4,055	15,605	3,680	11,925
Asia
Afghanistan	470	165	305	1,910	550	1,360
Bangladesh	190	25	165	580	70	510
China	965	715	250	2,585	1,875	715
India	655	310	345	1,790	765	1,025
Pakistan	495	150	340	1,360	410	950
Sri Lanka	85	30	60	630	290	335
Vietnam	260	10	245	835	150	685
Asia other	135	35	100	560	165	400
Asia total	3,255	1,445	1,810	10,255	4,275	5,980
Other, and nationality	20	15	10	65	45	20
not known	0	0	0	0	0	0
Grand Total	11,955	3,395	8,560	38,540	10,905	27,630

⁽³⁾ Figures are provisional and have been rounded to the nearest 5 with * = 1 or 2.

⁽⁴⁾ Serbia and Montenegro (SAM) replaced Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) from 5 February 2003. SAM comprises the Republic of Serbia, the Republic of Montenegro, and the Province of Kosovo (administered by the UN on an interim basis since 1999)

15 Jan 2004 : Column 875W

Mr. Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many initial decision makers for asylum applications were in post on 1 October in each of the last six years. [142155]

Beverley Hughes: Records are available for the years from 2000. The number of staff deployed on decision-making depends on the volume of cases. Internal management information indicates that, as the backlog of outstanding applications has fallen and decisions have been made more quickly, the number of full-time equivalent staff deployed on making initial decisions for asylum applications was 477 in October 2000, 465 in October 2001, 396 in October 2002 and 365 in October 2003.

Annabelle Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what written representations he has received from the First Minister of Scotland concerning his policy in relation to the detention of families with children in removal centres. [142763]

Beverley Hughes [holding answer 8 December 2003]: No written representations have been received from the First Minister of Scotland on detention policy as this is a reserved matter. The First Minister has, however, written recently to me emphasising the importance of the UK Government's careful engagement with this issue.

Annabelle Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to permit asylum seekers in general to take up employment. [142768]

Beverley Hughes: There are no plans to allow asylum seekers in general to take employment. The European directive on reception standards for asylum seekers comes into force in February 2005. At that time asylum seekers who have waited more than one year for an initial decision on their claim will be able to seek permission to work. Although the employment concession for asylum seekers was abolished on 23 July 2002 we retain discretion to allow asylum seekers to work. The discretion is exercised sparingly but might be appropriate in cases where an asylum seeker has, through no fault of their own, waited for longer than 12 months for an initial decision on their claim. The majority of asylum claims receive an initial decision well within this period. 81 per cent. of applications for asylum received in the period April to June 2003 had initial decisions reached and served within two months.

We are currently considering whether asylum seekers and failed asylum seekers currently in work whose employment would meet the requirements for the issue of a work permit should be allowed to remain in employment.

Mr. Gale: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when Kent county council will receive central government funding in respect of the costs of asylum seekers outstanding for the financial years (a) 2001–02 and (b) 2002–03; when funding will be received for the 2003–04 financial year; and what

15 Jan 2004 : Column 876W

estimate he has made of the cost to Kent county council in respect of support of asylum seekers between April and November. [144468]

Beverley Hughes [holding answer 16 December 2003]: All amounts claimed for 2001–02 by Kent county council—in respect of support for Adults and Families and Unaccompanied Asylum Seeker Children (UASCs)—have been settled. Payments on account of the 2002–03 claim have been made but the final claim is subject to audit before it can be settled.

Payments on account for Adults and Families have been made to Kent county council for 2003–04, based on grant claims submitted for the first two quarters. Payments on account have also been made in respect of UASC support costs, using the provisional rate for 2003–04.

Claims for the third quarter have not yet been submitted and so the Home Office's estimates have been made on the basis of the previous claims submitted for the current year.

Mr. Brazier: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers were removed or made a voluntary departure to the 10 East European candidate states for membership of the European Union (a) in each of the last three years and (b) in the first half of 2003. [141552]

Beverley Hughes [holding answer 4 December 2003]: Information on the destination of removals and voluntary departures is not available.

Estimates of the number of nationals of the 10 East European candidate states who had sought asylum at some stage and who were removed between January 2001 and June 2003 are shown in the following table. These figures include persons departing 'voluntarily' after the initiation of enforcement action against them, and persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Returns Programmes run by the International Organization for Migration.

Information on the nationality of persons removed in 2000 and on those persons who departed voluntarily without informing the Home Office is not available.

Removals and voluntary⁽⁵⁾ departure of asylum applicants, excluding dependants, of EU accession states, January 2001 to June 2003^(6),(8)

Nationality	2001	2002(9)	January to June 2003(9)
Poland	605	635	470
Czech Republic	800	790	585
Hungary	5	10	5
Lithuania	320	310	125
Latvia	170	175	90
Estonia	60	65	25
Slovakia	60	75	30
Slovenia	*	—	*
Cyprus(7)	5	15	5
Malta	*	—	—
Total	2,035	2,070	1,340

⁽⁵⁾ Includes persons departing 'voluntarily' after enforcement action had been initiated against them, persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organisation for Migration, and removals on safe third country grounds.

⁽⁶⁾ Figures rounded to the nearest five, with * = 1 or 2, and may not sum due to rounding.

⁽⁷⁾ Data exclude nationals of the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus.

⁽⁸⁾ Data have been estimated due to data quality issues.

⁽⁹⁾ Provisional figures.

15 Jan 2004 : Column 877W

The number of applications from nationals of the accession countries fell from 250 in October 2002 to 25 in June 2003 following the introduction (in November 2002) of the non-suspensive appeal measure included in the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

The Home Office will continue to remove nationals of the candidate states in the same circumstances as now up until accession, although this will be kept under constant review. This is being done in the interests of maintaining an effective immigration control and the need to control numbers prior to accession; because we are not legally obliged to grant free movement rights under 1 May; and because we are giving free movement rights earlier than some other member states.

15 Jan 2004 : Column 878W

Data on the removals by nationality are available from the Home Office website at: http://www. homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.

Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many cases heard by the Immigration Appeals Tribunal in each of the last five years for which figures are available the tribunal upheld the decision being appealed. [142582]

Beverley Hughes [holding answer 8 December 2003]: Data on the number of cases in which the Immigration Appeals Tribunal upheld the decision being appealed, in each of the last five years for which figures are available, are given in the following table. Appeals received do not necessarily correspond to appeals determined in any given year.

Statistics on appeals to the Immigration Appeals Tribunal are published annually. The latest publication, Asylum Statistics United Kingdom 2002, is available on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.

Asylum appeals—Further appeals to the Tribunal, decisions, and the outcome of Tribunal Hearings, excluding dependants, 1994 to 2002⁽¹⁰⁾Number of principal appellants

	Appeals to the Tribunal(11)		Outcome of Tribunal Hearings(12)
	Received	Determined	Allowed	Dismissed	Withdrawn	Remitted to adjudicatorsfor further consideration
1998	1,775	(13)1,090	—	—	—	—
1999	2,135	1,790	—	—	—	—
2000	1,615	2,635	815	1,385	220	215
2001	3,860	3,190	475	1,140	150	1,430
2002(14)	6,920	5,565	620	2,015	225	2,700

⁽¹⁰⁾ Figures rounded to the nearest 5. Numbers might not add up due to rounding.

⁽¹¹⁾ Figures based on data supplied by the Lord Chancellor's Department. Decisions and determinations do not necessarily correspond to applications and appeals received in any given year.

⁽¹²⁾ Figures supplied by the Presenting Officers Unit. Figures for October to December 1999 are based on data for November to December.

⁽¹³⁾ Revised figures.

⁽¹⁴⁾ Provisional figures.

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what basis he judges that the terms of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Bill as regards the removal of the children of asylum seekers are compatible with (a) the Human Rights Act 1998, (b) the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and (c) section 1 of the Children Act 1989. [143061]

Beverley Hughes: The Bill creates no powers for the removal of children of failed asylum seekers from their parents. Insofar as the withdrawal of support from people who have failed to establish a right to political asylum and who refuse to co-operate in their removal from the country leads to consideratipn by local authorities of the need for support for their children, it will be provided in a way that is consistent with the Human Rights Act, the Children Act and the United Kingdom's obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers have been granted permission to work due to exceptional circumstances; and what criteria are used to determine whether an application will succeed. [143461]

Beverley Hughes: The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost. Generally speaking, however, asylum seekers are not now allowed to take employment while their claim for asylum is pending. Prior to 23 July 2002 asylum seekers could request permission to work if their claim remained outstanding for longer than six months without a decision being made on it. The concession was abolished on 23 July 2002.

The majority of asylum claims receive an initial decision well within six months. 81 per cent. of applications for asylum received in the period April—June 2003 had initial decisions reached and served within two months. 74 per cent. of applications for asylum received in 2002–03 had initial decisions reached and served within two months, 84 per cent. within four months and 87 per cent. within six months. The number of asylum seekers who would have been able to benefit from the concession had it remained in force is now much reduced.

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the cost to West Sussex county council of the judgment in Behre and others v. Hillingdon London borough council, on asylum seekers in local authority care. [144993]

15 Jan 2004 : Column 879W

Beverley Hughes: The Home Office and the Department for Education and Skills are at present reviewing the grants arrangements for support of unaccompanied asylum seeker children (UASC) in the light of the Hillingdon judgment. A decision on the 2003–04 grant will be made shortly.

Mr. Keith Bradley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received from local authorities on the implications for them of children being taken into care under the provisions in the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Bill. [145189]

Beverley Hughes [holding answer 5 January 2004]: We received six representations on the provision in question from local authorities, or organisations representing them or the services they administer, during the consultation exercise we carried out recently. As we made clear in our response to this exercise, it is our objective to ensure that few, if any, children need to be taken into care as a result of this provision, and officials are meeting the Local Government Association in order to discuss its practical application.

Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many individuals have been housed at Oakington Immigration Reception Centre during 2003 as a result of the detention overspill facility. [145366]

Beverley Hughes: Following the success of the NSA process in 2002 that resulted in considerable intake reduction earlier than anticipated, there was the potential for utilisation of the Oakington facility. In line with considerations of public financial accountability a decision was taken to use part of the facility to detain families prior to removal on flights from nearby Stansted. It continued to be used for this purpose successfully throughout 2003.

The latest available information on people held in the immigration removal estate show that as at 27 September 2003–260 people were housed at the Oakington Immigration Reception Centre. Information on the number of these who were there as a result of the detention overspill facility and on the total number of people detained in 2003 is not available except by examination of individual case-files at disproportionate cost.

Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for what purposes, in addition to making initial decisions on asylum applications, detainees are housed at the Oakington Immigration Reception Centre. [145369]

Beverley Hughes: Oakington is a designated place of detention and may be used to house persons under any of the published detention criteria, including detention under fast track procedures.

Mr. Keith Bradley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what specific actions he expects local authorities to take to protect children who are not taken into care but whose parents have had their benefits stopped as a consequence of the implementation of clause 7 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Bill. [145584]

15 Jan 2004 : Column 880W

Beverley Hughes: We are discussing with representatives of local authorities whether guidance on the way in which they would exercise their responsibilities under these circumstances would be helpful.

Mr. Peter Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to change the system to record the number of asylum seekers (a) entering the UK illegally, (b) applying for asylum and (c) being detained awaiting deportation; and if he will make a statement. [145676]

Beverley Hughes: There are no plans to change the system to record the number of asylum seekers (a) entering the country illegally, (b) applying for asylum and (c) being detained awaiting deportation. Information on asylum applications, detainees and removals is published quarterly. The next publication will be available at the end of February 2004 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website.

Mr. Coleman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans his Department has to abolish the support only provision for asylum seekers; and if he will make a statement. [146971]

Beverley Hughes: There are no plans to do so at present. Section 50 of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 allows us to withdraw the opportunity for asylum seekers to apply for financial support only. During the passage of the Bill through Parliament we gave a commitment that there would be a full public consultation process before the provision was introduced. The provision is also subject to the affirmative resolution procedure.

Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what arrangements have been made for the UN High Commission for Refugees to work with Home Office training programmes to improve decision making on asylum applications; what the terms of reference are for UNHCR involvement; and when these arrangements will be brought into effect. [147728]

Beverley Hughes [holding answer 13 January 2004]: The London office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees already contributes to the training of asylum caseworkers. We intend that this fruitful relationship should continue and we are presently discussing with UNHCR what further assistance they might provide in support of our measures to assure high quality decision making processes.

Mr. Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost was in each of the last five years of police involvement in immigration controls. [147789]

Ms Blears: This information is not held centrally. Local police involvement in immigration controls forms part of the arrangements made by Chief Constables in the light of police authorities' policing plans.

Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions the powers

15 Jan 2004 : Column 881W

under section 6 of schedule 3 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 have been used. [146492]

Beverley Hughes [holding answer 8 January 2004]: We have not so far withdrawn support from any family under this provision, although its availability may have helped induce a number of failed asylum seekers to depart voluntarily.

---