Select Committee on Public Accounts Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-79)

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE, UKVISAS, AND THE HOME OFFICE

21 JUNE 2004

  Q60 Mrs Browning: But somebody must have said to the embassies, "Look, we have taken a legal view on this." It was quite clear from the tension building up in the embassies and from the staff processing in the embassies that to be asked to consistently process these pro formas, particularly for the business applications, what must have been quite self-evident when you see business plans that all look the same was that there was something seriously wrong there, and if, as you have told us, there were staff from both the Home Office and the Foreign Office, presumably at some time they had some contact back with their main embassies. I find it very hard to believe that these two big government departments failed to communicate anything other than the fact that they both knew they were locked in a legal difference of interpretation and somehow the status quo was allowed to proceed for so long.

  Sir Michael Jay: The embassies alerted the Foreign Office to what they thought was an inappropriate practice. The Foreign Office referred that to the Home Office. The Home Office replied that the way in which they were operating the scheme was in accordance with their interpretation of the law. The Foreign Office therefore had sought advice from the Home Office, had got it, accepted it, passed it on to the embassies, and the embassies were therefore instructed to continue to operate within that framework. As we know from Ken Sutton's report, in fact, the law could have been interpreted differently, which would have meant there would have been a different mechanism for operating it. As I said just now, I think that that is regrettable. It would have been better at the moment when that reply came back from the Home Office that the matter then be pushed further up the tree in the Foreign Office and the Home Office, and we had at that point resolved it. I regret that that was not the case. As I said earlier, I do believe that we have put in place procedures since then, both at ministerial and at official level, to ensure that these sorts of misunderstandings will not happen again.

  Q61 Mrs Browning: How many people do you think all together have come in under what Mr Sutton describes as an exploitation of the scheme? I will accept a ball-park figure.

  Mr Jeffrey: Over the key two-year period, just over 7,000 people from the accession countries, including 6,800 Bulgarians and Romanians, got entry clearance under the ECAA, and there were another 17,800, including 7,400 Bulgarians and Romanians, who were granted status within this country, switching from some other temporary status into ECAA. That does not mean to say that all or by any means all of these were people who were not entitled to what they were asking for.

  Q62 Mrs Browning: What changes have you made in recent weeks in terms of applications from Turkey?

  Mr Jeffrey: The position in Turkey is governed by a different accession agreement, under which these applications are to be dealt with consistently with the Immigration Rules as they were at the time. There is in fact an outstanding court case involving the extent to which people who apply under them when they are in this country should have their cases considered under the Immigration Rules as they were at the beginning of 1973. So there is a bit of uncertainty around the position of Turks but it is not the same as Bulgarians and Romanians because it does not create the kind of absolute entitlement that the Bulgarian and Romanian agreements do to be treated on the same basis as a British national would be if they were trying to establish a business.

  Q63 Mrs Browning: So you could tell a genuine Turkish business plan from one that was a pro forma?

  Mr Jeffrey: I would hope so, yes.

  Q64 Chairman: Just to complete Mrs Browning's questioning, Mr Jeffrey, can you do us a note on the circulation list of the memo from Mr Ainsworth to Ms Hughes of officials and Ministers?

  Mr Jeffrey: Yes.[3]

  Q65 Mr Jenkins: Just to clarify in my mind, I understand that the Departments were talking to each other, or not talking to each other, with regard to the situation in Bulgaria and eastern Europe, and it required a visit from Mr Bob Ainsworth, a Member of Parliament, to talk to officials on the ground, to come back, to send a memo to another Minister, and that was the first time the Minister had heard that there was a problem on the ground. Yes?

  Sir Michael Jay: I believe that is the case, yes.

  Q66 Mr Jenkins: So your system, which should automatically be feeding problems back, and did feed problems back, because you discussed this between yourselves, but no-one thought of telling the Minister that there was a problem.

  Sir Michael Jay: No. As I was saying in answer to Mrs Browning's question, I do believe that this issue should have been drawn to the attention of senior officials and Ministers earlier than it was. I am determined, as is John Gieve, to ensure that the arrangements are in place to ensure that that does not happen again.

  Q67 Mr Jenkins: So, with luck, it will not happen again?

  Sir Michael Jay: With more than luck, Mr Jenkins; I hope with the proper procedures in place and a determination on both our parts to ensure that it does not.

  Q68 Mr Jenkins: Mr Barnett, when somebody comes here as a student, what is a student?

  Mr Barnett: A student is somebody who wishes to study at some form of educational institution in the UK. That could be a school, it could be a short-term language course or it could be, for example, a university degree.

  Q69 Mr Jenkins: If I were to set up the English Cultural Morris Dance Academy and Worldwide Centre for students to come to my academy for morris dancing in the UK, they would be officially classified as students and given visas to come in?

  Mr Barnett: Absolutely not, unless they could demonstrate that they were high-quality potential morris dancers, and that they could provide evidence that they had the funds to support themselves while in the UK without recourse to public funds. I have to say too that with an institution with the name that you describe, we would also want to carry out at least some checks to establish whether there was actually a global demand for morris dancers. So we would undoubtedly first want to check the bona fides of an institution. As you know, we have now developed that and the plan is to have a student registration scheme.

  Q70 Mr Jenkins: That is where I am getting to, step by step. I have seen some of the literature and I have seen some of the applications. When they actually make an application to come here and study at the Mickey Mouse Academy, for lack of a better term for them, do they actually have to attend the college once given a visa and granted entry to this country?

  Mr Barnett: They are issued a visa for the purposes of attending a college, yes.

  Q71 Mr Jenkins: I did not ask that. Do they have to attend the college?

  Mr Barnett: Yes.

  Q72 Mr Jenkins: Do you check, or is any check carried out on their attendance?

  Mr Barnett: I think that is a matter I would like to pass to someone else, because I am only responsible for the overseas end of the process.

  Q73 Mr Jenkins: Surely, once again, there must be a lack of feedback. You do not close the loop. What is the point of attending Mickey Mouse College—and you have granted visas to attend Mickey Mouse College—if they do not actually turn up?

  Mr Barnett: To be very clear, there is a good deal of joined-up activity. UKvisas works very closely with IND, and particularly with the IND intelligence service, to examine information and investigate trends. It is true to say that we do not have the capacity either overseas or at home to follow each individual case.

  Q74 Mr Jenkins: So you cannot follow each individual case, but if you have got a college—and I could name one or two, and you will be well aware of one or two colleges—do you ever go along and check the attendance register to see that they do attend the college?

  Mr Jeffrey: This is an area that we have got into in the last month or so much more than in the past, and, as the Home Secretary announced a few weeks ago, first of all, there will be a registration scheme, and the Secretary of State for Education announced that the other day, but in the mean time we have been visiting colleges. We have already been to 300 or 400 of the ones that we thought gave most grounds for doubt, and there are a number of them we have already identified as being essentially bogus and applications in relation to them, whether made abroad or in this country, will be refused.

  Q75 Mr Jenkins: I can save you some time. You can take Oxford and Cambridge off your list. Universities in this country, when they have students, they do attend. But you know and I know and any one of your people in Dhaka or Accra know that there are sham colleges. People come here as students, they never attend and they disappear.

  Mr Jeffrey: On the sham colleges, we are determined to end it, and to get to the point where, if the college is not on the register, then application will be refused. On attendance, again, as the Home Secretary announced a month or so ago, we are discussing with the education sector and others arrangements under which there would be an obligation on them to inform us about the extent to which people granted leave as students actually attended the course or not.

  Q76 Let us take it the other way round: let us take it like any good local authority would; let us create a list. To get on the list you have to make an application and you have to pay to be on the list, and then you can send an officer down to check it, just like you would do a take-away restaurant or food outlet. Do you have a list of recognised colleges now?

  Mr Jeffrey: We have a list now of recognised colleges, but we also have a list of colleges that we will definitely refuse if we have seen applications in relation to them. What we are trying to do is to bridge the gap so that everything is under one thing or the other.

  Q77 Mr Jenkins: If they are not on the "recognised" list, refusal should be automatic. It is the college's job to get on the list, and then you can send the inspectors in and have them carry out checks on them; and they pay to be on the list. Does that make sense?

  Mr Jeffrey: Apart from the point about payment, that will be the position we will have reached at the end of the year because the college is not on the register that the Secretary of State for Education announced the other day. Then we will refuse an application made by somebody who purports to be studying there.

  Q78 Mr Jenkins: The worry is—and there are alarm bells ringing to me—that we are always going to do something; we are going to get there, but I want to know when we are going to get there and why the stable door is not shut. You know, and I know, names of colleges which have given us problems in the past, and they are quite clearly bogus in their arrangements. I was looking at one applicant, who says that in order to come to London, to do a PhD at this college, the college had indicated he would need £2,700, that is for the college course and to keep him in the four years he would be studying in London. Quite simply, it is just not possible; and yet that college is continuing trading and selling its name, and undermining the good establishments in this country; so when will it be shut down?

  Mr Jeffrey: We are absolutely determined, and our ministers are, to get on top of this. We feel that a lot of our effort in the last year or so has been about getting much more on top of the asylum problem than we had been, and we have succeeded in that in large measure. We are now devoting a lot more effort to identifying colleges, doubtful marriages and that sort of thing. It is important not least because many of the prospective students are exploited by these sorts of organisations.

  Q79 Mr Jenkins: Yes, and we can chew and walk at the same time! There is no reason why, if we are doing one function, we cannot devote some energies to another one; and it is quite simple to set up. Believe me, I think it is very simple to set up, and you can use the local authorities to go down that route of setting up, because for any college established in the local authority area, you could ask them to tackle it. They do things like food outlets and health and safety, and they could have gone in there and ratified whether that college was a genuine college. They could have had the names of the students, and they could have sent them back to you on the attendance records. When are we going to get to that stage? It is now 2004; can you give me a date as to when that will be in place, and be fairly watertight?

  Mr Jeffrey: The key date is the end of this year, when the register will be completed. It will take some time to complete. But to give an indication of the progress that we are making, in the last month or so our staff have visited just over 400 colleges that in our minds raised some doubt. We have already established that over a hundred of them are definitely not genuine, and we will do something about that. There are others that require a bit more careful investigation, so we are getting on with this. It is an area, as you say, Mr Jenkins, where we feel that there may well have been exploitation of the system in the past.

  Mr Jenkins: It is undermining that brand name we have got with regard to British education, and it is time we should take it very seriously.


3   Ev 21 Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 1 March 2005