| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Clarke:
I cannot give that absolute assurance. I have discussed the matter at length with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and we have agreed that by 2010 the scheme that the hon. Gentleman mentions would be wound up and the system that applies everywhere else would be in operation. I can give him the assurance that he seeks until 2010—[Interruption.] I am advised that we will not be in government then, to which I would say, "Wait and see." Beyond that, I can give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that we continue to monitor
7 Mar 2006 : Column 728
the situation closely in conjunction with the farming communities and the agricultural industry, and that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and her colleagues keep it under review.
Ms Diane Abbott (Hackney, North and Stoke Newington) (Lab): The whole House welcomes the Government's efforts to improve the system and to bear down on abuse. However, I return to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, East. The south Asian restaurant sector, which is only tiny, has the particular problem that even top-quality chefs on the sub-continent are unlikely to have paper qualifications the like of which this scheme turns on. Equally, they are less likely to be in large sector-based organisations to make their case. All that we asking is that the Government pay particular attention to that sector so that our Indian, Thai and Chinese restaurateurs may be assured that the Government understand the significance of their sector and the contribution that they make to the quality of life in our big cities.
Mr. Clarke: I can give two assurances. First, the Government understand the importance of the sector. My hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, East gave some important figures about the economic contribution of its members to the economy. It is fair to say that that contribution is not only to our economy, but to the breadth of our society and culture. I therefore give the assurance that my hon. Friend seeks and stress that we will continue to monitor the position closely. The real answer is investment in people in this country to develop their skills. The Government are committed to making that happen.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst): Order. May I say to the Home Secretary that I know that he is trying to make eye contact with the questioner, but it means that he loses contact with microphone?
Mr. Julian Brazier (Canterbury) (Con): The House, I am sure, applauded the Home Secretary's comment about the need, in the first case, to train people locally. In the light of the quadrupling of the number of work permits since the Government took office, from approximately 40,000 a year to about 160,000, will he answer the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Ashford (Damian Green) about what that means for overall numbers?
Mr. Clarke:
I am delighted to have eye contact with the hon. Gentleman. I cannot and will not answer the question because it derives from a proposition that, somehow, migration to work and study here is undesirable. I do not accept that. If one were to talk to people from many sectors of the economy, they would say that they welcome and need migration. I accept that it is necessary to tackle illegal migration and people who try to evade the system in various ways. The new system is designed to address that. It does not signpost a specific number—up or down—of people who migrate here to work or study. One of the reasons for the country's opposition to Conservative party policy at the general
7 Mar 2006 : Column 729
election was that people clearly understood that one could not simply pick some arbitrary number, but that the system had to be run well and effectively. The proposals are designed to achieve that.
Mr. Neil Gerrard (Walthamstow) (Lab): The Home Office expects the largest number of people who come here to do so under tier 2. The document states:
"Applicants will need to have a job offer from an employer who is registered with the Home Office on a list of approved sponsors".
How will that system of approving sponsors work? One could envisage many small organisations and companies, such as the restaurants that have already been mentioned, wanting to bring in a skilled employee. I hope that the system will be neither bureaucratic nor without an appeal mechanism for someone who is refused inclusion on the list of approved sponsors.
Mr. Clarke: I can strongly assure my hon. Friend that the proposal is not intended to be bureaucratic. Indeed, the reverse is true. We want to work in partnership—perhaps a new word for the Home Office in the context that we are considering—with large and small employers and universities, who ask people to come here to study and get much of their business from it, to administer and run the system in a non-bureaucratic way, thus resolving many of the problems of people needing to extend or change matters, sometimes using 80 different lists of migration routes into the country. I give my hon. Friend an absolute assurance that we will guard against a bureaucratic approach and work with large and small employers to make the system work effectively.
Mr. John Redwood (Wokingham) (Con): Does the Home Secretary accept that there must be some limit on the overall number of economic migrants every year because of the pressure on water resources, transport capacity, housing and land, or will he tell us how those problems can be solved so that we can have unlimited economic migration?
Mr. Clarke: A similar argument could be made for limiting by state diktat the number of people born every year. The country will operate on the basis of the number of economically active people who are in this country. Migrants fall into that category and they should and will contribute to the country's economic development, rather than the opposite. I know that the right hon. Gentleman acknowledges that that is the case in general. I hope that he agrees that our focus should be to stamp out abuse of the system rather than simply stopping people migrating here.
Mr. George Mudie (Leeds, East) (Lab):
Speaking as one who represents an inner-city seat in Leeds, may I offer the Home Secretary a warm welcome for his proposals? I also congratulate the Home Office on the extent of the consultation that has taken place on these measures. In the document, it is suggested that applicants will start at the first tier and move through the tiers. Will the Home Secretary tell the House how
7 Mar 2006 : Column 730
long it might take someone to go through that process and finish the scheme? What will happen to applications in the meantime?
Mr. Clarke: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his support. I know that, from his knowledge of Leeds—one of the great cities to have benefited from migration over the years—he will agree with what we are trying to achieve. We envisage a time scale of between 18 months and two years for implementing the whole process. We will simply go through the process stage by stage, steadily implementing the proposals, if they get the support that will enable them to be carried through in every part of the country, as I believe they will.
Dr. John Pugh (Southport) (LD): Does the Home Secretary acknowledge that no sane plan can work unless we curb the activities of illegal gangmasters, snakeheads and organisations such as 14K? Does he also acknowledge that that will require better security and intelligence at our regional ports and airports?
Mr. Clarke: The House will be shocked to hear that I agree that the activities of gangmasters and snakeheads are antisocial and should be driven out. The answer to the hon. Gentleman's question is that we will go through this whole approach policing rigorously the system to deal with organised crime. As I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody), measures to deal with people trafficking are a central priority in the system, and we shall carry that proposal through.
Mr. John McFall (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab/Co-op): The Governor of the Bank of England, among others, has stated that immigrant labour has been essential to maintaining the buoyancy of our economy. Will the Home Secretary ensure that those workers who come here and make a contribution can stay for as long as possible? Will he also take the opportunity to work with vice-chancellors to ensure that people from China and India who can provide graduate skills can stay here, perhaps using a similar system to the American green card, to make a contribution to our economy?
Mr. Clarke: Yes, I can give my right hon. Friend that assurance, provided that the contribution continues to be made. The important thing for everyone who migrates here is that they should continue to make a contribution. Working together with businesses and universities is the best thing for us to do, because they are best able to guarantee that that contribution is being made.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |