5 Uniform format for residence permits
for third-country nationals
| (27408)
7298/06
COM(06) 110
| Modified draft Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) 1030/2002 laying down a uniform format for residence permits for third-country nationals
|
| Legal base | Article 63(3)(a) EC; consultation; unanimity
|
| Department | Home Office |
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 16 May 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 34-xxvi (2005-06), para 13 (26 April 2006)
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
5.1 In 2002, the Government opted into the Council Regulation
which lays down a uniform format for residence permits for third-country
nationals.[16]
5.2 In 2003, the Commission presented the draft of
an amending Regulation to integrate biometric identifiers into
the residence permits. The Government told the previous Committee
that it strongly supported the inclusion of biometrics and that
it had decided to opt into the amending Regulation. Our predecessors
cleared the proposal from scrutiny.[17]
5.3 The draft Regulation provided for biometric identifiers
to be incorporated into both residence permits and residence stickers.
After the previous Committee cleared the document, an expert committee
advised the Commission that, at present, it is not technically
feasible to integrate biometric identifiers in stickers. In the
light of this advice, the Council invited the Commission to present
a modified draft of the Regulation.
The modified draft
5.4 The modified draft of the Regulation provides
for:
- a two-year transitional period
for the phasing-out of residence stickers:
- residence permits to be issued only as a stand-alone
document in a uniform format;
- the production of technical specifications for
the facial image and fingerprints to be incorporated in the residence
permit;
- the prohibition of the incorporation of information
in the machine-readable part of the permit unless its inclusion
is authorised by the Regulation or the national legislation of
the issuing Member State;
- the use of the biometric identifiers in the residence
permit only to verify the authenticity of the document or the
identity of the holder;
- Member States to have discretion to incorporate
in the residence permit "a separate contact chip for national
use"; and
- the identity photograph to be incorporated in
residence permits by 30 August 2006.
5.5 The proposal for Member States to have discretion
to include a separate box in the permit in which a contact chip
could be inserted springs from the wish of Estonia to use its
resident permits to enable its own nationals and legally resident
third-country nationals to have equal access to eservices.
5.6 The Minister of State for Immigration, Citizenship
and Nationality at the Home Office (Mr Tony McNulty) told us that
the Government supports the use of biometric data in travel documents.
He said that the cost to the UK of implementing the Regulation
would not be clear until more details of the technical specification
are available. The Government was considering whether to opt into
the modified draft of the Regulation.
5.7 We put some questions to the Minister and kept
the document under scrutiny pending his reply.
The Minister's reply of 16 May 2006
5.8 Our questions (in italics) and the Minister's
answers are as follows.
The Government wished to opt into the previous
draft of this Regulation. Why has it not yet decided whether to
opt into the modified version?
5.9 The Minister tells us that the Government is
planning to participate in the proposed Regulation.
The Government told the previous Committee that
the start-up cost of including biometric identifiers in residence
permits issued by the UK was estimated to be £24 million,
with annual running costs of about £15 million. Would the
cost of implementing the modified Regulation be similar?
5.10 The Minister says:
"We originally estimated that implementing the
Regulation would entail start-up and running costs of £24
million and £15 million respectively. Our thinking has advanced
since then. While I am happy to give you some detail on this,
you should be aware that our cost estimates are still subject
to departmental approval (which is why I did not include them
in my original EM). Under current planning assumptions we believe
that the start-up costs for biometric residence permits are likely
to be in the region of £60 million. This significantly higher
figure reflects a) an increase in our programme management costs
in line with a programme of this complexity and b) our desire
to ensure the issuing process is secure. We are developing additional
security measures, particularly related to identity management
and ensuring the integrity of the immigration process. Our estimate
of running costs has also increased to £56 million. This
is because a) it is a ten-year average figure, taking inflation
into account, b) it incorporates a larger contingency element,
in line with Treasury best practice, and c) in the light of a
better understanding of the technical specification we have revised
upwards our estimate of unit costs. The objective will be to recover
these running costs through charges levied on those who apply
for the service."
The modified draft proposes that Member States
should have discretion to incorporate a "contact chip"
in residence permits. The draft contains no limitation on what
the contact chip might contain or on the use to which the information
might be put. Is it acceptable that there are no such limits and
would the Government be disposed to exercise the discretion if
it were to opt into the Regulation?
5.11 The Minister tells us that the Government would
find the "contact chip" acceptable provided it does
not undermine the primary objective of the residence permit —
to provide secure identification of third-country nationals —
and the information on the chip is handled in compliance with
data protection principles. The Government's current plans do
not require use of the additional chip but it is considering whether
it could be used "to add value to the integrity of the immigration
process".
Conclusion
5.12 We are grateful to the Minister for his letter.
His reply prompts two further questions:
- The current estimate of
the start-up costs (£60 million) is very much greater than
the estimate the Government gave in 2004 (£24 million). Why
does the Government consider that the increase in cost is outweighed
by the benefits of incorporating biometrics into UK residence
permits? What are the expected benefits and how will the Government
evaluate whether they have been achieved?
- The Minister's letter refers twice to "the
integrity of the immigration process". We do not know what
that means. We ask the Minister to explain.
5.13 We shall keep the document under scrutiny
pending the Minister's reply.
16 Council Regulation (EC) No. 1030/2002: OJ No. L
157, 15.6.2002, p.1. Back
17
See headnote. Back
| 
