Examination of Witnesses (Questions 920
- 933)
TUESDAY 23 MAY 2006
RT HON
JOHN REID
MP, SIR DAVID
NORMINGTON KCB, MS
LIN HOMER
AND MS
HELEN EDWARDS
CBE
Q920 Chairman: Do you think you are
likely to be able to come back to us, Home Secretary, in due course
with an idea of how many you would need to be removing to satisfy
yourself that we were getting on top of the problem of illegal
migration?
John Reid: Subject to one very
big problem which no government has been able to address accurately,
and that is the problem discussed at your last Committee meeting.
For probably generations, but certainly on the record since Michael
Howard was honest enough to say it, no government, as he said,
has been able to say with accuracy and definition, "This
is the number of illegal immigrants". If you do not know
that number and you inherit a number of unknown quantity, as we
did from Michael Howard, as he no doubt did from his predecessor,
then it becomes impossible, if you have at the heart of any calculation
an unknown number of significant proportion, to decide what the
total is. It is then compounded because at present, even if you
left that aside, we do not have the number of people who leave
the country. We know roughly the number of people that come into
the country, but since embarkation checks, our reports and so
on were abolished, as it happens, by Michael Howard again, and
I do not blame him for that because my understanding, to be honest
and fair to him, is that the CAB-based system of counting embarkation,
those who are leaving the country, was itself highly inaccurate,
but, if you do not have that and you are building that on top
of a big figure you do not already know, then you have a difficulty
in giving any precision to these figures and no government has—
Q921 Chairman: I am sure the Committee
understands that, but you do accept that really choosing a figure
of 12,000 people to remove, because that is what you have got
enough money and enough staff to remove, does not really make
sense in terms of the overall problem of getting on top of the
issue?
John Reid: I do understand that
and, in my third week in the job, I will go and look at it. What
I do not want to promise you is that I come back with a figure
which is based on the number of known illegal immigrants because
no government has been able to tell that, but I will examine this
in detail and I will come back to you.
Q922 Mr Winnick: In the interesting
session we had last week with the Director of Enforcement and
Removal, which no doubt you have heard about, I did ask the question
about tracking individuals, not necessarily those here illegally,
but those who have been here with permission and, once their permission
has exhausted, what was done to ensure that they left the country.
Mr Roberts said this, "I do not think that tracking individual
cases at the level that you suggest", what I put to him,
"is an effective enforcement strategy". What I am asking
you is what is being done to change that?
John Reid: Obviously I cannot
speak for the official who was here last week since he had a particularly
personal way of addressing these matters.
Mr Winnick: You can put it like that
if you like!
Q923 Mr Spring: A bit of an honest
way!
John Reid: Yes, and he just got
accolade after accolade for his honesty, did he not, Chair? What
I hope he meant was that, in terms of allocating resources, many
more illegal immigrants would be caught and deported if we concentrated
efforts at firms which are employing large numbers of illegal
immigrants. As it happens, I am told that in the last year several
thousand of these operations were so directed. What I find rather
disconcerting, however, is the small number of prosecutions that
came after it. I have asked about this and I have been told that
that is because, up until relatively recently, such prosecutions
were very, very hard to pursue right through to a conclusion,
but that recent legislation introduced by the Government should
make that much more effective, so I hope, on that case, that we
get a higher number of illegal immigrants through that work. I
am going to ask, if I might, the Director General to comment on
the specific case of the singles and tracking and then come back.
Q924 Mr Winnick: So that there should
be no misunderstanding, what I did put to you, and I think you
have got the point, I am talking about people who came here legally,
no question, had entry clearance to come here on a temporary basis,
but have not left the country when they should have done so and
there seems to have been absolutely no follow-up. What amazes
people, Home Secretary, and why, and to some extent there are
other reasons, there is a lack of confidence amongst the general
public, and this is reinforced by the answer we received last
week, is that, having exhausted their right to be here, no action
is taken and they simply stay on endlessly.
John Reid: Let me address that
head on. One of the things I have charged Liam Byrne with in oversight
and the Permanent Secretary in detail along with Lin is addressing
the journey of someone who comes into this country and then goes
out because I am deeply concerned that we do not have any way
of tracking once somebody gets beyond, and even up to, an immigration
desk. Now, this may appear to be matter of process and detail,
but it is crucial. If someone can walk off a plane with no documents
or walk through immigration and, as you said, come in legally
and then stay here and overstay, once they are in that position,
it seems to me it is much more difficult to solve the problem,
so the key to this is before someone leaves their own home and
gets off the plane. I understand you are asking about a subsequent
thing, but you cannot handle the subsequent thing if you have
not addressed the identification as they come off the plane because
it becomes much more difficult to track anyone. I do not pretend,
a fortnight in, that I have identified the solution, but I can
tell you that I have identified in my view one of the problems
and tasked people already to look at it. Can I ask Lin Homer to
comment on the specifics of this.
Ms Homer: I think the Home Secretary
is right. What we are trying to do is tackle the problem from both
sides. We clearly need to undertake enforcement action in relation
to people in this country, but we have to be able to attach an
identity to more of our visitors so that they cannot change identity,
simply leave the address they gave us when they arrived, change
name, lose their documents and, therefore, become untrackable.
Therefore, one of the major activities that we are undertaking
is biometric visas and we are introducing those on 26 of the routes
and what that means is that we can then attach an identity to
that person wherever they then appear in the system, and that,
as well as extended enforcement and compliance, we believe, is
the right way forward. Some of that, I think, is not what I would
call `classic' enforcement; it is the work we need to do with
employers and with educational institutions so that, when people
are coming in to do a particular job or to study at a particular
place, there is a responsibility on the people bringing in that
individual also to keep us informed of their whereabouts and that
way round, I believe, we stand a much greater chance of bearing
down on more overstayers.
Q925 Mr Winnick: So there is going
to be a change of policy from what we heard last week where in
effect, we were told, individual cases are not going to be the
subject of tracking? That is going to change?
John Reid: What I want is to try
and find some method of tracking individuals who come to this
country. I know it is difficult and I cannot pretend to you
that there it can be instantaneously comprehensive in the short
term, but it does occur to me, without prejudice, and again I
say I am only in two weeks, but it has occurred to me as I have
studied this that, rather than just waiting on information technology,
which I am prepared to accept will create a solution for this,
I ought to be, or at least my officials ought to be, looking at
those countries which are the worst offenders in overstayers and
saying, "Is there a way that we can say that you do not get
into this country unless you hand over some form of identification
to the carriers?" I do not know if we can do that, but it
is one of the things that I would like to explore and that, I
think, addresses the very point you are making.
Q926 Mr Browne: Home Secretary, you
have just been talking about systems and tracking methods, but
we have been told that there is no central list of people who
are entitled to be in the country, this is non-EEA nationals,
or who have the right to work or who have been asked to leave
the country. Is there not a danger that we are talking about biometric
visas and other technological solutions when the very basics that
these are built on are not in place and maybe, as you keep going
back to the 1980s, we need to go back to basics in terms of trying
to address this problem rather than trying to find technological
solutions when these lists do not exist?
John Reid: I thought I had made
plain that that is precisely what I was saying, that we need to
get a fundamental overhaul of this. I do not pretend that I have
identified every element of that, but I think, if you look today
at the written Ministerial Statement and the eight points and,
first, the five managerial general points that apply to the whole
Department, you will see that I do take this seriously and I am
thinking along the lines that you are suggesting. Now, IT may
or may not help, but it will only be a part of, if you like, an
add-on to a fundamental reform and transition of the whole system.
Incidentally, Chair, can I just make plain in this that I am not
saying that my predecessors, Labour and Tory, did not, in the
wake of these huge problems they faced, make major advances. If
you look at the closure on the French coast of Sangatte and others,
if you look at the methods that are being taken for inspection
of lorries coming in for illegal immigrants, if you look at the
regime on the Channel Tunnel, if you look at the figures on asylum
today, big advances have been made. The problem is that the challenges
have been growing even greater, not only in the post-Cold War
world that I mentioned, but also Europe which has now got a bigger
movement of people and goods than ever before, so I would not
want anybody to think that I think nothing has been done. Huge
steps have been taken, but I think that they have been taken on
top of a system that needs a fundamental overhaul and that takes
time, effort and endurance, and I think, Mr Browne, that is exactly
what you are suggesting.
Q927 Mr Benyon: Home Secretary, in
talking about the people who employ illegal immigrants, can I
start with one particular employer, you, and ask whether you think
that confidence in you might rightly be questioned by the public
because of the fact that you went on air last Thursday with a
statement which was subsequently proved, concerning the five employees,
to be different from what actually was the case? Do you not think
you should have checked in greater detail about those employees
with the contractor concerned?
John Reid: Well, I thought I dealt
with that right at the beginning, that I had actually answered
the question—
Q928 Mr Benyon: You stated an element
of regret, but do you not feel—
John Reid: I did not actually
state an element of regret. I said that I had found to my experience
that not every fact or figure you were given in the Home Office
existed 24 hours without revision, and I actually mentioned that
specific thing right at the beginning when I think you were present.
What we are doing on that is the Permanent Secretary, as from
that night, was checking all our procedures and, on my instructions,
the use of that firm has been suspended. I understand that an
investigation is under way. I have my own views which I will not
express here because there are certain industrial tribunal regulations,
so I cannot, about whether or not there should have been suspensions
immediately or not. I am not sure whether there have been, and
not yet is the answer, but we will have to go through those processes
which of course you would support. In that case, it is not right
that that should have happened and we have got to do everything
to make sure it does not happen again. All I would say is what
I said that evening, if that is what you are referring to me,
three things in fact. One was that we ought to congratulate the
security guard, and I say that again, because she did a very good
job and, now that I know the full facts, she did an even better
job than I thought at the time for reasons that I cannot go into
at present. The second thing is that I understand this is the
first time that they had turned up and that is the one thing that
proved to be incorrect. I should say that this is not cleaners
who are in there every night, incidentally, but this is computer
cleaners who come every six months, but that was wrong and I regret
that that was wrong. The other thing was that I was wise enough
to say that, because the security guard that evening had dealt
with it in, I thought, an exemplary fashion, we should not for
a minute believe that this meant there had been 100% certainty
in the past and it may well be on past occasions that the rules
had been broken and people had got in. As it happens, that was
a wise caveat based on my one week in the Home Office.
Q929 Mr Benyon: On the more general
subject of employers, do you believe there should be zero tolerance
of employers who knowingly employ illegal immigrants?
John Reid: I think there are two
things out of this. One is that in future I should not take care
of cleaners or anything else that ought to be under the management
of the Home Office, and that is why today I have stuck to the
strategic issues. The second is that, like anyone else, if someone
knowingly breaks the law, they should face the law.
Q930 Mr Benyon: In order that we
can have confidence that some of the disturbing evidence we took
last week is being addressed, yesterday I met the person whom
The Observer term as "Tanya" and I heard a really
horrendous story about her treatment.
John Reid: Absolutely.
Q931 Mr Benyon: I am dealing with
a continuing, very serious problem relating to ancestral visa
routes for people from Zimbabwe which is terribly upsetting for
those individuals concerned. We have heard catalogues of evidence
to this Committee about real cultural, intrinsic problems at IND.
Can you give us the confidence that, in terms of this specific
area dealing with employers of illegal immigrants, there is the
ability and you are going to give the leadership which will really
address these problems?
John Reid: Yes. I am as horrified
as you are about the details of that case. It is bad enough if
you are vulnerable without someone preying on that vulnerability,
if that is what has happened and I am not prejudging anything.
I can tell you that a man has been suspended, he has been investigated
and he has now been investigated by the police for criminal activity
as well, that I have instructed the Permanent Secretary that,
once that has been done, he has to find ways of carrying out a
wider appraisal of whether this may in any way not be an isolated
incident, which I hope it is, and I am glad to say that, when
something like this was discovered before in the public enquiry
office, two were sacked and several more, a lot more than two,
are under investigation and they should be treated pretty robustly.
Q932 Mr Benyon: Sorry, these issues
were sort of raised by another person back in January and there
is some feeling that these matters are not being addressed. In
terms of this inquiry, we want really to know that the IND is
going to move on from this.
John Reid: All I can say is that
that would be my intention as well. I think I have referred to
what happened in January and it is not true that nothing happened.
I think two people were sacked there and there is a number which
I know, but I cannot tell you, but it is more than two, who are
still under investigation and they will be treated similarly.
In the case of this one, not only is there an investigation, but
there is a potential criminal prosecution, which limits what I
say. Until such times as that is finished, then I am not in a
position to order a further and wider investigation, but I have
already spoken to the Permanent Secretary about that. Do you want
to say anything, David?
Sir David Normington: This behaviour
is totally unacceptable and I do not believe it is endemic across
IND, but Lin and I will be doing everything we can to ensure that
standards across IND and across the rest of the Home Office are
higher because this is totally unacceptable behaviour and we will
not tolerate it.
Q933 Chairman: Home Secretary, could
I just raise one final point which follows on from a question
earlier. If you are going to deal with the problem of illegal
employment, employment of illegal workers, whether it is employers
turning a blind eye or conniving which, we have had evidence,
takes place on a large scale, and most illegal migrants are here
because they are working, if you are going to deal with those
problems, you are going to need support from well outside the
Home Office, from other government departments, whether it is
clamping down on dodgy colleges, whether it is tax enforcement,
whatever. You are new in the job, but do you have the commitment
right across government to deal with this or are you out there
on your own with the IND trying to fight it and everybody else
is looking in the other direction?
John Reid: Can I tell you at the
next meeting? I work on the basis that I will have such support.
I have not yet had prolonged discussions with anybody on the subject
actually apart from yourself, Chair, but I would say that I would
be looking for help, assistance, advice and support not only across
government, but, if I might respectfully say so, from you and
your Committee. You have been involved in these things a lot longer
than I have. I am a couple of weeks into this, so I do not believe
that this is an issue which actually should hugely divide us up.
I know there are difficult subjects involved here. I believe ID
cards and biometrics are actually, the more I look at this, an
essential prerequisite, although they are not a sufficient condition
of arriving at this. I know others have different views and want
to be persuaded of this, but I think, apart from that, there is
a pretty common commitment among us all to address this because
it is a matter of fairness. The people of this country are very
welcoming to those who come and who contribute towards our society,
who accept the responsibilities as well as the rights, they are
very welcoming and that is the nature of our culture and has been
for a long, long time. I do not want to see that threatened by
the perception of people that this system is not being fair to
them and that it is being misused or abused through incompetence
of a government department. I will, therefore, attempt to address
this and, on the issue of illegal employment as well as everything
else, I look to you, if I might, and I will start reading your
back reports, but also in the future, Chair, for what advice and
assistance you can give me because I have a feeling after a fortnight
that I am going to need all the support and friends I can get.
Chairman: Home Secretary, we will, I
think, all acknowledge the progress which has been made in a number
of areas, but nobody could accuse you today of understating the
problems that you face and we look forward to seeing you in the
months to come. Thank you very much indeed to you and your officials.
|
