Select Committee on Home Affairs Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-59)

RT HON JACQUI SMITH MP AND SIR DAVID NORMINGTON KCB

24 JULY 2007

  Q40  Mr Clappison: In order to assess this impact, can you just remind us what the present level of net migration is?

  Jacqui Smith: No, I cannot but I would be quite happy to write to you about it.

  Q41  Mr Clappison: Do you have a rough idea?

  Jacqui Smith: One of the lessons that I have learned as Home Secretary over the last four weeks is that it is probably a good idea to base what I say on complete knowledge as opposed to a rough estimate of what the figure might be.

  Q42  Mr Clappison: You have just given a long speech about the impacts of migration but you are telling us you do not know what the level of migration is. Yesterday your government made a very important announcement about housing which I do not think you mentioned a moment ago in the impacts of migration. Do you draw any connection between migration and housing development?

  Jacqui Smith: Yes, I do. What is more, the Migration Impact Forum does as well, which is part of the reason why it includes or it is jointly chaired by a minister from the Department of Communities and Local Government.

  Q43  Mr Clappison: It is there to advise. It has not taken any decisions. Your government already knows, does it not, what the level of household formation and housing demand which comes from migration is. What do you think it is?

  Jacqui Smith: Not only am I not going to answer questions on the basis of not being confident about the figures; I am also going to try not to get into the areas of other government ministers. However, what I do know about some of the projections around housing growth is that, yes, of course migration will make a contribution to that but so will a whole range of other issues like family formation and the different areas of the country that people want to live in.

  Q44  Mr Clappison: This is true but migration happens to be a very important part of housing demand. Do you have any idea what the proportion is? Your government has given a figure.

  Jacqui Smith: No, I do not.

  Q45  Mr Clappison: Perhaps I can assist you.

  Jacqui Smith: I thought you might.

  Q46  Mr Clappison: In a written answer I received from your government, your government has revised upwards three times in the last ten years the level of housing demand stemming from migration. It has gone up from 26 to 31 to 33% which is a very substantial part of housing demand. You talk about government departments working together. Here we have a government department which is telling us that the housing we need to build is three million over the next 14 years to accommodate the housing demand, but your government department is responsible for migration, for issuing work permits and for how many people come into the country. You two departments should be working together when 33% of housing demand which you told us about yesterday comes from migration.

  Jacqui Smith: I am sorry, but that is precisely why as departments we are working together. It is why there has already been a meeting of the Migration Impact Forum. It is why there is already work under way to consider what the impacts of migration are across a whole range of government services. It is why, as well as recognising the considerable benefit that comes from migration, we are also recognising the impact on public services. If your charge is that the government needs to work together on these things, that is completely reasonable and that is why we are already doing it.

  Q47  Mr Clappison: If we are talking about three million houses which are needed, according to your government 33%—this is a figure which I am very happy to give you—it follows that a million out of these fall within the remit of your department because they arise from migration.

  Jacqui Smith: I am not sure what argument you are making. If you are making the argument that migration brings with it impacts on a whole range of other public services and on our communities, my argument is I completely agree with you which is why this government is working across government to consider the impacts of migration, both positive and negative. In that area I agree with you.

  Q48  Gwyn Prosser: Is it not the case that if we accept your opening statement—and I do—that we need to have immigrants to fill the labour gap and help the economy grow, we need houses for those people. Either we fill those houses and grow our economy with people from outside or we expand and increase the birth rate, which is not an easy thing to do.

  Jacqui Smith: I am not even going to go down the route of answering how we expand the birth rate. You are absolutely right. The important point here however is that the government has both recognised the challenge to this country of ensuring that we build sufficient houses, which was precisely the reason why the Housing Minister made the statement that she made yesterday, and it has recognised the impact that migration, for a whole variety of reasons, can have both positively in terms of growing our economy and providing the skills we need, but also in terms of impact on public services. It seems to me that that is an appropriate way to respond to the challenges, whether or not that is in housing or in other areas of public services.

  Q49  Mr Clappison: On asylum, you have a target by 2011 of granting or removing 90% of new asylum claimants within six months. You understand that target. Are you on course with it?

  Jacqui Smith: Yes, we are. We are currently at the situation where nearly 40% of asylum cases are being concluded through grant or removal within six months. It is quite important to recognise, firstly, that we realised the significance of that target and moved from a target that was previously about the point at which you make a decision to a recognition that what is important for people is not only making that decision but also moving to the impacts of that decision. If that is a decision that enables people to stay, ensuring that those people do become integrated or, if it is a decision to remove, ensuring that those people are removed. It is precisely because of the need to ensure that that happens that, as from March this year for example, all asylum cases are now being considered on the basis of what you might call an end to end approach, where somebody is responsible for that case from the point at which the application is made to the point at which that is concluded. We have had some success on that, as I have suggested, in that we are at the point of nearly 40% of those asylum cases now being concluded through grant or removal within six months.

  Q50  Mr Clappison: Your predecessor gave evidence before this Committee on how he was dealing with the old cases of people whose asylum cases had sadly failed and who remained in the country. Can you tell us how many of those people are still in the country today and what is your target for removing them?

  Jacqui Smith: No. What my predecessor actually said was that we now had a programme for dealing with the legacy cases. I am committed to the priorities that he set out and the timescale that he set out. I will certainly ask Lin Homer as the chief executive of the Border and Immigration Agency to write to the Committee on the progress.

  Q51  Mr Clappison: Do you know how many there are?

  Jacqui Smith: The total amount that was spelt out previously was 450,000 and the target was to do that over five years.

  Bob Russell: When you and other government departments are looking at immigration, can I ask you to look again at previous Home Office statistics, which I recall indicated that immigration has resulted in a net contribution to the national economy? Successive governments have relied on immigration to ensure the National Health Service did not collapse. A third one which perhaps has not been fully appreciated is that 10% of the British Army is not British. I think that puts into context some of the benefits. I am the Home Secretary, when she and her government departments look at the total picture, that those are aspects which perhaps are not necessarily highlighted in The Daily Mail and The Sun.

  Chairman: I think Bob Russell is saying that there should be a more balanced approach to immigration than perhaps we have heard so far.

  Q52  Bob Russell: Can you report on developments in relation to the 1,013 foreign prisoners released without deportation being considered since the chief executive of the Board of Immigration Agency wrote to us on 14 June?

  Jacqui Smith: Yes. I can give you an update from the point at which Lin Homer wrote to you. The key figures at the moment on the 1,013 group are that 563 have now had their cases concluded. That is an increase from 543 when Lin Homer wrote to you. 226 have been deported or removed which is up from 214 when Lin Homer wrote to you. In a further 302 cases the individual has been tracked down and located and is going through the deportation process. In the remaining 148 cases, which are down from 149, the individual has not been located.

  Q53  Bob Russell: Of those 148 that have not been located—you have indicated the number has fallen by one since the last report—how confident are you that they will be located?

  Jacqui Smith: This is obviously work that is ongoing. There has already been quite considerable progress that has been spelt out to you on more than one occasion by Lin Homer. This remains a very important area of the work.

  Sir David Normington: As Lin made clear in her letter, some of them will almost certainly not be in the country.

  Q54  Bob Russell: They have left?

  Sir David Normington: Yes.

  Q55  Bob Russell: In terms of numbers of foreign criminals deported, what difference do you estimate the provisions of the UK Borders Bill, if enacted, will make?

  Jacqui Smith: We obviously think that is important but there has been some quite important progress already. Firstly, the condition that we set previously that no foreign national prisoner should be released without first being considered for deportation has been met since April 2006. The Border and Immigration Agency is already now considering deportation cases eight months before the earliest date of release. 2,784 foreign national prisoners have left the UK in the 2006/7 financial year. That is compared to 1,500 in each of the two previous years. If performance continues at the current rate, over 4,000 foreign national prisoners will leave in 2007. It is in order to build on that improved performance that the new legislation would automatically consider deportation of foreign criminals as being taken forward in the UK.

  Q56  Bob Russell: What role has the National Offender Management Service played in work on foreign national prisoners since its responsibilities were transferred to the Ministry of Justice?

  Jacqui Smith: The transfer of ministerial responsibility does not of course impact on the work that is carried out by NOMS more generally. On the specifics of what their contribution has been, perhaps I could write to you.

  Q57  Gwyn Prosser: One of the main aims of the forthcoming Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill is to ensure that the UK does not become a safe haven for foreign prisoners and terrorists. To bring this about, the Bill contains certain powers with regard to residency and reporting arrangements. How confident are you that these are sufficiently robust, given that the penalty for failing to meet the requirements looks as if it is just 51 weeks imprisonment? Is that sufficiently robust?

  Jacqui Smith: We are confident, having brought them forward, that these measures are suitably robust. They do mirror those that are already available where a person is given temporary admission, which have operated for over a third of a century. The problem here of course is that we were not in these particular circumstances able to give people temporary admission because of the Court of Appeal ruling last year. If we look at the sorts of reporting and monitoring requirements, the reporting for example would be to an immigration reporting centre or a police station if there was no reporting centre within a reasonable distance. The electronic monitoring provisions would also be available which could be used as part of an overall management regime with respect to contact. We can ensure that those people who are given special immigration status are required to live at a particular address to ensure that we can maintain contact with them and failure to comply with either residency or reporting conditions will be an offence for which that individual will be prosecuted resulting in a fine, imprisonment or both. We do believe that the propositions we are putting forward in the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill will fulfil those requirements, although this is obviously, as with everything, something we would want to keep under review. It will be part of the discussions that will go on as we take this legislation through Parliament.

  Sir David Normington: It is important to say that the Bill creates a stronger presumption of deportation. Also, it is not just those who receive a prison sentence of at least 12 months; it is anyone else who has a prison sentence of any length for a serious crime. That is set out. Of course the courts can decide to recommend for deportation as well, so this is quite a big step beyond where we are. We are now considering deportation well ahead of the act of sentence in a way that we were not before so we are doing it at the moment eight months before the end of sentence. That is a big improvement on where we were before which gives you confidence that we will be able to deliver on those provisions.

  Q58  Gwyn Prosser: Except to say that for the individual who has been already designated as a foreign criminal or a terrorist—otherwise he would not come under these orders—the balance he has to make is whether he should comply with them with the almost certain chance of deportation or risk less than 12 months' imprisonment. That does not look like much of a disincentive to abscond.

  Jacqui Smith: These were difficult circumstances that led to the requirement to put into place this special immigration status that is in the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill. I am, as I suggested, confident that in those particular circumstances the reporting and monitoring requirements are appropriate. As David has also said, what the UK Borders Group does is strengthen even further with respect to other foreign national prisoners the approach that we will be able to take to deportation. That, alongside the progress that we have already seen with respect to foreign national prisoners, is quite considerable progress in an area which I do not think any of us would agree has been completely properly dealt with previously.

  Q59  Gwyn Prosser: What is the danger of these new activities on behalf of the borders people detracting from the remainder of the work?

  Jacqui Smith: The very important review that was carried out into the whole immigration area last year, the way in which the agency is now operating as a shadow agency with a clear focus on the strategic objectives that it is responsible for, some of what I have already seen in the last four weeks about the way in which the processes and the operation of the agency have improved, give me confidence about the ability of the agency to be able to continue taking forward that work and that progress; but, the reason why I said at the beginning that immigration will obviously remain a very important priority for me is because the proof will be in delivering the objectives and maintaining the progress that we have seen, whether or not it is on the removal of failed asylum seekers where obviously we have made very important progress in reaching that tipping point and where we have seen the lowest levels of coming here for asylum since 1993; whether or not it is on the enforcement work where extra capacity has been put into enforcement and we see an impact; whether or not it is on securing our borders, where some of the biometrics I was talking about earlier mean that we are now much better able to stop people before they get to our borders and, if they should not be coming in, prevent them when they do get to our borders. All of that is important progress, as is the structural changes that have been made to the agency, the regional structure that has now been put in place, the new focus on the processes that are there. I and Liam Byrne are absolutely focused on the need to make sure that that progress continues and it is something we will be watching very carefully.


 
previous page contents next page

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

© Parliamentary copyright 2007
Prepared 26 October 2007