Examination of Witness (Questions 397-419)
MR PHIL
WOOLAS, MR
MATTHEW COATS
AND MR
NEIL HUGHES
17 MARCH 2009
Q397 Chairman: Good morning Minister,
Mr Hughes and Mr Coats. Thank you very much for coming to give
evidence to us this morning. I know, Minister, that you were up
very early on GMTV and I would like to start by asking you a question
based on what you said this morning concerning the locking out
of migrants from Calais. You made a statement to the BBC I think
that the UK's borders were tougher than the US Mexico frontier.
I am not sure whether you have actually been down there to have
a look at the US Mexico frontier, but are you pleased with the
efforts that are being made to tighten up on illegal immigration?
Mr Woolas: Thank you, Chairman,
and thank you for the invitation to this inquiry, which we are
very keen to support. The point that I was making this morning
on the television interviews is that the reason why numbers of
people are seen to be gathering in Calais is indeed because it
is more difficult to get past our border controls, our juxtaposed
border controls, that we operate with the French authorities.
On 5 March, the Editor of the Dover Express, a fine newspaper
that perhaps has reported more on this industry than any other,
said: "It would seem that the traffickers are doing their
worst and with security never better at Calais and the Dover-based
carriers and Eurotunnel better clued up than ever before, this
problem is likely to escalate." I base my evidence not just
on the reports from Matthew Coats and colleagues but from local
reporters.
Q398 Chairman: We have just taken
evidence from Professor Metcalf on the points-based system and
I am going to bring you back to your evidence to this committee
on 20 November last year and the events since then. Does the Government
regret using the phrase "British jobs for British workers"
in respect of immigration issues, bearing in mind the current
level of unemployment and the wish under the points-based system
to let people in on the basis of their skills? I know this was
not your phrase; it was a phrase which the Prime Minister used.
Do you stand by that phrase?
Mr Woolas: Yes, I do, Mr Chairman,
and I am more than happy to say that as a British Minister in
a British government representing a British constituency, I want
my constituents to have the first bite of the cherry in the employment
market. That seems to me to be uncontroversial. It is what local
authorities do in their regeneration departments. It is what devolved
governments are doing in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
It is what happens in the regional development agencies, and it
is what happens nationally.
Q399 Chairman: Do you think there
is a limit on the number of people who can come into the United
Kingdom? You mentioned previously in November that you did not
favour a cap but the figure of 70 million was put about then as
being the kind of population that Britain could not extend beyond.
Are we still talking about these kinds of figures? Is it still
the Government's intention to keep the limit at about 70 million?
Mr Woolas: The population projections
of 70 million are based on extrapolations from current or most
recent (last three year) net migration figures. Those net migration
figures include the number of people who are in this country temporarily.
The points-based system addresses exactly the temporary economic
migrants, both students and workers. The counting in and counting
out e-border system enables us to know who has left the country
and who has not. We are therefore in a much stronger position
to identify within the population figures those who are temporary
and those who are permanent and therefore to get a more accurate
extrapolation. The points-based system also enables us to control,
by moving the criteria, the numbers of people coming into the
country as economic migrants covered by the PBS. I hope to be
able to show you, Mr Chairman, by the end of this year, the figures
to back up my proposition.
Q400 Chairman: And they will show
that fewer people have come in as a result of the points-based
system?
Mr Woolas: that is our expectation.
Q401 Chairman: On the British jobs
slogan, since you came to give evidence to us of course there
have been the demonstrations at Lindsey. A large number of British
workers were complaining that the Government was letting in too
many people from the EU; in that particular case it was from Italy.
As someone who has campaigned very strongly against the British
National Party throughout your political life, did it worry you
that the British National Party had adopted this slogan as a means
of keeping out of this country people who were not British?
Mr Woolas: I think the British
National Party are making an electoral appeal to former supporters
of UKIP, and indeed the revelations recently on membership would
back up that point of view. I think the campaign they have is
aimed at those areas. It is the anti-European Union sentiment
of the British National Party campaign; it is one of their three
priorities in the current European election campaign. I think
that there was a coincidence of those issues. Clearly the Government's
policy, and the one I whole heartedly support, is that the Posted
Workers' Directive provides a regulation within the European Union
but also European Union people through the Freedom of Movement
Directive have access to our labour market, just as British people
have access to the European Union Member States' labour market.
Q402 Chairman: Finally from me, have
you finished your public spat with the ONS? What prompted your
statement against them?
Mr Woolas: My concerns I think
have been recognised in the UK Statistics Authority notice of
yesterday, Note 3/209, and they looked at the ONS release in the
context of the code of practice. I think that the UK Statistics
Authority has recognised the concern that not just I but others
had on the confusion between the one in nine of the population
figure who are foreign born population within the UK (which of
course includes children born to British nationals overseas, for
example to our Armed Forces) and the one in 15, which is the actual
figure of foreign work people not including British nationals
born overseas that are in those population figures. My concern
was that those figures may be confused and that that indeed may
have a serious impact in communities, partly for the reasons you,
Mr Chairman, were referring to in relation to some of the political
parties. The answer is: yes, I have finished my spat with them.
Q403 Mr Winnick: Would it not be
odd, Minister, if any government here was not aware at a time
of rising unemployment, which is being faced by us and other industrial
countries, and very sensitive about British workers having the
first opportunity for vacancies? Is that not perfectly natural?
Mr Woolas: I think so. I think
this is about Killingholme in Lindsey. I understand the point
that the trade unions are making about their need as they see
it for those agreements to stick and I think that dispute in reality
had more to do with enforcing agreements than it did with British
jobs for British workers, although that was the headline. I think
it is perfectly natural. With the measures that we have taken
we have already implemented the change to the Resident Labour
Market test that the Home Secretary announced recently and other
measures within the PBS to drive towards that policy. What is
perhaps most important in the context of Mr Winnick's question
is the effort that we are making to ensure that where Professor
Metcalf's committee has identified skill shortages, government
across Whitehall have skills and training strategies as well as
the points-based system. I think in that way the United Kingdom
can maximise the benefits of Professor Metcalf's work.
Q404 Mr Winnick: In that recent demonstration
which the Chairman mentioned, was it not the case that every effort
by fringe, lunatic and racist elements to set one group of workers
against foreign workers failed but the unions made it totally
clear that their dispute, their quarrel, was in fact with companies
exploiting the situation to try to get in people from abroad at
a cheaper rate?
Mr Woolas: Yes, I think so. Outside
my role, in a previous life I have much experience of the big
sites' agreement in the construction projects sector. My experience
is that employers and trade unions on the whole needed each other
to make sure the relevant labour was in the relevant place. We
could not have built many of the major projects in this country
under different governments without that agreement, and I think
it is very important.
Q405 David Davies: Turning to the
Sangatte issue, is it the case that you are missing the point
a bit if you think that the reason people are gathering there
is because of increased security. The reality is that they are
marching sometimes through dozens of European Union countries
because they know that the benefits system is far more generous
in the United Kingdom?
Mr Woolas: I do not accept that
point of view.
Q406 David Davies: Why do they not
claim benefits in France then or in Italy?
Mr Woolas: It is true that the
majority of people there are not claiming asylum in France and
that rather backs up my point that as a general assertion such
people are not asylum seekers. If they were genuinely seeking
refuge, they would claim asylum in the first safe country. The
same debate is held in most European Union countries. For example,
there are routes from Algeria to France. In Marseilles the public
policy debate is around why do Algerians go to Marseilles and
not to Spain. In southern Spain the public debate is why do people
from western Africa come to Spain. There are routes from Libya
to Italy. There are routes from Romania to Italy. These routes
exist across the world in fact, not just within the European Union,
but I recognise the important point that Mr Davies makes and the
Government recognises that the message that the people traffickers
are send out to these people in the country of origin is exactly
that there is a promised land in the United Kingdom. Our efforts
are there to make sure that whilst we protect genuine refugees,
and I think that our record under the United Nations Charter is
exemplary, and I am more than happy to defend that, I also think
that we need to put the record straight as to what our immigration
management policy is and that is undoubtedly improving.
Chairman: We are now going to
turn on to the details of the points-based system, and if you
want to turn to Mr Coats or Mr Hughes, please feel free to do
so.
Q407 Mrs Dean: Minister, do you agree
that it is not political palatable for the Government to promise
one thing to the electorate, i.e. safeguarding jobs for British
workers, only to risk being contradicted by an unelected advisory
body, such as the Migration Advisory Committee? Is political pressure
being brought to bear on the MAC in terms of the advice which
is requested from it?
Mr Woolas: No, it is not. The
value of the MAC, as we call it, is not just in presentation of
policy but critically in formulation of policy. Very important
areas, such as are there enough children's care workers in our
local authorities, are the subject of investigation by the Migration
Advisory Committee. These are things that one could not use in
the political arena. My own experience is that it absolutely is
not, and indeed I think you would back me up in saying that if
we tried, I do not think Professor Metcalf would succumb in any
shape whatsoever. I find him a very impressive man.
Q408 Chairman: Do you think that
its name should be changed? You were not where when Professor
Metcalf gave evidence. Mr Clappison asked him whether the name
should be Labour Shortages Committee rather than Migration Advisory
Committee because the terms of reference are actually quite limited.
Mr Woolas: That is an interesting
question.
Q409 Chairman: You can think about
it and write to us if you like?
Mr Woolas: The difficulty I have
is that the first bit of advice that he gave in my tenure was
over the Workers Registration Scheme, the A8, and critically he
was able to draw on advice from what other European countries
had done in relation to that point and what the migration impacts
were of those; for example, Poland and Germany. He does take that
on board.
Q410 Chairman: The distinction made
by Mr Clappison was that it actually does provide a good service
and if you are going to call it a Migration Advisory Committee,
it should actually advise you beyond labour shortages.
Mr Woolas: The ball is bouncing
that way, Mr Chairman.
Q411 Martin Salter: Minister, we
read that Australia for the first time in many years is reducing
its net immigration by around 14%. We have heard a lot about the
points-based system giving Ministers the levers or the facility,
an employment tax might be a better metaphor, dependent on the
needs of the British economy. Is it not about time, with unemployment
rising, that people actually saw Ministers using the powers that
the points-based immigration system give you? We understand the
Home Secretary has asked the Migration Advisory Committee to consider
whether or not there is an economic case for restricting Tier
2 workers. When are we actually going to see that advice and see
some form of implementation and is there not a case for restricting
access to Tier 1 employers as well, given the state of the British
economy?
Mr Coats: What the Home Secretary
announced were three broad changes plus three questions. The first
change was to introduce Jobcentre Plus into the resident labour
market test to change the requirements for Tier 1 and also to
set in place a mechanism to review skills in particular sectors.
She also asked the MAC three specific questions. The first was:
is there a case for restricting Tier 2 to shortage only occupations?
The second was: what is the impact of dependants in Tier 2? She
asked the MAC to come back by July on those two questions. She
also asked the MAC to assess whether there were further measures
beyond which we have already talked to restrict Tier 1, and that
question is to be assessed by the autumn.
Q412 Martin Salter: Minister, do
you not think that is too long to wait? We are losing jobs at
an alarming rate. Why on earth do you not use the powers now to
put a moratorium on these categories and then see where the advice
goes? Frankly, if we wait till July, we could have the situation
running away from us. You are not obliged to follow the advice
of the Migration Advisory Committee. For once, the Government
has not conceded all its powers to a quango. Why not take some
action now in order to protect the situation? You could always
open the tap a little further down the line if the needs of the
economy require it. Why do we need to wait to July or the autumn?
Mr Woolas: The beauty of the points-based
system is that you have that option. We have already taken tough
action. Tier 3 is closed, as the committee knows. We have already
announced and implemented the changes on the Resident Labour Market
test under Tier 2. On Tier 1, we have already announced an increase
in the criteria on graduate to postgraduate and other measures.
So we have done that and because we have the points-based system,
we have been able to get this advice underway earlier, and indeed
if we had not had the points-based system, we would not have been
able to do it. I think that on that side we have that flexibility.
On the other side, I was very struck by the advice from the Department
for Children and Schools and Families on the previous analysis
of the shortage list on critical care workers. I realised that
a bit of caution and looking at each sector is very important.
Some of these skills shortage are critical to the public services.
Chairman: Mr Clappison has a very quick
supplementary.
Q413 Mr Clappison: My quick supplementary
is to keep talking about the resident labour market test. In fact
that was not something which was introduced by the points-based
system, it was in place a long time before the points-based system
came into being and at the beginning of, I think it was, last
year—certainly very recently—you were proposing to
abolish it for higher paid workers. I asked lots of questions
of your predecessor about this and eventually he kept to it, but
it is wrong to say that the resident labour market test is an
innovation of the points-based system because your Government's
policy was to relax it.
Mr Woolas: No, I am sorry, Mr
Clappison, the resident labour market test being under Tier 2
is a consequence of the points-based system; the resident labour
market test at Tier 1 does not apply; so the fact that we can
use the resident labour market test within Tier 2 is a policy
innovation. Of course the resident labour market test has been
around for donkey's years and I always thought that it was subject
to abuse actually: that was one of the reasons why we wanted to
change.
Chairman: Thank you very much. Ann Cryer.
Q414 Mrs Cryer: Minister, can I briefly
ask you about the position of employers who are seeking to plan
their recruitment ahead? It may be a bit difficult if the Shortage
Occupation List keeps changing. Can you give us some assurance
that you will be taking them into account?
Mr Woolas: The flexibility that
the points-based system gives the Government with a sector by
sector approach, we think, does allow for much better engagement
with industrial sectors. Of course there is the point about disruption
and the need for advanced notice, but the person who enters through
Tier 2 shortage, their grant for temporary worker is not affected
if the shortage list subsequently changes so that that flow is
not for staff under the points-based system. I do not know if
there is another experience there.
Mr Coats: There is always going
to be a balance between keeping something for long enough so people
can get used to it and updating it so it reflects the circumstances
at the time. There are two mechanisms. The first is that elements
from the shortage occupations can be updated each six months,
and the Government agrees with the MAC as to what will be looked
at in each of those groups and then each two years the whole document
is updated, and we think that is the right balance between creating
certainty for people but also keeping the list current.
Q415 Mrs Cryer: Can you comment briefly
on the tiers? If you are going to change the tiers, will those
changes in tiers be carried out retrospectively?
Mr Coats: No.
Mr Woolas: No, the change is within
the tiers and there is no retrospection.
Q416 Mrs Cryer: Can I ask you a very
short supplementary. I am having a lot of fairly bad reports about
a certain residential home in my area and nearly all of the bad
reports stem from the fact that many of the staff there either
have no English or a very limited amount of English and many of
the elderly people being cared for have either dementia or other
related illnesses. It does confuse an already confused person
if the person who is helping them does not have the same language.
Are you looking at this in the Shortage Occupation List?
Mr Woolas: Within the tiers, apart
from not all cases of Tier 5, one is required to have command
of spoken and written English, so the people that you have in
your constituency will be people who have been granted before
the introduction of the scheme. As from now, as from the operation
of the scheme, the use of English is a requirement for entry.
Q417 Mrs Cryer: This will not be
happening?
Mr Woolas: That is right.
Chairman: Thank you, Mrs Cryer. Tom Brake.
Q418 Tom Brake: Minister, do you
acknowledge that some people are highly skilled but they do not
have formal academic qualifications?
Mr Woolas: I think it would be
foolish not to, Mr Brake.
Q419 Tom Brake: The obvious question
which follows is should not the points-based system acknowledge
this?
Mr Woolas: This is the "nomad
knowledge" point, is it not? The points-based system, of
course, as Mr Brake says, provides for objective criteria. That,
in turn, has many benefits in terms of being able to administer
the system more easily. The criticism that it does not allow for
commonsense, I think, is met by the fact that in, for example,
Tier 1, one is able to find an employer or a sponsoring university,
for example, who would be able to bring such a person in, in a
specific situation. So I think there is enough flexibility to
meet the Einsteins of this world, but I think that is a policy
choice that has been made, and I think it is fair of you to ask
the question, if you do not mind me saying so.
| 
