Examination of Witness (Questions 1-31)
MR TIM
HEAVER
9 MARCH 2010
Q1 Chair: We are taking a very short
look at the Committee's report and inquiry into the Gurkha issue.
The report of the Committee, as members will know, was accepted
in full by the Government and implemented in full by the Government,
and we are looking at the follow-up as to what has happened since.
We have as our first witness Mr Heaver. You were going to be accompanied
by a Gurkha veteran, I understand.
Mr Heaver: Yes,
Chair, I was. Unfortunately, because of the nature of some of
the things that are going on, the individual ex-Gurkha who had
initially agreed to attend with me has declined to do so quite
late in the day for fear of what might happen to his son who remains
in Kathmandu.
Q2 Chair: Let us begin by asking
you about reports we have heard of the existence of agents who
are advising Gurkhas in Nepal, raising expectations and charging
them enormous amounts of money. Are these reports accurate? Is
this, in fact, what is happening?
Mr Heaver: The reports would appear
to have foundation in fact, so yes.
Q3 Chair: And how widespread is the
issue?
Mr Heaver: I would not like to
say how widespread, but certainly one particular organisation
until very recently was certainly telling people that if they
did not make the application through that organisation the application
would be refused and they would have to make a donation of £500
in order to see that organisation's solicitors who would make
the application on their behalf.
Q4 Chair: Is there any indication
that those agents are connected to any solicitors or agents in
the United Kingdom?
Mr Heaver: They were certainly
working with Messrs Howe & Co, and I must stress that there
is nothing to indicate—
Q5 Chair: Sorry, they were working
with whom?
Mr Heaver: They were introducing
Gurkhas to Howe & Co, but I must stress there is nothing to
indicate that Howe & Co have done anything improper. I was
handed copy emails this morning to say that Howe & Co raised
this matter with the Legal Services Commission in June last year
and the Legal Services Commission appear to have given the advice
that they do not want clients paying any organisation for a referral
for services that they are or may be entitled to under the Access
to Justice Act. Other than that I do not think there is much we
can do from here in the UK. There is a problem inasmuch as the
only UK regulatory organisation that works in Nepal is the Solicitors
Regulation Authority and I am not aware that they have ever been
to Nepal.
Q6 Chair: The English Solicitors
Regulation Authority?
Mr Heaver: An English solicitor
is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority—
Q7 Chair: Yes, I am aware of that.
Mr Heaver: —wherever in
the world they operate as an English solicitor.
Q8 Chair: Oh, I see.
Mr Heaver: The Office of the Immigration
Services Commissioner has no extra territorial jurisdiction, so
with any immigration matter there are always local agents charging
money for services and those services are not necessarily proper,
legitimate or—
Q9 Chair: But do you have some hard
evidence from people prepared to say to this Committee, or indeed
to the Government, "This is what is happening", or is
it just anecdotal?
Mr Heaver: I can certainly give
what would amount to hearsay evidence from members of my family
who are Nepalese ex-Gurkhas who have gone along to GAESO in the
understanding that they had to, have paid £500 per applicant
to GAESO on the understanding that they had to, and have then
been introduced to Howe & Co. Howe & Co have acted within
the legal aid—
Chair: That is very helpful. Perhaps
you would let the Clerk of the Committee have at the end of this
session copies of those emails. That would be very helpful.
Q10 Martin Salter: Mr Heaver, I want
to personally also put on the record that I have had contact from
Howe & Co who have absolutely assured me that they have moved
out of the GAESO premises and have at no point taken money unscrupulously.
I think we should put that on the record because what we are actually
talking about here, are we not, is agents, middlemen operating
in Nepal in this kind of unregulated vacuum that appears to exist
out there and also in the gaps that fall between the various organisations
that seek to represent the wider Gurkha community? Is that not
the nub of the problem in that it is almost like Life of Brian,
we are trying to deal with five or six different organisations
in an unregulated framework with quite a rush of people wanting
to take advantage of the Government's belated conversion to the
Gurkha rights cause?
Mr Heaver: Certainly there are
many organisations that exist for former Gurkhas. They are all
to some extent rivals and compete. Certainly the organisations
do sit down and talk and work together. Others do not. The Gurkha
Army Ex-Servicemen's Organisation, who are, from what I am hearing,
the main culprits in demanding money will not sit down with anyone.
We have a large contingent from BGWS who are to be commended because
they have sat down in the past with other Gurkha organisations.
Sadly, without GAESO the unity of Gurkha organisations is not
possible and GAESO to that extent can be a very disruptive organisation,
whether intentionally or otherwise.
Q11 Martin Salter: Would it be possible
for UKBA not to process applications that have come through middlemen
or where people have been exploited? Is it possible to have physical
measures that would stop people being conned in this way, into
handing over hard-earned cash which in many instances represents
a year's salary for a service which is provided free by the MoD
in Kathmandu? Is there any mechanism that we could recommend the
British Government adopted?
Mr Heaver: Realistically I cannot
see what can be done. The application form itself has a section
towards the end of it asking, "Who has helped you fill in
the form?" If that is completed properly that would possibly
be the only way you could see if a middleman had helped.
Martin Salter: Perhaps that should be
at the start of the form.
Q12 Gwyn Prosser: Mr Heaver, the
MoD have told us that their Resettlement Office in Kathmandu goes
to some lengths to explain that they have a free service, in other
words there is no need to go outside and pay any fees. Are they
doing a sufficiently good job in this respect and what else can
they do?
Mr Heaver: There are a couple
of points. First, there are some ex-Gurkhas who feel very angry
and let down by the MoD and who, quite frankly, whatever the MoD
do, will never use an MoD sponsored organisation because they
will never believe that they will get proper help.
Q13 Gwyn Prosser: Really?
Mr Heaver: That, unfortunately,
is the basis of the formation of all the ex-Gurkha groups. If
the Gurkha Resettlement Office was offering perfect advice and
a perfect service there would still be people who did not want
to use it. Then there is the issue that simple straightforward
applications should really go to the Resettlement Office. There
is no need for legal advice or legal assistance; it is a straightforward
application. With adult dependants, which is the hard end of the
cases, the Gurkha Resettlement Office do not like to even take
those cases, so there is an issue there because most Gurkhas want
to settle here, at least in part, for the sake of children and
in some cases it is only for the sake of children. With GAESO
spreading the word that any adult child can come here there will
be a large number of bad applications that with no amount of help,
legal or otherwise, will get here.
Q14 Gwyn Prosser: Mr Heaver, you
might remember that at the round table meeting we had last May,
which made great progress, I think, with regard to these issues,
our friends from the Gurkha groups indicated that they were more
than pleased to set up a Resettlement Board to help with the receiving
and integration of families, et cetera. Have any developments
taken place here?
Mr Heaver: Not really. Because
of the Gurkha politics involved a large number of the community
Nepali groups have not engaged independently and largely it is
the MoD leading the resettlement effort.
Q15 Gwyn Prosser: And that is bad,
is it?
Mr Heaver: Not necessarily. Why
would that be bad?
Q16 Gwyn Prosser: So how can they
make progress?
Mr Heaver: The Gurkhas themselves
need to sit down within themselves, within their community. They
need to decide what is good, what is bad, and then they need to
move on, and that is a long time awaited.
Q17 Chair: Sorry; did you say that
they need to sit down and decide what is good and what is bad?
This sounds rather like a discussion on Marx and Engels. This
Committee has made a recommendation. The Government has accepted
the recommendation in full. What is going wrong is practical implementation,
is it not, so what do you think should happen rather than having
discussions on good and evil? What is the way forward? That is
what this Committee needs to know.
Mr Heaver: The Gurkhas themselves
need to agree what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. There
needs to be full and proper disclosure of information to those
Gurkhas in Nepal and their families who may wish to come here.
I had a client come to see me last week whose uncle was 84 years
old and his nephew was keen to come to this country, even though
he is in his thirties and is married with children, because they
had been given the impression that it would be possible, so they
want to do it. It is not going to be possible; they should not
even be thinking about it.
Q18 Tom Brake: Mr Heaver, first of
all could I put a difficult question to you? It has been suggested
to us that on the Law Society's records you are not down as a
registered solicitor. Can you explain that?
Mr Heaver: I retired as a solicitor
some years ago through ill health. I work for a firm of solicitors.
I do not exercise any of the functions that you need a practising
certificate for.
Tom Brake: Okay. Can I also ask you,
as far as it is possible, to say what particular Gurkha faction
you represent, because you cannot see the body language of some
of the people sitting behind you, but I can, which indicates that
the responses you are giving to lots of these questions are not
necessarily terribly representative of the Gurkha community, so
which particular group do you represent?
Chair: Before you answer that question,
unfortunately, Mr Brake, the body language of people in the public
gallery is not evidence.
Tom Brake: It is anecdotal perhaps.
Q19 Chair: Mr Brake, this is to get
evidence. Mr Heaver, perhaps you could answer Mr Brake's question
not in relation to the body language of people in the public gallery,
who do not exist for the purposes of this discussion, but in terms
of the intonation behind what Mr Brake is saying.
Mr Heaver: My background with
the Gurkha organisations is that I was one of the founders of
the British Gurkha Welfare Society. I was its founding secretary.
I was formerly a committee member of the Gurkha United Forum,
which was a group that was aiming to unite everybody. I have been
legal adviser to the United British-Gurkha Ex-Servicemen's Association.
I represent a large number of Gurkha and Gurkha family member
applicants for settlement, and my wife's family going back several
generations are Nepali Gurkhas.
Chair: Yes, Mr Heaver, I think we accept
that is why you are a witness.
Tom Brake: I will come on to my specific
question. Obviously, at the point where discussions were taking
place about Gurkha rights and how many Gurkhas would come to the
UK, some speculative figures were put forward. What is your assessment
of how many have actually taken up the offer of settlement?
Q20 Chair: Before you answer, can
you remind us, in answer to Mr Brake, what was the estimate?
Mr Heaver: The estimates varied.
I think I said up to 250,000. In the end I think we settled on—
Q21 Chair: So what did the Government
say?
Mr Heaver: I think we settled
on about 15,000. From what I can make out there are possibly 5,000
Gurkhas who retired after July 1997 and not many more than 2,000
who retired before whose applications were pending, and a very
modest number in addition to that.
Q22 Chair: So it is about a third
of what we expected?
Mr Heaver: We are certainly talking
about well under 10,000 that I am aware of.
Q23 Tom Brake: Is there any evidence
that perhaps the bulk of applications has now happened and the
flow has reduced, or is this the first wave of future waves? How
do you assess what is likely to happen in the near future?
Mr Heaver: Given the saturation
of Nepal and the information that has gone on about, "Yes,
you can apply; please do so", I cannot see that we are looking
at any great flood now. I would have thought there may be a slight
trickle once the backlog, which is still there, is worked through.
Q24 David Davies: Mr Heaver, you
will be reassured to know that the body language of Monmouth Comprehensive
is of entire interest in the Committee's proceedings. Can I suggest
to you that there have been a lot of good intentions here, lots
of celebrities involved in this campaign and many people have
gone along with this, but the reality has been that Nepalese citizens,
some of whom have not even been in the Gurkhas themselves, many
of whom do not speak English properly or have any transferable
skills, have come to Britain thinking that the streets are paved
with gold and ended up in rotten, mildewed flats trying to eke
out a living on benefits, and they have had to borrow money in
order to do so. They are the victims in this, and the only people
who seem to be making money are, with the exception of yourself
perhaps, solicitors in both Nepal and Britain.
Mr Heaver: I have certainly seen
newspaper reports stating that there are former Gurkhas living
in abject conditions. There is certainly an issue that the older
Gurkha, who does not necessarily speak English particularly well,
will come here and will have difficulty finding work. The answer
to that is possibly education both in letting them know before
they make the decision to come here that work is not guaranteed,
quite the opposite, and education inasmuch as teach them English
so that when they arrive here they are in a better position to
get work.
Q25 Chair: In answer to what Mr Davies
has put to you, we did suggest as a Committee that there ought
to be something equivalent to the Uganda Resettlement Board. If
you will recall when the Ugandan Asians came in 1970 there was
a group here. Forget about the disputes in Nepal. There was a
group here that could help them resettle. Did this ever happen?
Mr Heaver: It has not, no.
Q26 Chair: Because Ms Lumley, I think
we suggested, might like to be taking the lead on this.
Mr Heaver: It has not happened.
Q27 Chair: What has become of Ms
Lumley in terms of your campaign?
Mr Heaver: You talk of my campaign.
Q28 Chair: The general campaign.
Mr Heaver: Ms Lumley currently
is maintaining a dignified silence. I think she is very embarrassed
by the revelations and does not really know what to say.
Q29 Bob Russell: Mr Heaver, the victory
for the pre-1997 Gurkhas was one of those great parliamentary
occasions, and it was in tune with the mood of the country at
large. Therefore, as somebody who was heavily involved in that
parliamentary campaign, with the Ten-Minute Rule Bill and the
rest of it, I have to tell you and others who may be reading the
proceedings that I am dismayed to hear of the disunity amongst
the former Gurkha community. If anything comes out of today's
proceedings I trust there will be a healing of wounds and there
will be a coming together so that everybody is singing from the
same song sheet because I do not think this is what I envisaged,
nor indeed what the British public envisaged, when we won this
great parliamentary campaign, that there would then be this disunity
subsequently.
Mr Heaver: There are always political
differences. However, we are talking about fundamental basics
and one would hope that there is something good in terms of unity
that could come from this.
Q30 Bob Russell: I sincerely hope
so because that does not please me. To your knowledge, how long
are applications for settlement under the new rules taking to
decide?
Mr Heaver: Because of the backlog
applications made overseas can take several months. I certainly
have a gentleman that I deal with on a daily basis whose wife
and two children applied in August last year and they are still
waiting in the queue, so it can take a considerable length of
time overseas. I have to say the Home Office here, UKBA, are bending
over backwards. They are phoning to check. It is difficult to
heap enough praise on them.
Q31 Bob Russell: So, other than the
sheer volume, have there been any problems that have emerged with
the application process?
Mr Heaver: Not really. It is just
volume related. There will always be the odd hiccup, but that
is in the nature of things.
Chair: Mr Heaver, thank you very much
for giving evidence to us. If you have any further information
that you think will be helpful please do let us know because the
Committee will be, I am sure, very keen to follow up on these
matters.
| 
