Examination of Witnesses (Questions 420
- 439)
TUESDAY 1 DECEMBER 2009
MR BRODIE
CLARK AND
MR MARK
FUCHTER
Q420 Tom Brake: What are you doing
to address that?
Mr Clark: I am continually making
very clear the message of what our priorities are and how we are
delivering against those priorities. Queue lengths are important
in terms of dealing properly and responsibly with the travelling
public into and out of the UK, but the issues around criminality,
particularly serious criminality linked with Class A drugs, are
more important concerns. That message coming from me is clear
and has always been very clear. There will be times at ports when
there is pressure on them to manage queues, but that is not in
any way to denigrate the requirement for delivering against Class
A drugs seizure targets.
Q421 Tom Brake: Mr Fuchter, can I
ask you if you have any specific responsibility perhaps towards
officers who were Customs Officers in terms of addressing the
concerns of clearly some of them about the priority that is now
given to that work?
Mr Fuchter: I have policy responsibility
for drugs and a range of other prohibited and restricted goods
that we have brought into the Agency to integrate in the way that
Mr Clark has described. I do not actually see the fear. I get
feedback that officers on the ground are integrating quite well;
they are going through each other's training courses. We are getting
some benefits at a working level. I do not know whether you would
have seen anything like this yesterday, but we are having people
picked up at the primary checkpoint who are of interest for Class
A drugs. What I take from that is that we will be in a better
position for our targeting effort.
Q422 Martin Salter: Gentlemen, I
am worried that we might have initial overload here. HMRC transferred
its responsibility for criminal investigation and intelligence
work on drugs to SOCA in April 2006; we had day-to-day responsibility
for operational enforcement from HMRC to the UK Border Agency
in April 2008; UKBA has come about comparatively recently, which
came out of BIA, which then came out of IND. I understand that
detections that are not adopted by SOCA may be investigated by
HMRC's referred investigation team. Is there not a danger—and
you would not be human if you did not recognise the dangers here—that
there could be gaps in the system and important investigations
could fall through those gaps if not picked up by either UKBA
or SOCA?
Mr Clark: I think, in terms of
the reshaping of the organisation, that it is very clear in terms
of outcomes and performance that that is the right way to go.
I think the joining of Customs detection with Immigration has
been good and it is improving performance and capability and flexibility
and resources that can work on some of the key high risk issues
for the UK. The picture has not finished yet. The referred investigation
team has got to come over from HMRC into UKBA. That will happen
on 9 December and that will then give UKBA the capability to investigate
a range of the issues arising from drug seizures at the border.
Then there has to be, and there already are, a number of agreements
and MoUs in place with other key law enforcement agencies to recognise
where one area of jurisdiction stops and the next begins. I think
the relationship, for example, between ourselves and SOCA is improving
constantly and is at a very positive stage at this point, and
we continue to build and develop that through an MoU in terms
of who deals with the outcomes from seizures and how particular
levels of seizures are managed. I understand the risk and UKBA
is alive to the risk and UKBA continues to work at narrowing gaps
or looking for gaps and identifying areas where the fullest focus
might not be there and we will work to mitigate that.
Q423 Martin Salter: You say that
the amalgamations have improved performance. Can you give us some
examples of where it has done so to justify that statement? For
example, have performance indicators risen, have targets been
met?
Mr Clark: In the course of last
year, which was the very first year of beginning that integration
process, the performance delivery—and I choose for the sake
of this conversation issues around commodities and seizures—in
every respect equalled or exceeded the performance of HMRC on
the previous 12-month period. Now, that was a year against which
there was a huge amount of change taking place as well within
the UKBA and where we were going through the process of training
3,000 staff in the skills of the other side of the house, as it
were. I think in those circumstances that has been a very, very
good performance, and part of that is clearly attributable to
the flexibilities and the capability coming out of the increased
and more flexible workforce.
Q424 Martin Salter: Would you expect
seizures to continue to rise as you become more efficient?
Mr Clark: There are a number of
issues around that. We are doing more work overseas. As you do
more work overseas, less of the commodities come into the UK and
that has an impact on seizure figures. We are working more with
other agencies and increasingly providing information, intelligence
and data to them. That may mean that they get some of those seizure
figures on issues that we do not. There are world trends and markets
around some of the key commodities. That will impact on the sheer
scale of the kind of operations and whether we are able to equal
or exceed previous years' figures. For me, that is why, frankly,
a numeric figure about seizing in the UK needs a much broader
view around outcomes, strategic direction and partnerships, and
that is the area that we are continuing to work within and that
is an area that Mark particularly is leading on in terms of the
future work of the UKBA and the Border Force.
Q425 David Davies: Mr Clark, when
we visited Schiphol last month we were told that they intercept
something like 30% of all the hard drugs coming in and that the
average in other European airports is 14%. What do you make of
those figures?
Mr Clark: I think it is very difficult
to know what you have seized and detected balanced against what
has successfully come into the country. I do not have figures
on that and am not able to make a comparator with what the Dutch
presented you with.
Q426 David Davies: Do you think that
those figures are feasible? Is it possible that Schiphol is finding
more than twice as much as other airports, including Heathrow?
Have you been over there to see what they do? Are they doing something
different from us or more of it perhaps?
Mr Clark: I have not been over
and examined their commodity work in respect of drugs and may,
as a consequence of this, seek that opportunity. If those figures
ring true, then there should be something that we should clearly
be learning from the Dutch and their work at both Schiphol and
presumably Rotterdam and other key ports that they have, but I
do not know the answer in terms of the comparator figures. If
we have things to learn, we should learn those.
Q427 David Davies: One of the things
they say they do is to target very much based on nationality and
on planes. I think there is another question on this in a minute,
so I am not going to go further on that. I might come back to
that.
Mr Fuchter: If I go back to the
point about Schiphol and the percentages, I think it depends on
the context. I did want to make the point that we work quite closely
with the Dutch through a couple of EU fora. There is a Customs
Co-operation Working Group under the Third Pillar. We are exchanging
information with them on a daily basis anyway and we do undertake
joint exercises and there is one ongoing at the moment under the
auspices of the World Customs Organization about cocaine in air
traffic. We do not see a huge difference in those percentages
but it can depend on whether you are talking about one particular
route or the totality.
Q428 Mr Streeter: Mr Fuchter, you
gave us a written submission. Of course you used to be part of
HMRC, which we are all familiar with as running the tax credit
system in this country that gives so much distress to our constituents,
as well as benefits of course occasionally. You state in your
submission that you are taking "a targeted, risk-based approach
to intervention that is intelligence led". There is quite
a lot of jargon there. Are you not saying the same thing three
times over? Can you unpack that for us, please?
Mr Fuchter: I apologise for the
jargon. That is typically our jargon. Looking at that paragraph
in the round, a wide range of goods are covered by EU and UK legislation,
a point I made at the beginning, and we find them by looking for
criminal patterns of behaviour. Moving on to a "targeted,
risk-based approach", I think you saw in quite some detail
yesterday some of the targeting information. I would not want
to expose too much of that in the public domain. The point in
essence is that we are not standing there doing random checks
relying on serendipity. We have to target to make efficient use
of our resources. There is no other way with the volumes of traffic
and the speed with which traffic comes through, and indeed we
do have an obligation not to hold up the legitimate traveller.
Q429 Mr Streeter: Frankly, having
seen the operation yesterday, it is hard to think of what more
could be done than is being done, so I do accept that point. This
is a specific question. We were told in Schiphol, and again it
was referred to yesterday at Heathrow, that involvement in cocaine
smuggling is rife amongst baggage handlers and certainly was at
Schiphol. Obviously a chain is as strong as its weakest link.
What is the experience at Heathrow or in the UK at major airports
in terms of baggage handlers being involved in this process, being
apprehended, being prosecuted? Can you give us a picture of that,
please?
Mr Fuchter: The high level picture
is that we are alive to the fact, I would not say just with baggage
handlers, but we accept that there can be a risk with any employees
in an area like a large airport and we have had some cases over
the years. We are well aware of what has happened in the past.
It is rather difficult to say too much in the public domain and
I would not want to accuse the baggage handlers per se, but we
are aware of cases that do look to bring drugs through so that
they do not have to go through official customs controls.
Q430 Mr Streeter: Just moving on
to Mr Clark, earlier you touched on targets. Of course we do not
know what we do not know, so we do not really know how much cocaine
enters, but SOCA has estimated that 35,000 to 45,000 kilograms
of cocaine enter the UK annually. Your target, Mr Clark, is 2,400
kilograms, about 5%. If SOCA are right on this, do you think capturing
5% of cocaine coming in is a realistic target?
Mr Clark: It is the target we
have and have inherited from HMRC. We will go through, in the
course of the next few months, a conversation around what that
target might be for 2010-11. If and as our capability is improving,
then we would certainly want to stretch in terms of what we can
deliver on seizures at the ports. I think there are a number of
questions, however, that I alluded to earlier on about where one
wants to make the interventions and where one wants to make the
seizures. We are increasingly looking at a much more international
approach to that and an overseas approach, and we have Operations
Airbridge and Westbridge running, both in Jamaica and in Ghana,
which are both very key, or have been key, in terms of a source
for illegal drugs coming into the United Kingdom. We think that
has had very good outcomes and results. Within the UKBA, of course,
we also have an international arm to the organisation, which is
one of the other benefits of joining this up together. We have
3,000 staff working overseas.
Q431 Chairman: We will be coming
to the overseas section in one moment.
Mr Fuchter: May I please add that
there is another dimension to that answer about the quantity of
drugs, if I may. Back in 2005, when we were preparing ourselves
for the formation of SOCA, we had a debate within Customs along
the lines of what targets should we set for ourselves. Alongside
the targets for seizures of powder—heroin and cocaine—that
you see from our targets, you will also see some high level indicators
around support to SOCA and other law enforcement agencies. The
strategic approach we took then was deliberately to say that alongside
those seizures we will make interventions and undertake checks
on behalf of SOCA in particular but other agencies, particularly
counter-terrorism, if they approach us.
Q432 Chairman: Did you just tell
this Committee that you set your own targets?
Mr Fuchter: No. We proposed those
targets and they were accepted.
Q433 Chairman: Who sets your targets?
Mr Fuchter: They were set by the
Treasury. The Treasury certainly accepted that proposal. The proposal
coming from us was that we needed to ensure that our border interventions
continued to support SOCA.
Q434 Chairman: The Treasury sets
your targets. What role does the Home Secretary have in all this
since he is responsible, in effect, for policing the cocaine trade?
Does the Home Secretary not get involved in setting your targets?
Mr Fuchter: I think at the time
those targets would have been cleared with the Home Office certainly,
yes.
Mr Clark: Can I try to clarify
that? The Home Office has got responsibility for drug-related
issues. We are currently in conversation with another part of
the Home Office in terms of looking at the targets that would
be suitable and appropriate for next year, looking at both outputs,
outcomes and the strategic background to that, and they will then
be signed off by the Home Secretary.
Q435 Chairman: So at the beginning
of the year the Home Secretary will send you a letter, "Brodie
Clark, your target for seizures is X and if you get it, you will
get your bonus; if you do not, you will not get your bonus."
Do you get a letter like that?
Mr Clark: I kind of wish it was
that simple really, but it is of that kind, yes.
Q436 Bob Russell: I am still trying
to come to terms with the fact that the Treasury is setting the
targets, but perhaps we will re-visit that one. Mr Fuchter, your
written submission states that figures on cocaine seizures, prosecutions
and convictions do not take account of UKBA's upstream activity—another
term I have learnt today. Can you please provide us with figures
also assessing your upstream activity?
Mr Fuchter: To be honest, we cannot
give you the entire picture. We do know that since we have been
engaged in Operation Westbridge in Ghana the government authorities
there have reported to us that they seized something like 690
kilos of cocaine as a result of our support, but that is about
a contribution, so that is not a seizure that we have made and
we do not score it against those targets, and similarly with Operation
Airbridge in the Caribbean.
Q437 Bob Russell: In football terms,
that is a non-league result, is it?
Mr Fuchter: You could say that.
Actually, we think that is particularly valuable because it is
a very good point at which to take out the drugs, even if it is
another agency taking that out because we are committed and we
have to collaborate as much as we can.
Q438 Mr Winnick: There is a particular
problem, is there not, Mr Clark, in the way in which these drugs
are smuggled into Britain? You have, I think you call it, Operation
Airbridge whereby you try and detect those who are carrying drugs
in one form or another, in body cavities and the rest. Is that
quite common?
Mr Clark: I am sorry, Operation
Airbridge is an operation that we run in Jamaica and we have deployed
a number of staff in Jamaica for some years now and their role
there is to work with the Jamaican constabulary to train, mentor,
upskill and look at technologies that might be appropriate in
stopping drugs leaving Jamaica. Indeed, we have seen a significant
drop in the seizures from Jamaicans, or people coming from Jamaica,
as a consequence of putting Airbridge in place. It is our preferred
option to stop people bringing the drugs to the UK in the first
place.
Q439 Mr Winnick: When your organisation
is not in a position to stop that, the fact is that people are
found, are they not, carrying drugs in various parts of their
body?
Mr Clark: The three main ways
in are through some kind of freight entry into the UK, or a passenger
or tourist bringing it with them as part of their baggage, or
individuals putting it inside their body and seeking to bring
it into the UK in that fashion. Freight is by far the greatest
entry point of illegal drugs into the UK.
| 
