| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Earl Attlee: My Lords, a lorry going to the continent has no problems. It can be sealed inland and go through the Channel Tunnel. What are the technical problems?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I was hoping that the noble Earl would not address technical problems about transport to me, because I am probably the least qualified person in the Chamber to respond to them. Suffice it to say that if there were no difficulties with the throughput of trains, the present problem of trains being stopped at Calais would have been overcome. We are in favour of trains with destinations in France and further afield in Europe being able to go straight through when that becomes practicable.
Clearly, however, it is essential for both our and the French rail freight industry, and for firms that use the services, that security problems should be rapidly addressed, as noble Lords have emphasised in the debate. The Government, including my right honourable friend the Prime Minister, have made that point clear to the French.
I heard the passing allusion made by the noble Viscount, Lord Astor, that perhaps the matter had not received the emphasis that he would like. Important as the issue is, given our relationship with France and the issues that the Prime Minister has to discuss with the French Prime Minister when we have troops committed overseas and the French are joined with us in a coalition, we must keep a sense of proportion, even about an issue important as that under discussion. The Prime Minister's expression of his clear and keen interest in the matter is symptomatic of all Ministers, when they can present such issues to the French. We want early action on the matter.
Physical measures to prevent access to the services are necessarily and rightly the responsibility of the operator. I am always grateful for interesting suggestions on how we could tackle such problems. My noble friend Lord Berkeley thought that a free Christmas present of barbed wire might solve the problem. I understand that the fencing in place is a good deal more sophisticated than barbed wire. Eurotunnel's existing defence systems are of considerable sophistication; that is what needs to be in place. It is not a question of shipping a load of barbed wire to the French, always supposing that they would regard that as in any way constructive.
At the UK-French Summit last February, we set up a commission to resolve cross-Channel issues of joint concern, including illegal immigration. We have set up a hotline to deal with those issues, which reflects the fact that we need the most direct access to the French. That is why, on 12th September, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary met with the French Interior Minister, Daniel Vaillant, and agreed a range of practical measures designed further to tighten controls at Channel ports and to reduce the flow of would-be illegal immigrants into the surrounding area.
The authorities at Calais have invested heavily to tighten security around the ferry port, and Eurotunnel has taken similar action at its site at Coquelles. We are expecting the site at Frethun under SNCF's control to follow a similar pattern.
Lord Berkeley: My Lords, has the commission met since the 7th November, when rail freight services stopped?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the commission is a continuing body. It has a hotline attached to its operations; it has a framework in which on-going discussions can take place. I assure my noble friend that a regular dialogue takes place under its auspices.
However, what has underpinned our debate is our great problem with the number of people seeking access to this country through unauthorised access to rail freight. On 29th October, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary announced a package of measures as part of his long-term strategy to reform the asylum and immigration system. That is a radical new approach that is fair but tough. It is based on induction, accommodation, reporting and removal centres to control the system better and to improve contact with genuine asylum seekers. Those offered and refusing to take up a place in an accommodation centre will forfeit the right to support. The package also includes the introduction of an application registration card, which will contain a microchip with full details of the asylum seekers and their application. A more streamlined and integrated process with quicker decisions and appeals and fast-track removals, and the introduction of this card, should help in our efforts to reduce the attractiveness of the UK to illegal immigrants. There is no doubt that we need to reduce the pressure on entry into this country, of which utilisation of the transport system is one part.
In conclusion, the Government fully recognise the importance of the issue that we have debated this evening, and the forthright contributions from all sides of the Chamber have left us in no doubt of the strength of feeling on this matter. We are engaged with all the relevant French authorities to seek early resolution of the immediate problems of Frethun. We are also taking steps nationally and in partnership with the French Government and other European partners to address the underlying immigration and asylum problems. We have impressed these matters on the European Commission, which has addressed formal letters to the French Government, as the noble Baroness, Lady Scott, observed.
Rail has an important part to play in long distance freight and the solution of our transport problems. The present problems that obtain at the Channel ports and the cross-Channel areas are a source of great concern to us all.
I recognise that many points have been made in the debate which I may not have answered as satisfactorily as some noble Lords would have wished. If there are points of detail I shall write further to noble Lords, particularly in relation to technical details where I recognise my limitations. I hope noble Lords recognise
that the Government take this issue seriously. I am grateful to my noble friend for having introduced this debate.
Lord Greaves: My Lords, before the Minister sits down perhaps I may make one point. The noble Lord said, quite rightly, that some of the people who tried to reach this country from the other side of the Channel had genuine claims to refugee status and others had no justifiable claims which fell within our international obligations. How do people with genuine claims arrive here legally in order to press them? If that is not possible, is there not a case for carrying out at least an initial sifting operation on the other side of the Channel?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the noble Lord recognises that there are many ways in which genuine
refugees can present their case on arrival in this country, not simply by making hazardous journeys from distant places to the Channel ports. People can present themselves to the British authorities, embassies and the United Nations to put across their cases. The noble Lord will be aware that there are a number of genuine asylum seekers whose cases are subsequently substantiated by decisions of our authorities, but there is also a very large number who seek and obtain access to this country and have no right to be here. As a society we have the right to patrol our frontiers effectively and, because of the particular nature of the transport system, they also extend to facilities in France.
- House adjourned at twenty-six minutes before ten o'clock.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |