Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page


25 Jul 2002 : Column WA101

Written Answers

Thursday, 25th July 2002.

[The first seven Written Answers should have been printed in the Official Report of Wednesday 24th July.]Road Traffic Penalties

Lord Hardy of Wath asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether they intend to publish their response to the consultation paper on road traffic penalties.[HL5584]

The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Falconer of Thoroton): The Government's response to the consultation paper on the review of road traffic penalties was published today. Copies have been placed in the Library.

Correctional Services

Lord Jones asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What will be the form of the independent review of the correctional services described in the White Paper Justice for All.[HL5587]

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: We shall shortly be announcing membership of the new Correctional Services Board, which will include a number of independent non-executive members. These members will have a specific remit to oversee work on reviewing effectiveness and value for money in the delivery of correctional services so as to reduce re-offending and on how we improve our ability to manage the prison population.

HMP Brixton

Lord Brooks of Tremorfa asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether they will indicate the outcome of the market testing of the management of HMP Brixton.[HL5590]

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The market test for the management of Brixton did not attract bids from the private sector, partly because of its poor physical condition and location. The in-house bid, while being impressive, was not affordable. Therefore, instead of operating under a service level agreement, the prison will continue to be run under existing management arrangements. However, a performance baseline will be set with challenging improvement targets and progress will be closely monitored.

Asylum Seekers

Lord Hughes of Woodside asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What arrangements exist for asylum seekers to submit material in support of their claim.[HL5885]

25 Jul 2002 : Column WA102

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord Filkin): Under existing procedures, an applicant who is not issued with a statement of evidence form (SEF) to complete prior to their asylum interview is allowed five days after their substantive asylum interview to make further representations before a decision is taken on their asylum claim.

Those asylum applicants issued with an SEF prior to any substantive interview do not benefit from this arrangement. This is because applicants issued with an SEF form are given 10 working days to submit the completed form to the Immigration and Nationality Directorate. We think this gives applicants a reasonable period to set out their claim and time to seek legal representation if they wish for the submission of further supporting evidence.

We have decided that asylum applicants who go through the induction centre process will no longer benefit from the five day period to make further representations. The induction centre process is designed to familiarise an asylum applicant with the asylum procedures, providing the asylum seeker with detailed briefings on different aspects of the asylum process and to explain to applicants what their obligations are. All asylum applicants who go through the induction centre process are told that all information relevant to their claim must be available by the time they are substantively interviewed because decisions on claims will be made shortly after the interview. The interview itself will be scheduled to take place two weeks after the applicant has gone through the induction process. We consider that this two-week period offers the applicant sufficient time to prepare for the interview and gather any supporting information he considers necessary.

This change is in keeping with our commitment to deliver fast asylum decisions, while at the same time ensuring that asylum seekers have a proper opportunity to establish their claims.

These arrangements do not apply to Oakington or any detained cases.

Immigration and Nationality Directorate Complaints Audit Committee

Lord Hughes of Woodside asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether they will indicate the changes in the membership of the Immigration and Nationality Directorate's independent Complaints Audit Committee.[HL5586]

Lord Filkin: Ms Catherine Tuitt has been appointed as a new member of the Complaints Audit Committee to replace Mercy Jeyasingham, whose three-year term of tenure ends in July 2002. Ms Tuitt has worked in a variety of positions, both in the private and public sector, ranging from legal consultancy and public affairs, to chairing council committees. A local elected councillor until recently, Ms Tuitt has considerable experience in facilitating service provision. She is

25 Jul 2002 : Column WA103

presently an advocate for a voluntary community organisation providing support and advice to refugees and children of refugees.

Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre

Lord Jones asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What plans they have for the future of the Campsfield House Immigration removal centre.[HL5588]

Lord Filkin: On 7 February, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary announced that he had decided that the Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre would close by spring 2003. However, following the incident at the Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre in February and the consequent temporary reduction in removal centre capacity, we have decided to postpone the closure of Campsfield House until September 2004. This is in order to maintain removal centre capacity and thus support our commitment to increase the rate of removal of failed asylum seekers.

Entry Clearance: Over-age Applicants and DNA Testing

Lord Varley asked Her Majesty's Government:

    How many successful applications have been made since 1999 under the concession for over–age applications for entry clearance, following DNA testing.[HL5589]

Lord Filkin , On 1 January 1991 a concession was introduced concerning over-age applicants for entry clearance, following DNA testing. It enabled those dependent children who had previously been refused entry to join their parents in the United Kingdom owing to doubts about their being related as claimed to re-apply if a DNA test now confirmed the relationship. Among other requirements, they had also still to be dependent upon their parents and unmarried. By July 1991, some 550 cases relating to the concession had been considered, of which 115 were conceded. However, in recent years use of the concession has been nil. Each year between five and 10 people who have already re-applied once and been refused, have applied again, but no applications have been granted under the concession.

Last year, some members made representations to the Home Office, urging that the concession be widened so as to allow people who had been refused as minors to re-apply. The Government had considerable sympathy with their views and with the people yet more who were wrongly refused before the introduction of DNA tests made such decisions much more reliable. However, this situation arose owing to technological advances and we have already attempted, by way of the present concession, to correct any previous injustices resulting from decisions which

25 Jul 2002 : Column WA104

were taken in good faith on the available evidence at the time. It is now no longer possible to identify those people who may have been wrongly refused due to doubts about their relationship to a United Kingdom sponsor, as many records of earlier decisions have been destroyed.

Given that it is not possible to widen the concession, and given that the concession is not being used and has not been used for some time, we have decided that the concession should end. After 24 August 2002 no new applications under the concession will be considered. There remains within the Immigration Rules provision for dependent relatives who find themselves in distressed circumstances to apply to join a sponsor in the United Kingdom. Any future applications will instead be considered under the existing Immigration Rules governing dependent relatives.

Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill

Earl Russell asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What sum has been budgeted for litigation arising from the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill.[HL5129]

Lord Filkin: Financial implications of provisions in the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill were set out in the Financial effects of the Bill in the Explanatory Notes to the Bill, as introduced in to the house of Commons. There is no specific budget for litigation; any costs will be funded from within the Home Office budget.

Helsinki Conference, 16 and 17 September

Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Further to the Written Answer by Lord Filkin on 9 July (WA 77), whether they will publish the draft final declaration of the Conference of European Ministers responsible for migration affairs, to be held in Helsinki on 16 and 17 September, so that Parliament is informed in advance of the conference of the likely parameters of the disclosure.[HL5217]

Lord Filkin: I do not think it would be appropriate to publish the draft final declaration before it has been discussed by participating ministers.

The conference will be considering three main themes. These are: challenges for integration policy, including managing diversity in a democratic society; challenges in migration management policies, including smuggling and trafficking; and policy planning for the future, including the role of migration in economic and social development and its impact on the demographic situation in receiving and sending countries.

The final communique will reflect the views of working groups on these topics and key conclusions will be presented at the end of the conference.

25 Jul 2002 : Column WA105


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page