UK Borders Bill

Public Bill Committee, 1 March 2007.

Further written evidence to be reported to the House

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

Good morning. May I remind all Members and witnesses that today’s oral evidence sessions must stay within the scope of the UK Borders Bill. I would ask that Members and witnesses keep questions and answers concise and in order. Our first evidence session must finish at 9.40 am, and I have to warn the Committee that, if necessary, I will interrupt whoever is speaking to call a halt to proceedings atthat time and will do the same when the knife fallsat 10.25 am.

Welcome, Mr. McLardy. Would you briefly introduce yourself to the Committee, and then I shall ask my colleagues to begin their questions.

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

Mr. McLardy, you do yourself a slight injustice. I think that you are also heavily involved in the Home Office’s illegal working stakeholder group.

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

We benefit enormously not only from your own advice and the good practice that you have put in place but from the contribution of the group.

In the UK Borders Bill, the Government propose a dramatic simplification of the complex way in which migrants can identify themselves and prove their entitlement to work. By way of introduction, could you say a little about the virtue of these clauses or the arguments against them? The Committee would benefit from understanding the practical difficulties that you encounter in identifying migrants and proving their entitlement to work.

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

Today there are something like60 different documents that somebody could proffer in order to provide evidence of entitlement and identity. Would it be easier if there were just one?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

Your witness submission is fascinating in getting to grips with the scale of the problem that the Bill is meant to address. You say that you employ 6,000 staff, about half of whom are foreign nationals. As a broad guess, how many of those 3,000 foreign nationals are illegals, who should not be working here?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

And from your contacts around your industry and others, is that broadly typical? As you say, you are presumably one of the biggest employers—

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

May I ask you to expand on one of the things that you said, when you noted that there is no provision in the Bill for the Government to require businesses to make identity checks on foreign nationals who are using a biometric document? Do you see that as a big weakness?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

Another point you made was that you have concerns about the fraudulent provision of falsified documents.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

So you think that somebody will produce what looks like a good document but is not, so you have then made permanent—

Chris Mole (Labour, Ipswich)

Are there particular issues for your industry on the different entitlements to work for people in the immigration system, for example those who have indefinite leave to remain? There is sometimes a lack of clarity about who has an entitlement to work and who does not. Do you think that some of the changes will help with that?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

Do you feel that the onus should be on employers to carry out these checks, and what would you say to employers who feel that it is not up to them? Whose fault should it be for hiring illegal workers? Is it the worker who has done wrong or the company for hiring them and not checking?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

I note that in your submission you said that you are concerned that the identity checking service that comes in in 2007 could be overloaded by employers who just cannot be bothered to carry out any checks at all.

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

I know that in the document you mention pro rata penalties for small and large employers. What do you think the levels should be?

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

May I clarify my understanding of the scale of the problem? You gave two statistics: first, that 6 per cent. of your work force are going to warrant further investigation.

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

And then you said that when checks started to be made, 60 per cent. of staff disappeared.

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

So 60 per cent. of the people who approach you clear off when they discover they are subject to the checking process?

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

Of the migrant population, which is half of your work force. Is that the part of the work force with the largest turnover?

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

And then, of the people who get into the recruitment process, 6 per cent. warrant further investigation?

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

Mr. McLardy, you presented the argument for a much simpler way of checking with admirable clarity. How widespread do you think support is among the business community for a much simpler way of checking people’s eligibility to work here?

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

A little bit later on this year, the Government will consult on whether to introduce fines for employers that do not enforce checks, and if so, at what level. Is that a good opportunity to test the business community’s sentiment on whether to make these checks mandatory?

Jamie Reed (Labour, Copeland)

We heard from the Immigration Advisory Service about what it believes to be the adequate level and type of biometric data that would help in its work. It believes that fingerprinting would be sufficient. Do you believethat fingerprinting represents adequate biometric documentation? You talked in your evidence about your business being able to pick up on trends in the emerging risk of documentation fraud. Will you tell us what some of those emerging risks might be?

Jamie Reed (Labour, Copeland)

What is the cost to the business of the staff turnover, and the number of people who you find working illegally in your employ?

Jamie Reed (Labour, Copeland)

So do you think that you are currently subsidising an inadequate system?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

In your wider role as a spokesperson for others in theindustry, do you have discussions with your European counterparts, or with people in other countries with biometric systems and ID cards? Can lessons be learned from their experiences?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

In your written submission, you mentioned the difficulties of working with the police and immigration officers and of getting them to take your concerns seriously. How do you suggest that that relationship could be improved?

Alan Campbell (Labour, Tynemouth)

I should like to follow on froman answer that you gave to my colleague, Mr. Reed. IfI have understood correctly, your company has a relatively high staff turnover—higher than most companies.

Alan Campbell (Labour, Tynemouth)

A higher proportion of migrant workers, perhaps, than many companies?

Alan Campbell (Labour, Tynemouth)

And you made it clear that having a single secure document would be simpler for your company and, you think, for other companies too. What about the cost? Surely, you must have an estimate of how much it costs you now to carry out the kind of checks from front end to back end that you have to do. What does that cost your company?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

What is your opinion of the pull factor that the opportunity to work illegally has on people who might try to enter and work in the country illegally? Is it a draw that some employers do not do any checks?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

But do you feel that people come here because—

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

You mentioned the joined-up approach with other agencies. Could you say something about the problems in respect of that? You mentioned TUPE-transferred staff.

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

Right at the end of your submission, you mention benefits with regard to fighting terrorism.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

I am interested in what you have just said because it suggests that a system is already extant that would help the authorities track down terrorists, multiple passport holders and so on, but that it is not being effectively used. Obviously, there are laws against that type of thing. Why are those laws not being enforced properly? Is it because of problems with employers or with the enforcement authorities?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

You say that it should be shared, but intelligence about whom? You say that illegal immigrants congregate, but how do you know that someone is an illegal immigrant? I am slightly nervous that—

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

So these are people about whom you have suspicions?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

What do you do now when you find someone like that? Do you inform the police?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

So you think that the priorities act against proper enforcement?

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

Can I infer from your evidence that you believe that there needs to be much better joint working between the immigration service, the police, local authorities and others, and that, secondly, we need a big step up in the resources that we provide for enforcement against illegal immigration?

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

Thank you, Mr. McLardy. The Committee is most grateful.

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

Welcome, gentlemen. I remind the Committee that I have to adjourn proceedings at10.25 am and will have to interrupt whoever is speaking at that time. Would you like to introduce yourselves, gentlemen?

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

Thank you for coming to give evidence this morning. I remind witnesses and members of the Committee that we are required to stay within the confines of the Bill.

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

Throughout the Bill, there are measures to strengthen the powers of the immigration service and its partners to tackle the kind of exploitation of migrant workers that we often hear about. To begin these questions, I would be interested in your perspective on the extent of exploitation of migrant workers in this country. Are there sufficient sanctions and powers to tackle that exploitation today?

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

There are a number of measures in the Bill that make it easier for the immigration service to pin down and identify businesses that may be breaking the rules. For example, there are provisions to allow the immigration service to access Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs data. We have already heard evidence suggesting that where businesses are employing people illegally, they are also breaking every other rule in the book. They are not paying the national minimum wage or operating healthy and safe conditions, and they are often not paying their taxes either. I am interested to know whether that is your experience? Are businesses that you see as exploitative also breaking other rules? Is there a case for stronger sanctions against those businesses, whether they take the form of seizure of property or cash, in order to deter that sort of exploitative and abusive relationship?

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

Do we need to make it easier for migrants to prove their identity and their entitlement to work?

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

That is very useful. My last question is about trafficking and human smuggling. That is an area on which the TUC and the Transport and General Workers Union have commented in the past. We have heard that up to three quarters of illegal entrants into Britain are in the hands of organised crime. The Bill proposes tougher sanctions and stronger measures to track down those traffickers, wherever on the planet they perpetrate that crime. I would be interested in your perceptions and impressions about whether the law needs to be tougher on trafficking and smuggling.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

I want to pick up the point that you made about the Government having their eyes open to the effect of the legislation. I assume that,by toughening up rules on biometrics, penalties on employers and so on, the Government want the 340,000 illegal workers in London whom you mentioned to go back. That is the logic of the Government’s position. You disagree with that, do you not?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

We are supposed to be discussing the Bill, rather than the wider, fascinating subject.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

I know, and I was interested to hear the answer. The logic of what you have just eloquently said is that the more effective that the Bill is, the worse the problem that you identify will become.

James Clappison (Conservative, Hertsmere)

I was interested in what you were telling us about the agencies that recruit people, particularly from eastern Europe; you mentioned Bulgaria and Romania. That is recruiting people so as to get around the restriction that they can work here only if they are self-employed?

James Clappison (Conservative, Hertsmere)

How much evidence do you see of that recruitment? How big an issue is it?

James Clappison (Conservative, Hertsmere)

Can you spell out exactly how the agencies are doing this? The agents simply go over to these countries and recruit people?

James Clappison (Conservative, Hertsmere)

What sort of wages do the people who are employed by agents as self-employed people from Bulgaria earn?

James Clappison (Conservative, Hertsmere)

That is from Romania and Bulgaria?

James Clappison (Conservative, Hertsmere)

We know that the genesis of this was that the Government wildly underestimated the number of people who were likely to come from Poland in the first wave of people from accession countries; we got hundreds of thousands, rather than 13,000. So these restrictions were introduced in the light of that. However, what you are telling us is that they are not working very well, and that they are stimulating this cottage industry of agents going over there to find self-employed people.

James Clappison (Conservative, Hertsmere)

I understand that.

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

So you want censorship, do you? You do not want them to have an opportunity to debate—

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

Order.

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

Answer the question.

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

Order.

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

Order. Through the Chairman, please.

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

Order. From here on in, I ask Committee members and witnesses to return to the Bill, please.

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

Can the witnesses speak to the issue rather than having a diatribe, and answer the question?

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

Yes. We can all stick to what is in the Bill. The witnesses are giving evidence on what is contained in the Bill.

John Hemming (Liberal Democrat, Birmingham, Yardley)

I shall try to return to what the consequences of the Bill might be and to understand its implications. I am very lucky: I have a very competent caseworker who understands immigration law. To me, it is one of the more complicated areas. Given those complications, you are saying that the Bill might increase the size of the twilight zone, or perhaps create a midnight zone of no regulation at all. Is that what you are saying?

John Hemming (Liberal Democrat, Birmingham, Yardley)

Are you also sayingthat controlling immigration, substantially through employment and employers, could give employers a keyhole surgery approach to immigration, with which they can act in an arbitrary manner that is not in the interests of the work force, using the excuse of immigration regulation?

John Hemming (Liberal Democrat, Birmingham, Yardley)

In essence, it may increase the illegality in the system, rather than reduce it?

John Hemming (Liberal Democrat, Birmingham, Yardley)

In essence, you are saying that, given the complexity of the situation, having biometric data may mean that you know who someone is, but you still do not know whether they are allowed to work?

John Hemming (Liberal Democrat, Birmingham, Yardley)

It is clear that you would not want to increase enforcement through employers, but what else would you try to do with the Bill?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

Some of my questions may have been answered, so I am just trying to gather my thoughts. I will start with the 200 cleaners whom you mentioned, Mr. Tudor. Before you arrived, we listened to a guy from the NCP, who seemed to feel that the one document—the biometric immigration document—would help him to work out who is here legally and who illegally, and therefore who can work legally. He felt that that would help, because there are currently up to 60 documents that people can present. I take your point that whether you are here legally is different from whether you can work here legally, but surely the first step toward clarity in that whole process is to find out who someone is. The guy from the NCP talked about working with all the other agencies, when we know who people are, to establish whether those people can work here legally. Do you not see that the biometric immigration document would help in that regard?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

Is that not good?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

I am sure that the Minister will come back on those points. I am also sure that the levels have not yet been set and are being considered. That was spoken about the other day.

I want to return to a couple of your points. You are saying that somebody could get hold of a biometric card that does not relate to them. I am sure that such a card would have a photograph on it. Are you saying that it would be a forgery and that biometric cards could be forged?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

On a point of clarity, you referred to clause 23, which is about arrest, and said that there were all these employees who would be frightened because of it. Are we talking about employees who can work legally who may, for whatever reason, be worried that they cannot prove it or about people who are working illegally, whether they are illegal immigrants or not?

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

I am conscious of time, and I ask hon. Members and witnesses to bear that in mind, too.

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

I will stick to one question. I am slightly confused by the evidence being given. There are obviously lots of problems with how the system works now with regard to checks on the legality of workers. If you are not happy with what is proposed in the Bill, how would you like to see the system operating? Do you accept that there is a need for checks on the legality of workers or are you advocating an amnesty for the illegal workers who are in the country? What would you like to happen?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

I accept that. In my constituency surgery I see people such as those you mention, particularly those from Afro-Caribbean countries who have overstayed for 10 or 12 years and have children who were born in this country but who now face deportation. That is a difficult situation. However, if we do not tighten up the law, it will continue in years to come. Would it not be better to prevent people from staying, working and settling? It is as though we are leading them astray with a false promise that they will be allowed to do that, although the problems arise as a result of their having come—or overstayed—illegally in the first place. How would you address that?

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

You said earlier that there are hundreds of thousands of people who work in low-paid jobs in London. I think we all accept that, even if the figures are hard to understand. The jobs are mostly in the service industry—cleaners, people working in restaurants and shops, and domestic servants.

The principle behind the Bill is that it will be harder to come to this country and work illegally. If that succeeds, which is a slightly separate question from the general principle that we are discussing, one of two things will happen. Either people will have to pay more for those services—they will have to pay more money to the shopkeepers, waitresses, waiters and so on—or people might start to move out of London to obtain those services in a place where they are more affordable. Is that not quite a good thing from the point of view of those who are in low-paid jobs? Their wages are bound to rise if the Bill succeeds.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

Not as a result of this one Bill. In general, however, if the Government are successful in reducing the number of illegal workers who enter the country, the wages of low-paid workers will rise, will they not? That is supply and demand.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

Working conditions will improve.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

So that is a good thing.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

So, instead of talking about the general principle of whether the Bill is good or bad, we should probably accept that the principle of restricting the number of people who come to the country and work illegally is a good one, and merely consider ways to improve the Bill.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

That Bill is a private Member’s Bill, but I am sure that if the Government support it—

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

Time is short. It has been useful for us to be warned to be aware of the hundreds of thousands of people who are here illegally. We have heard some hints on what you would like to happen to those people, and you mentioned regularisation. May I use the final 30 seconds to pin you down on that, because you said that we need to sort it out?

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central)

Order. I thank our witnesses for coming to give evidence. It is much appreciated.

Sir David Amess (Conservative, Southend West)

I have to inform the Committee that unfortunately Shami Chakrabarti is unwell and is unable to be with us for our second evidence session this afternoon. The Public Bill Office has done a brilliant job and managed to get two people in her place.

May I remind Members and witnesses that this afternoon’s oral evidence sessions must stay within the scope of the UK Borders Bill, however tempting it may be to stray into other areas, and please could everyone try to keep questions and answers concise and in order?

I also remind Members that normal rules of order apply, even when we are sitting in this unusual formation, so Members should not under any circumstances use mobile phones, laptops or PDAs at any point whatsoever during our proceedings.

Also, the Hansard writers have found it difficultto report our proceedings because some private conversations have been audible. Apparently they interfere with the microphones, and that hampers the Official Report.

Our first evidence session must finish at 3 o’clock.I would have to interrupt proceedings if they have not been concluded by then, and the same thing will happen at the end of the second evidence session, which must finish by 5 o’clock.

Would our witnesses kindly introduces themselves, without making an opening statement?

Sir David Amess (Conservative, Southend West)

Thank you.

Paul Rowen (Liberal Democrat, Rochdale)

I should like to ask you about your last comment, particularly as it applies to children. What are the particular problems in measuring the biometrics of children? What can be used that is accurate and reliable?

Iain Wright (Labour, Hartlepool)

I understood you to say that the error rate in terms of fingerprints was one in a billion. You went on to say that in terms of matching hundreds of thousands per population, against another population, the frequency of misidentification is much higher. I am not entirely certain how those two things marry up. An error rate of one in a billion, given that we have a world population of 6 billion, does not seem a bad rate of accuracy to me. Could you just clarify that?

Iain Wright (Labour, Hartlepool)

The suite of biometric information, where you marry up fingerprints with iris recognition, would provide a very good and secure way of identifying a person, would it not?

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

Profession Anderson, may I ask you a general question and then a specific one? Liberty argues in its submission to the Committee that

“biometric registration is effectively the first stage of roll out of the National Identity Card Scheme.”

You are an expert in these matters; what is your view on that in general?

On a specific point, in the regulatory impact assessment the Government have described the introduction of biometric identity documents as an opportunity to:

“De-risk ID Cards by trialling similar technology and processes”.

What is your view on that explanation?

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

So, at the risk of inviting youon to tendentious ground, would you say that this is possibly an example of function creep, moving from biometric data into laying the infrastructure for a full national identity card scheme?

Sir David Amess (Conservative, Southend West)

We certainly cannot stray into a general discussion about ID cards. Did Mr. Herbert or Mr. Booth want to comment on the same point?

Chris Mole (Labour, Ipswich)

You described to us, Professor Anderson, how some of the biometrics could singly, if not in combination, significantly increase confidence in a transaction between an individual and the state at any point. Can you tell me how you think a false negative would affect an individual in any such transaction? Do you think it would be any worse than a reversion to the situation before the use of biometrics—that is, if they had to produce the paper documents that they currently have to produce?

Chris Mole (Labour, Ipswich)

But would you accept that there are big differences between the circumstances in which there can be false positives and false negatives? They exist in different transactional contexts.

Chris Mole (Labour, Ipswich)

But that is the subject of the design of the overall system—not the technology, but the operational system in which it sits. You are making assumptions about what form that will take.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

I want to move on to security issues, but just to pick up on that, would it be more difficult to institute a full iris recognition system from now? Would it take longer and would it be more expensive?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

More generally, I would like to ask each of you about the issues of keeping the biometric information secure, however it is collected. What are the problems with that? Is the information likely to drift across different Departments, or out into the private sector?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

Would that idea be directly useful to the consideration of the Bill? Are you saying that the Bill should specify uses, rather than have these catch-all powers?

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

I think that we know your views on ID cards, generally—I would suggest that the clue is in the name of your organisation. However, I wanted to put that to one side and specifically ask you both—whichever of you would like to answer—whether you think that the proposals in the Bill will be useful in terms of our immigration policy specifically.

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

I am slightly confused, because you said that you had no views on immigration policy, but you have just spent the past few minutes explaining that the Bill could deter immigration and that that is bad. Could you clarify what your organisation thinks?

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

So, the view of NO2ID is that the legislation is bad because it will discourage the people whom we want in this country from coming?

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

So, it is the view of NO2ID that biometric ID cards for immigration purposes only can be an effective immigration tool as long as they are done with the minimum of red tape?

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

Can I clarify that from NO2ID?

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

Are there circumstances in which you could have a biometric ID card, for immigration purposes only, which would be useful to a country in conducting its immigration policy?

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

May I return to Mr. Herbert and Mr. Booth and deal with issues touched on in previous answers? As you know, clause 5 works through secondary legislation; it is quite loose in that respect as the provisions are not to be found in the Bill. In my opinion, the Minister has not given a satisfactory answer on that, although it is a separate issue. For instance, subsection (2)(k) would

“permit the Secretary of State on issuing a biometric immigration document to require the surrender of other documents”;

and subsection (1)(b)(iii) would apply

“in specified circumstances, where a question arises about a person’s status in relation to nationality or immigration”.

Do you feel that there is scope for difficulties inhow the Bill is interpreted once we have biometric immigration data?

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

With your indulgence, Mr. Amess, I have a general question for Mr. Booth and Mr. Herbert. Do you feel that in the publication of the regulations you will be given sufficient opportunity to comment on the specific details?

Jamie Reed (Labour, Copeland)

I have a question for you all, but particularly for Professor Anderson. As you understand it, would it be fair to say that the disbenefits of a biometric ID system are theoretical assumptions, or is there an evidential base from the US or other European countries making wide use of biometric ID in a variety of ways that underpins such disbenefits?

Jamie Reed (Labour, Copeland)

I think that most people would share those risks. Can I infer from your answer that there is not an evidential base and that they are assumptions?

Jamie Reed (Labour, Copeland)

For the purposes of the intentions of the Bill, do you understand why biometric identification, notwithstanding the issues within that term, is included in the Bill?

Paul Rowen (Liberal Democrat, Rochdale)

I was interested in the comments, Professor, that you made about the operation of the scheme in the US and also the Emirates. I wonder whether you could elaborate a little on how the Emirates scheme is operated and what practical difficulties you envisage in operating a UK biometric visa document rather than just using biometrics to secure our borders.

Paul Rowen (Liberal Democrat, Rochdale)

Have there been any assessments of the possible delays or costs of the new system, and of how that might deter people?

Alan Campbell (Labour, Tynemouth)

Professor Anderson, I have two questions to help me review the evidence that you have given this afternoon. First, the United States and most EU states have either moved, or are moving towards, biometric visas and ID cards. In your view, on balance, have they got that wrong on the points that you have raised?

Alan Campbell (Labour, Tynemouth)

I think that you have answered my second question, but I shall ask it anyway, just to be absolutely clear. I have not read your evidence to the Home Affairs Committee, but I shall make a point of doing so. To be absolutely clear, is your scepticism of those aspects in this Bill based on administrative or engineering problems, or on the principle of ID cards themselves?

Alan Campbell (Labour, Tynemouth)

May I ask a supplementary question, which arose from the anecdote of your experience in Germany? Is it not the case that the cost of issuing biometric immigration documents and identity cards will be received from fees? Although it may be preferable to have police officers who would make a judgment, there is not a spare pot of money available. It is not an either/or situation in which you could spend the money either on ID cards or on more police officers. The reality is that the ID cards proposed in the Bill will be paid for through the fees of the people who use them.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

I want to try to be fair to the Home Office—it is St. David’s day and I am Welsh and feeling full of the joys of spring. You made the point powerfully that over-centralisation is one of the many bad things about the system. The Home Secretary says that there will not be a single database, but that the information in general will be shared over three databases. Does that make any difference, for good or ill, to the arguments about the general efficacy of the systems?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

Given the history of the management of large electronic databases by central Government, and by the Home Office in particular, how much confidence is it sensible to have that the database proposed in the UK Borders Bill will work well from day one?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

Am I right in understanding, then, that the project proposed in the Bill will be at the bottom end of the likelihood of a successful project, given all the constraints that you suggest?

Iain Wright (Labour, Hartlepool)

Professor Anderson, I was interested in your comments to Mr. Campbell about the anecdotal evidence regarding being a student in Germany and the idea that we are not giving the police the opportunity to observe and to make a judgment. Is it not the case that a procedure processing systems in conjunction with biometric passport information actually reduces the risk of corruption because there is a process that the police officer, or immigration officer in this case, has to go through? That actually reduces the risk that certain racial groups will be targeted simply because they are a member of that race. Conversely, is it not the case that the person being questioned, because of the mass migrant movement, can provide positive reassurance that they have a legitimate right to be here? In both cases, it protects the immigration officer and the person being questioned.

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

You said that a significant proportion of your postgraduate students are foreign. How important are they tothe economics of Cambridge university, or your department, as far as you can tell us?

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

What is your opinion, then, of the extra burden that will be placed on them, in fees for the identity cards they will be required to have in addition to the visa arrangements they already go through, as well as by the obligation to report? What is that likely to do to your students and the reputation of the United Kingdom as a place for higher education?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

There are a few areas I want to cover. On the point about overseas students, I think you said earlier in evidence that fees for students are higher in the United States, which is certainly my perception. You gave as an example a student who was deterred from studying at Cambridge and decided to go to Stanford instead. Surely that is nothing to do with the situation we are discussing at the moment. It is nothing to do with fees; it is a decision about what sort of course students want to take.

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

So that is nothing to do with your case that increased fees here would deter students.

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

In respect of the provisions in the Bill, I am trying to nail down what evidence you have that they would be a significant deterrent as opposed to all the other factors that might make someone choose the United States rather than the UK?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

Do you know what the figures are for the increase in the number of overseas students who are choosing to come and study in the UK, say over the last five or 10 years? I wonder whether there has been a falling off.

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

Has the general trend been upwards or downwards?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

But still a year-on-year increase?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

Moving on, you raised the point about the police potentially harassing peopleand demanding identification and so on. In my constituency, there must be a significant number of people who may or may not be legally entitled to be in this country, but might be open to suspicion. Would it not be a lot easier, if somebody wanted to check their identity, for them just to be able to produce an ID card and say, “Yes, this is it, I am entitled to be here”—a two-second question and answer? That is it, it is over, rather than relying on bits of paper from the Home Office and all the other forms of identification one might have to produce at the moment. Would it not make life easier for those people who need to prove their status?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

That already exists, in that there is an employers’ hot line, which they can phone up and check, but it is obviously more complicated for an employer, say, to make a phone call than it is for somebody to get an ID card out of their wallet. You are talking about another scenario. I was talking more about the police rather than employers carrying out checks. If the police wanted to check someone’s immigration status, at the moment we are talking about—as with people coming to my constituency surgery—a whole bundle full of paperwork, including letters from the IND, maybe travel documents and various other things they have sent. It can be very difficult wading through that to try to work things out, because, obviously, letters have expiry dates and limited shelf lives, only being effective the date that they are issued. I do not understand why you are saying that this would be so much more onerous.

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

You say that the police would be more likely to stop people and ask them to produce this identification. Why would they be more likely to do that than they are to question people’s immigration status now?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

Why would it, though? Certainly in my area, the police are very wary of community cohesion issues. They want not to stir up conflict but to build good relations, so they are quite reticent about making inquiries of people. The last thing that they would want to do would be to walk through some of the areas in my constituency and stop everybody who looks Somali in origin, demanding to know what they are doing on the streets of Bristol. Why will they be more like to do that when people have cards?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

But you were saying that this will make them more likely to operate like that. Why would it?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

It is not intended to be proof of right to walk the streets, is it?

Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)

But at the moment, if the police suspect that somebody who is walking around is in this country illegally, they can stop them and ask questions or require to see documents. They do not do that as a matter of course, partly because of resources and partly because of the danger that you mentioned that they could be harassing people who are here perfectly legitimately. I do not see why the fact that the cards would be in existence would make any difference.

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

In the evidence that the Minister gave previously, which I have been re-reading, he said,

“What we have to construct is the right roll-out plan for biometric immigration documents. We are starting with none of those 3.4 million people with biometric immigration documents; we want to get to a situation where they all have them.”——[Official Report, UK Borders Public Bill Committee, 27 February 2007; c. 23.]

He also said,

“There is a minor technical question, which is that it is important to ensure that the specification of the technology that we use is common across the EU.”——[Official Report, UK Borders Public Bill Committee, 27 February 2007; c. 22.]

Earlier, Mr. Rowen and Mr. Campbell spoke about the revenue costs, and Mr. Campbell made the point that the scheme might be self-financing. Can I ask Professor Anderson, Mr. Booth and Mr. Herbert whether there is any reputable academic data on the likely capital cost of setting up the infrastructure, bearing in mind that it is going to be spread across a number of Government agencies. If not, what is your estimate of the likely cost?

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

What cost is that, may I ask?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

Coming back to Professor Anderson, we were talking about foreign students. Just to help the Committee judge the importance of the evidence that you gave, could you tell me how much the fees are for a postgraduate student at Cambridge and how much you imagine the charge might be for a biometric ID card?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

A very small irritant.

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

How many foreign students does Cambridge currently have, and how many of those have a scholarship?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

I am sorry; was that three quarters who have a—

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

How many of those, roughly, have a scholarship?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

Did you say before that you feel that a lot of students are choosing the US now, rather than the UK?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

I am sure that the US fees for equivalent universities are more than £10,000, so the argument that it is the visa fee that is encouraging them to go to the US instead of the UK falls flat on its face.

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

I should like to challenge Guy, who said that the number of foreign students is decreasing. We all think that the numbers are increasing and I certainly know from one of my local universities, Northumbria university, that their numbers are drastically increasing, especially with students from Asia and particularly China. I think we now have 4,000 Chinese students at Northumbria university.

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

As someone who has been to the USA within that four-year time period, I think that the tiny bit of fuss at the airport is well worth it in order to enjoy whatever you are going to the US to do, and I would think conversely the same would be true of students coming here. Whatever the small bit of extra hassle, if you want to go to Cambridge to do your post-grad, you will put up with that bit of hassle to get here.

Iain Wright (Labour, Hartlepool)

The cost of a foreign student doing a postgraduate course at Cambridge university is £10,000. The cost of a visa or biometric passport or whatever you like to call it is £200. Why does Cambridge university not absorb that cost and pay the visa? I would suggest that this is classed as an excuse not to have biometric passports for foreign nationals. In the whole mix of things this is a very minor point, as Mrs. Hodgson said, in the context of coming to this country to study.

Iain Wright (Labour, Hartlepool)

Are you seriously suggesting, Mr. Booth, that potential students for this country, coming from, say, China, will think, “I will not go to the UK to study because I think it will be a bit of a Big Brother country”? I just cannot see it.

Iain Wright (Labour, Hartlepool)

And I am suggesting that the cost is an excuse; it is not about that. People come to this country from abroad to study because they want the quality of the research and the fantastic opportunities that this country provides. Having hassle for half an hour to an hour, perhaps twice a year, will not stop a student coming to study here for three years.

Sir David Amess (Conservative, Southend West)

Thank you very much indeed for giving evidence this afternoon, gentlemen. Would you kindly retire to the back of the Room and would our next witnesses come forward please? It looks as though we have failed to get a replacement for one of our witnesses. Would you kindly introduce yourself?

Sir David Amess (Conservative, Southend West)

On behalf of the Committee, would you wish her well? We are very sorry that she was not able to be with us this afternoon.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

I wonder if anyone will check whether Shami has been dining with people from the Home Office recently.

We have been talking about biometrics and I want to move on to another part of the Bill—the detention at ports and the powers of immigration officers. You put in your very full written submission your concerns about that. I should like you to expand on why you are particularly concerned about that part of the Bill.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

Carry on with the general analysis.

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

I understand that Liberty has argued that

“the real problem of illegal working lies not in the deceiving of honest employers but in the intentional employment of those without immigration status by unscrupulous and exploitative employers.”

If that is the view of Liberty, would you not agree, therefore, that biometric identity documents would help to tackle exploitative employers?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

Would you not agree that the fact that we do not have any biometric ID, and that people can work here illegally, is a pull factor? People can come here, and events like those in Morecambe bay can happen. The legislation is trying to stop events like that happening.

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

The fact that we do not have biometric ID encourages people to come here, and biometric ID would turn that on its head.

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

But there would not be the numbers of people here ready to be exploited if we had biometric immigration identity cards.

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

But this is not just about what is happening at the moment; it is to change things for the future, is it not?

Sharon Hodgson (Labour, Gateshead East and Washington West)

Would you say that the legislation, the direction of travel, what we are trying to achieve, is to reduce exploitation by illegal employers?

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

Following Mrs. Hodgson’s questions, which are apposite to my question, do you think, in view of what we have seen in the past few years since May 2004 and the abysmal failure of the Government properly to estimate how many EU migrants would enter this country—they were hugely out; they said there would be 13,000 and there are anything between 600,000 and 700,000—that if you are tackling the issue of exploitative employers, this is a red herring? Issues such as low wages, poor health and safety, houses in multiple occupation and people trafficking are irrelevant to the 600,000 people who have come in from within the EU accession states, and indeed the EU10, from 1 January. The argument that these documents will massively help the issue is completely erroneous.

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

Perish the thought.

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

In respect of those people from within the EU, would you agree that if you add the cost of bringing in the system to the cost of the pressures on local public services, the system will not really tackle the most immediate issues at local level?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

May I move on to clause 16? It has been clear from the evidence we have taken this week that it is one of the most contentious and controversial clauses in the Bill, for a number of reasons, mostly because it seems to add unnecessary and all-encompassing powers to those that already exist. In its written evidence, Liberty expressed strong reservations about clause 16. The Government claim that it will help unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. What do you say to that?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

On the general points relating to clause 16, and particularly proposed new sub-paragraph (v) to section 3(1)(c) of the Immigration Act 1971, do you think that the addition of “a condition about residence” to the controls that can be put on people have implications under article 8?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

Would you prefer the Bill to be amended to specify that?

Paul Rowen (Liberal Democrat, Rochdale)

On that clause, do you think that immigration officers are the most appropriate people to whom an unaccompanied child asylum seeker should be reporting?

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

May I ask about deportation in clauses 28 to 35? What difference do you think those clauses will make to the current arrangements for deporting foreign criminals?

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

So for you the requirement for residual discretion to deal with one case is a point of principle, whatever the benefits of having a system that is much clearer and has fewer appeals and fewer mechanisms for people to escape through and abuse.

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

What I was trying to get to was whether you were stating a point of principle from which Liberty would not depart or whether, in trying to administer an immigration and deportation system in the widest national interest, there is a point at whichit is legitimate to have a trade-off about bad cases making it easier, or possible, to administer a system that does not end up with the terrible backlog that we have now because the system is so difficult to administer.

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

So do you think that the Minister has been incorrect in signing off this Bill as being consistent with the Human Rights Act 1998?

Crispin Blunt (Conservative, Reigate)

Do you think that the triggers proposed by the Government for deporting a foreign criminal are appropriate?

James Clappison (Conservative, Hertsmere)

Why do you think that the judges have lost confidence in the deportation system?

James Clappison (Conservative, Hertsmere)

A constant stream of judges have expressed criticism of the Home Office, such as Judge Hoffman at York Crown court. More recently, various experienced judges have said that they have no confidence that anything will happen.

James Clappison (Conservative, Hertsmere)

They make recommendations for deportation but say that they have no confidence in them.

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

Let me take you to the Dog and Duck in Peterborough. We are propped up at the bar, and my constituents, who are the salt of the earth from north Cambridgeshire, say: “This foreign prisoner debacle is all about the Human Rights Act, isn’t it? It’s abused, because if you are sent to prison, period, it is not for not paying your TV licence, it is because you have been very naughty. These lawyers are misusing the system and abusing the Human Rights Act in a way that was not intended. It is unfair.” What would be your response to that sort of comment?

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

So is the corollary of whatyou are saying—given that we are not talkingabout automatic deportation, but a presumption of automatic deportation, which is a completely separate thing—that the Minister and the Government will have to tighten up that wording in order to ameliorate the misinformation, as you put it, about the HumanRights Act?

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

The wording of the Bill,clause 28 specifically, about automatic deportation and the presumption of deportation. What is your view on that?

Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough)

Yes.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

I want to move on to a point you make in your submission about the ability to amend the regulations that will flow from this, because Liberty points out that there is an awful lot left offthe Bill and that some of what is left off is hugely important. What areas would you like to see covered by such amendments?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

That is very interesting. I suspected that the reason for this recent growth is that it removes the policy parts, which now go into the order, from proper scrutiny in the House of Lords. I think that that is the reason. However, it is also the case that Ministers will recognise that passing bad legislation is worse than suffering the embarrassment of minor amendments as the Bill goes through in the first place. When they look back in the autumn of their political careers at some of the legislation that they have put through, former Ministers from all parties will acknowledge that.

To return to this Bill and the biometric sections that we have discussed, I know that one of your other points that will be contentious is that the application of these provisions might be divisive, affect community cohesion and be used unfairly against minority groups. Would you expand on that?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

As I understand that it will not be compulsory to carry it, will the corollary of that be that if a person looks like someone who may well have one of these documents, they will be required to report to a police station, which could be even more intrusive. I can quite see that, were it to become an extra piece of available information, that might well lead to changes in policing habits.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

Until we are back to the sus laws.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

On clause 40, you make a similar point about the very broad powers to enter a property in pursuit of a person or documentation. Why are you worried about that? What is the problemwith it?

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

You think that the clauses are amendable in a way that you would think more acceptable.

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

I want to follow on from the interesting exchange on people being required to carry documents and whether that would lead to the arbitrary stopping of people in the road because they look funny or whatever. My understanding is that there is no compulsion in the Bill to carry documentsso it follows that, because it is not mentioned, people will not have to carry them. We would obviouslywelcome that.

My concern is why you believe that because the extra document—a biometric ID card—will exist, the police will be any more likely to stop people arbitrarily. I do not quite understand that. Specifically, I thought that such arbitrary behaviour on the part of the police was actually illegal under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. Could you elaborate on that?

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

On a point of order, Mr. Amess. I understood that the Bill required regulations to be subject to affirmative resolution in both Houses. Is that not the case?

Sir David Amess (Conservative, Southend West)

Unfortunately, that is not a matter for the Chair.

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

Is it your understanding that the regulations are subject to affirmative resolution?

Sir David Amess (Conservative, Southend West)

The witness is not required to answer unless he feels he wants to.

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

I have just asked the witness, Mr. Chairman, if it is his understanding that they are subject to an affirmative resolution.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Amess. That is exactly right, whether the regulations are subject to an affirmative or negative resolution does not affect their ability to be amended.

Sir David Amess (Conservative, Southend West)

These are not points of order, of course. These are matters for argument and matters for minuters and Opposition spokesmen.

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

I would like to get to the bottom of this and I will try to do so quickly, Mr. Chairman. It seems from these non-points of order that perhaps a general point is emerging, which is that were the Government to try to do what it is suggested they may do, in other words introduce an order requiring compulsion, that would be subject to the normal democratic process. We will certainly use the later Committee stages of this Bill to ask the Government whether they intend to do so. My understanding is that they do not, which will perhaps alleviate your concern.

Perhaps we could answer the main point, which is whether it is illegal for the police to arbitrarily stop people.

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

I am quite worried by what you say. If the police are arbitrarily using their powers, that is a serious concern and perhaps we can come back to it in a different form.

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

I think you need to be slightly more specific about what you are alleging, if you do not mind me saying so, because the reason I came back to this line of questioning was that it seemed there were allegations being made that the introduction of biometric ID cards for foreigners would lead to the police stopping people because of what they looked like. I do not think you are alleging that although you have some broad concerns about the way that the Government are drafting regulations on stop and search generally. Is that correct?

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

So you are not saying that they are more likely to be arrested, but that when they are arrested this is likely to happen. So someone is not more likely to be picked up as a result of the Bill.

Kitty Ussher (Labour, Burnley)

You do not think that people are more likely to be arrested as a result of the provisions in the Bill. That is useful clarification.

Chris Mole (Labour, Ipswich)

Could what you said apply to any immigration document that anyone might be required to carry now?

Jamie Reed (Labour, Copeland)

May I test everyone’s patience by stretching this point a little further? I completely accept that previous social frameworks may have inclined—I will be fairly specific about this—some police officers to stop certain British citizens who, frankly, were not of European descent. Do you not think that that situation has changed and continues to change, given the greater numbers of white, non-European immigration into the UK, and that better police training could obviate what are understandable concerns.

Damian Green (Conservative, Ashford)

What has emerged in the last 10 minutes is that you can take a view on whether it is fine to have a piece of biometric information that you have to carry around with you at all times. That is just an issue between us. But what is interesting about the Bill is that to roll it out specifically to foreigners first will itself give rise to the danger that you think, not unreasonably, will happen. The roll-out method that the Government have chosen for the ID cards, starting with this Bill and a certain group of people, may be a particularly bad way of introducing the policy.

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

Is it your understanding that those subject to immigration control in this country generally have some kind of document proving their immigration status?

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

How does the creation of another one increase the potential for racial division?

Liam Byrne (Labour, Birmingham, Hodge Hill)

You are clear, though, that there are no provisions in the Bill to require people to carry these cards, and you will have seen the contributionon Second Reading that specifically ruled out our intention to do that.

The rest of the debate is in Hansard.