Immigration Bill

Public Bill Committee, 20 October 2015.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

Before we begin, I have a few points to make. Please switch electronic devices to silent mode. For some reason I have never entirely understood, tea and coffee are not allowed during the sittings. Today we will first consider the programme motion on the amendment paper, then a motion to allow us to deliberate in private about our questions before our oral evidence sessions, and then a motion to enable the reporting of witnesses’ evidence for publication. Given the time, to allow us most time for cross-examining witnesses I hope that we will be able to take the motions formally.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

On the basis of the programme motion, the deadline for amendments to be considered on 27 October, when the Committee will begin line-by-line scrutiny of the Bill, is the rise of the House on Thursday 22 October.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

Copies of written evidence that the Committee receives will be made available in the Committee Room. We will now go into private session to discuss our lines of questioning, so anyone who should not be here should now please go.

Examination of Witnesses

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

We will now hear oral evidence from Still Human Still Here, the Refugee Council and the Scottish Refugee Council. Before calling the first Member to ask a question, I remind all Members that questions should be limited to matters within the scope of the Bill and that we must stick to the timings in the programme motion that the Committee has agreed. For this session, we have until 10.15 am. Welcome to our witnesses; will you please introduce yourselves for the record?

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Bone. This question is directed to Judith Dennis and Mike Kaye in the first instance. You have both expressed concern about the adverse consequences of the provisions on the removal of support in the Bill. Will you tell the Committee what, in headline terms, your concerns are? You have also expressed a concern that the provisions will fail to further the Government’s stated aim, so as well as the adverse consequences, will you outline how, if at all, the Bill will support the Government’s stated aim?

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

You have mentioned the adverse consequences and the number of families in the pilot, some years ago, who disappeared off the radar. How does this compare with supported returns—family support in the return programme—in terms of achieving the Government’s aim?

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

Thank you. You have mentioned children and the impact on them on a number of occasions. Will you give a bit more detail on what the impact might be on local authorities if support is withdrawn for children that come within their area? How does that work and what might the consequences be for the local authority?

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

Following up on that, you have mentioned finances. Are there circumstances in which you envisage that it will be necessary to remove a child from a family in order for support to be provided by the local authority?

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

Hence the local authority, in those circumstances, would step in and provide the support that is being removed under the Bill.

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

Thank you. Finally from me, there are provisions in the Bill to prevent appeals against decisions on support. Can you give some evidence as to the quality of the decisions currently being made about the support available in such circumstances?

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

Am I right that people may be left destitute on the basis of a decision that is wrong or that needs to be retaken?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

Mr Kaye, do you agree, in principle, that there should be an ability to take sanctions against people who have no right to be in this country and are frustrating efforts to remove them or not co-operating with a voluntary returns mechanism? Do you accept that principle as a legitimate policy response?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

There is obviously a distinction that can be drawn. Clearly, you are not supportive of certain aspects of the policy, but I think you have taken the principle. Can I ask about the safeguards that would operate? Am I right in saying that the provisions under section 55 of the Children Act would apply and that provisions relating to destitution would be there in terms of support?

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

Can I just jump in? I should have explained to witnesses—I apologise for not doing it at the beginning—that Ministers love these sessions. It is a time that they get to ask questions, rather than getting grilled. I want to bring some more Members in, because I have about five queueing up to ask questions.

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

Mr Kaye, are you saying that appeal rights-exhausted families who could and should leave the UK should be entitled to automatic and indefinite support, either from local authorities or the Home Office, if they do not leave?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

My question, though, was whether you are advocating that we provide indefinite ongoing support for people if they refuse to leave?

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

Could I just jump in? I wonder whether Mr Wilkes and Judith Dennis would like to speak on this particular point as well, so that we hear from all three witnesses.

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

Down to brass tacks, then. I think what all three of you are saying is that those families who have exhausted the appeals process, should not be in the UK and should be returning home should get indefinite, automatic support ongoing. Is that what you are all saying?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

How far does that go, though? That is the question I am trying to get at, because at the end of the day these people are in our country illegally. How far do we expect the taxpayer to continue paying, whether it is for housing or whatever, for people who should not be in our country?

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

Before we move on, let me say that seven Members want to ask questions so perhaps the witnesses could try to keep their answers a little bit shorter.

Emma Lewell-Buck (Labour, South Shields)

I have a quick question for Judith, going back to something that you said earlier with regard to the Children Act. Obviously, you have to have valid reasons for removing children, but most children get removed because of neglect, and if a family is left destitute they cannot feed and clothe their child. So do you not envisage child protection departments removing children on that basis if support has been withdrawn?

Emma Lewell-Buck (Labour, South Shields)

I used to be a child protection social worker myself, so I totally get what you are saying, but social services departments are overstretched and are really sinking because the resources are not there. If they cannot fill the gap and help that family, that child will go hungry and will be neglected, and it is easier to pay for a child than to pay for the entire family, so could we see some perverse outcomes, with children being removed from their families? Is that a risk at all, do you think?

Emma Lewell-Buck (Labour, South Shields)

There is a chance, down the line, that that could be the case. I just wanted to clear that up. Thank you.

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

Two quick questions from me. The first is on what happens at present to engage with these families. Mr Kaye, you were just saying that the longer we do not engage with them, the more there is a problem; yet, as I have just heard it, Ms Dennis, you were outlining the current process and saying that it was chock full of engagement. Will the panel comment on the ways in which current engagement is different from what happened under the 2005 process, which I understand hinged largely on corresponding with people rather than engaging with them, perhaps as happens at present?

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

I suppose in what you are saying there are two types of support, in the sense of money and of engagement, and just to be clear you are—

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

My second question looks back somewhat. Mr Kaye’s organisation, Still Human Still Here, in 2008 gave evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on the then draft citizenship and immigration legislative proposals. Your organisation stated:

“Government asylum support policy is leaving many refused asylum seekers destitute”—

that was clearly the then Government in 2008—and that that destitution

“results from the current statutory scheme”

of that Government. Why is it that two major British political parties, which most recently represented around two thirds of the UK population, would want to pursue such measures when they have been democratically elected?

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

Why do you think that the Government—either of those Governments—respond to the electorate’s ask?

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

But they are not, because the 2005 pilot was based on correspondence rather than engagement.

Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)

My question is specifically to John Wilkes. It is about the Scottish issue. Obviously, every country has different legislation. You have been through the changes in legislation coming from this House, so I hope that you will be able to advise us about the impact of this legislation, and the challenges that that presents, in terms of Scottish legislation.

Simon Hoare (Conservative, North Dorset)

Mr Kaye, could I take you back to what I thought was the nub of your argument? You said—I think I heard you correctly—that as soon as financial support is removed, people lose contact. Can I put the other side of the coin to you? If somebody’s application is finally refused, do they not, against that backdrop, and irrespective of whether financial support is provided, run and hide, because they do not like the decision, and they do not want to leave the country? I am not persuaded that an element of financial support will, in any way, shape or form, encourage them to stay in a continuous dialogue with the Home Office and agencies while preparations for their removal are made.

Simon Hoare (Conservative, North Dorset)

With respect to officials, we only know where people are if they want us to know where they are.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

I am sorry. We could go on for an hour about this, but we are really up against the clock, and I have other Members to get in. I would just like the other two witnesses to say whether they agree with the statement that has just been made.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

Lovely. I think it is Paul Blomfield next—or did you have any more questions, Mr Hoare?

Simon Hoare (Conservative, North Dorset)

I did have a few more, if time allowed. I shall try to be brief.

These questions are to all three of you, and they probably need yes or no answers. While you are supporting or advising people going through the process, do you take them to end of the telescope they do not want to look from—that is, how will a decision whereby they are not allowed to remain be implemented? Do you do that in advance on a “just in case, let’s keep all the bases squared” basis?

Simon Hoare (Conservative, North Dorset)

So that is a no. Mr Kaye?

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

I was in Stockholm last year on a cross-party delegation, where we were all impressed by the rate of compliance and returns under the Swedish system. I just wondered what lessons you all felt we could learn from other countries, particularly in relation to this issue of withdrawal of support, in terms of effective compliance, because that is something that we all share an interest in.

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

Perhaps from other international comparisons.

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

Briefly, is there any evidence from other countries that withdrawal of support along the lines proposed in the Bill assists compliance?

Byron Davies (Conservative, Gower)

Good morning. I have heard what you have said in answer to the questions about what is proposed in the Bill. You have given your objections to what is in the Bill, so can I ask you what you think is the way forward to effect behavioural change? What is your answer to it?

Byron Davies (Conservative, Gower)

Anyone else have a view on that?

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

I cannot read the clock very well, so Gavin Newlands, very quickly.

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

I have two very quick questions. One is for Mr Wilkes, following on from my colleague’s question. Do you think there is a danger that the Bill might contravene the Children (Scotland) Act 1995?

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

Thank you. One explanation given for the failure of a 2005 pilot of terminating support was lack of faith in the asylum process. Is there any reason to believe that people have any more faith in that process now?

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

Order. I am afraid the time has beaten us and I must bring this session to an end. I thank the witnesses so much for coming. You can see the interest of Members and I am sure we could have gone on for longer, but thank you for coming.

Examination of Witness

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

We will now hear evidence from the Migration Advisory Committee. For this session, we have until 10.45am. Will the witness please introduce himself?

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

I am grateful for that. I should warn you that this is the favourite session of the Minister because he gets to ask questions, rather than answer them. I have a horrible feeling he wants to start. Minister.

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

Perhaps I could open things up for the Committee by asking an open question. Sir David, what are your thoughts on the establishment of a labour market enforcement directive, the need for greater co-ordination on enforcement, and the impact that might have on the employment market overall?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

For laymen like me, are you saying that the new role of the director of labour market enforcement is a good idea?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

Okay. Do you think the director will provide the focus necessary to bridge the gap you say exists between the current labour market offences? You also mentioned lack of resources throughout your answer. Do you think that the Bill will bridge that gap, too?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

In your 2014 report, “Migrants in low-skilled work”, which we have quoted several times, you talk about countries that use the International Labour Organisation labour inspection convention 81 of 1947, which seemed to be particularly effective. Will this new director bring us much closer to that working model?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

Mr Bone, it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I have a couple of questions. I am a big fan of the anti-slavery commissioner. I think that in six months, he has had a big impact, precisely because he is independent and has a remit that goes across different Departments and organisations. You said that it was key that the post of director is able to work harmoniously with other Departments, but you mentioned the Health and Safety Executive and local authorities, and a lack of clarity about what the relationship would be. Do you think that ought to be fleshed out on the face of the Bill for this post to have the maximum impact?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

You also mentioned the need for sufficient resources. Do you believe that, as things stand, the director does have sufficient resources to prevent worker exploitation?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

What do you think they should be?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

Your hope was that the director would be able to set established minimum standards with employers. However, in parts of the Bill, the criminal aspect has shifted from the employer to the employee. What impact do you think that is likely to have?

Rebecca Harris (Conservative, Castle Point)

What impact more generally do you feel illegal or poorly regulated workers’ protections have on the domestic, legal workforce?

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

You described, in your evidence, the current regime as trivial in the sense of the likelihood of an intervention or a prosecution. You gave the figures of an intervention once every 250 years and a prosecution once every million years. We welcome, therefore, the director of labour market enforcement, because that provides an opportunity to bring a degree of oversight and strategic thinking. Obviously, reporting to the Home Office and to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills is a welcome step in the right direction.

I know you have been tasked on resources a number of times. You clearly accepted that, the public finances being what they are, there may not be much by way of resources and suggested that increasing the sanction might do the same work. Is it not the reality that, with that level of intervention and prosecution, unless significant resources are put into the relevant agencies, the prospects of this raising beyond trivial to very much further up the scale are pretty limited? You can only do so much with the sentence, unless you are going to go way off the scale.

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

It is targeted and intelligence-led.

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

Ultimately, the pressure will have to be on the Government, because the agencies are likely to say, “We allocate our resources. We are happy to go along with the strategy but, ultimately, those are the resources we have. Therefore, we simply can’t up the number of inspections, and so on, in the way that might be strategically most advantageous.”

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

In headline terms, what do you see as the gaps? This is to co-ordinate a number of agencies, which is a good thing. What gaps are still being left?

Simon Hoare (Conservative, North Dorset)

Given what you have just said about the importance of having the director, and taking on board the resource issue, where would you be expecting him or her to be focusing their energies in the first instance? Which sectors of the economy are most exposed to workers being exploited?

Simon Hoare (Conservative, North Dorset)

I know. That is why I asked it.

Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)

Is a worker who does not have the right to work in this country—for example, a parent who is made destitute by this legislation—and who is being ruthlessly exploited, or physically or sexually abused, more or less likely to seek protection as a result of these provisions?

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

Sir David, I imagine that you would agree that labour market exploitation takes place where gangmasters and those exploiting people can create a climate of fear and intimidation. You will be aware that in the States, for example, there is a clear protocol between the Department of Labour and the Department of Homeland Security on firewalls between immigration control and labour market enforcement, to ensure the effectiveness of labour market enforcement and to create a climate in which people can properly express concerns. Is it important that we have such a firewall in the UK?

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

Are you not concerned that those who are being exploited might be less willing to talk about their exploitation if they felt that that threatened their immigration status?

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

Time is again catching us out, so I think this will be the last question. Mims Davies.

Mims Davies (Conservative, Eastleigh)

You mentioned the construction and hospitality industries, in particular, as areas of illegal working—

Mims Davies (Conservative, Eastleigh)

Sorry if I misunderstood that—areas where there might be more exploitation. I am just wondering about the causes. Is that about a skills gap, or is it just pure exploitation?

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

I am afraid that that brings us to the end of the time allocated for the Committee to ask questions. Thank you, Sir David. You have been an excellent witness.

Examination of Witnesses

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

We will now hear oral evidence from the Recruitment and Employment Confederation, the National Association of Licensing and Enforcement Officers, and Focus on Labour Exploitation. For this session, we only have until 11.25 am. I warn the witnesses not to be surprised if the Minister asks questions, because he is allowed to do that in this session. Will the witnesses please introduce themselves?

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

May I begin with the illegal working offences in the Bill, in particular the extension of an offence to employees as well as employers, and ask the panel how they think that will impact on the power relationship between an exploiting employer and exploited employees? Secondly, do the panel think it will have any impact on the confidence of employees to come forward? If criminal cases are to be brought, it is very important that those affected come forward and give an account, and possibly give evidence. Thirdly, do the panel think that there is any evidence that the employee offence is needed, given the other offences that are already in existence? Caroline Robinson, I think you particularly expressed some views on this.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

Rebecca Harris wants to come in on that point.

Rebecca Harris (Conservative, Castle Point)

We know migrants are quite knowledgeable—they are good about communication and about the details—so do you think that the knowledge that working in Britain would be illegal and a criminal offence might deter people and make it less likely that they would allow themselves to be trafficked in the first place? With that knowledge, they are less likely to come to this country.

Rebecca Harris (Conservative, Castle Point)

You do not think that it might make people less vulnerable to being trafficked if they knew in advance that this was the legal situation in Britain?

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

For clarity for the Committee, will the witness define what she means by trafficking? I thought trafficking meant people who were not aware and were tricked. What is your understanding of trafficking?

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

That is very helpful. Rebecca Harris, did you have anything more to say on this?

Rebecca Harris (Conservative, Castle Point)

No.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

We will go back to Keir Starmer, but I would like to hear from the other two witnesses as well.

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

Can I go to the flipside of enforcement and look at protection? The role of the director of labour market enforcement has been widely welcomed, and rightly so. Most discussion so far has been about enforcement. Do the witnesses have views on the protective role of the director and whether the remit is wide enough?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

Caroline, I want to come back to you and the answer you gave to my colleague earlier. You said that you were not sure that illegal immigrants are aware of the rules and regulations around countries. Most people in the UK know that when you go abroad there is a huge perception in the wide world that Britain is a light touch.

I grew up in Australia and the children of a lot of my friends I grew up with have come to the UK and know full well that they can overstay their visas without too much hassle. We have 100,000 students who overstay their visa requirements. There are also the heritage cases we know about, and the traditional open-door policy. How can you say that you are not sure whether somebody coming to this country with the intention of being an illegal immigrant is not aware of the rules and regulations?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

We are not talking about India, we are talking about the United Kingdom and what has traditionally happened in this country. The general perception, throughout the world, not just Australia, is that we have traditionally been a light touch. That is among people who come and go just for holiday visas, for example. If you intend to come here as an illegal immigrant, surely you will have the knowledge that you can get away with far more than people who do not intend to do that in the first place.

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

You do not think that the UK has been a light touch, then.

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

Leading on from Mr Whittaker’s question, do any of the panel believe that clause 8, the offence of illegal working, will have any impact on people illegally coming to this country?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

Does anyone on the panel think that clause 8 will prevent illegal workers coming into the country?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

My personal feeling is that clause 8 is a show pony for the Daily Mail. It will not actually make any difference to people coming into the country to work illegally. However, what is your opinion of clause 9? Do you think that it goes far enough to put the onus on employers to not employ people illegally and not exploit workers?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

Specifically, previous witnesses have spoken about takeaways and the construction industry, which would be small employers. Does clause 9 go far enough to prevent that exploitation?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

Mr Miley, as a licensing officer, does this give you enough to go on to stop illegal practice, or would you like to see more in there?

Byron Davies (Conservative, Gower)

Caroline, you mentioned the extent of harbouring. You talked about the Romanian case on Channel 4. What is the extent of this, and what is the evidence?

Byron Davies (Conservative, Gower)

Yes.

Byron Davies (Conservative, Gower)

What would your definition of harbouring be, out of interest?

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

I am keen to ensure that we learn from other countries, and I am interested to know what the panel thinks we can learn from them about effective labour market enforcement. In particular, I am interested in the line of questioning that I was pursuing earlier, which was about the relationship between immigration officers and labour market enforcement regimes. For example, in the States there are clear firewalls, which the Americans think enhance effective labour market enforcement.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

I am aware that time is getting on, and I also have quite a few Members who still want to ask questions. Undoubtedly, we could talk for a long time about the trafficking issue, but we will move on.

Minister, would you like to ask a question?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

I want to ask Mr Miley, who has expertise and experience in licensing, how he thinks the powers contemplated in the Bill could strengthen existing enforcement around standards in the licensing process, and who should be holding licences. Also, I would like to know about his experience of using closure notices, and some of those short-term measures that are currently reflected in licensing legislation and are now being contemplated in a broader sphere.

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

Do you have any comments on intelligence sharing and joint working with other agencies to support the work of local authorities?

Kelly Tolhurst (Conservative, Rochester and Strood)

I want to explore a little more around employers who are repeat offenders. I have witnessed examples of activity from smaller businesses that have caused concern. Does clause 9 go far enough to prevent such businesses, once caught, from doing it again? Is it enough to stop people who have already caused concern for agencies?

Kelly Tolhurst (Conservative, Rochester and Strood)

I have been made aware that fines sometimes—

Kelly Tolhurst (Conservative, Rochester and Strood)

Undocumented workers. It has not always reached a full conclusion, so there has perhaps been a view that the penalties are not stiff enough. That is why I am interested to know whether this measure is enough finally to stop people taking those decisions and using undocumented workers.

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

I want to take Ms Robinson back to her point about defences under the Modern Slavery Act 2015, in which I take a great interest—I sat on the Public Bill Committee. I have that Act and the Criminal Damage Act 1971 in front of me because she made a specific reference to that defence. As I understand it, the defence supplied in the 2015 Act in relation to criminal damage specifically excludes criminal damage with the intent to endanger another person’s life, so it is a rather more specialist case than she might have suggested. Secondly, on Second Reading of this Bill, the Home Secretary was very clear that all those defences will continue to apply. Will Ms Robinson explain her view?

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

The Home Secretary said that those defences will continue to apply. I thought I heard you say earlier that the defences will not apply; the Home Secretary says that they will.

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

Yes.

Mims Davies (Conservative, Eastleigh)

I want to pick up with Mr Green, and perhaps Mr Miley, how the Bill intends to improve the market regulation and enforcement of workers’ protections. Why has such a culture built up in certain sectors, and how have we allowed that? Does what is in front of you work for that culture to be broken down?

Mims Davies (Conservative, Eastleigh)

Yes.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

Order. I am really sorry. I am afraid that that brings us to the end of the time allocated to ask questions. Again, I thank the excellent witnesses; we could have spent a lot longer on this.

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

On a point of order, Mr Bone. This afternoon we move to witnesses who deal with the landlord and renting provisions in the Bill. In an answer given orally last week, there was an assurance that the evaluation for the west midlands pilot of the scheme would be available before the Bill Committee. Since we are getting to that witness this afternoon, where is the evaluation? I would certainly benefit from reading it before I start my questioning at 3 o’clock.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

I thank the hon. and learned Member for the point of order. I will certainly make inquiries where necessary—unless the Minister wants to say anything.

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

I can say that, as Members may have noticed, there is a written ministerial statement on the Order Paper in relation to the right to rent scheme roll-out more generally. Alongside that, the evaluation is being published. I suspect—and can certainly talk to hon. Members outside the Committee as well—that the evaluation will be available on gov.uk well in advance of our considerations this afternoon.

Peter Bone (Conservative, Wellingborough)

That brings us to the end of the sitting. Thank you again to the witnesses; you have the message. The Committee will meet again at 2 pm.

Examination of Witness

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

We now move to the fourth panel of witnesses and will hear oral evidence from the CBI until 2.30 pm. May we informally refer to you as Neil?

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Neil, may I ask you to introduce yourself for the record?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

Neil, thank you for coming to give evidence this afternoon. This is one of the rare occasions when I, as the Minister, get to ask some questions, so there is nothing unusual in this. On labour market enforcement, Sir David Metcalf, head of the Migration Advisory Committee, gave evidence to the Committee earlier today and commented that he hoped that the CBI would buy into the labour market enforcement director mechanism contained in the Bill. He was essentially extolling it and suggesting that the CBI should welcome it. In fairness to you, I want to put his perspective to you so that you can respond.

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

So your call is for smart enforcement, using intelligence and drawing together all the different strands of information to target more rigorously the non-compliant.

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

What is the CBI’s current assessment of labour market exploitation and non-payment of the minimum wage? How does your organisation seek to challenge that? In parallel with the Bill’s provisions, what role do you see the CBI playing?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

And are you looking at particular sectors, or is that a more general comment about the labour market?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

Such as?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

I look forward to serving under your chairmanship, Mr Owen. Mr Carberry, offences are already specified in the Immigration Act 1971 that are applicable to migrants who breach their immigration conditions. Do you believe that clause 8, which creates the new criminal offence of illegal working, is necessary, and do you think that it may have unintended consequences?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

Just to unpick that, do you think that actually criminalising the workers is useful in changing practice?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

I agree that if employers are employing people illegally, they should be accountable for that. Do you feel that the Bill goes far enough to enable that to be enforced?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

Finally, do you believe that the director has the remit and the resources to prevent this from being a box-ticking exercise? Would they have the authority to make the necessary changes?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

I want to turn back to the evidence given to us this morning by Professor Sir David Metcalf. When he was discussing the CBI, he said that the regulation of the labour market proposed in the Bill would take away the cowboys and help your sector. He went on to say that it would go a long way towards raising the welfare of British residents. Do you think he has applied a risk-based, intelligent approach to his assessment?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

On the face of the Bill then, it is a good thing.

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

You talked about parts of the labour market where abuse happens. I am conscious that many of your members might have had their reputations tarnished by unwitting involvement through supply chains. Can you share your thoughts about the Bill in the context of the most effective way of helping your members to achieve supply chain compliance?

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

You mentioned a situation in which companies at the top end of a supply chain have reason to believe that things are going wrong further down the supply chain, but the problem faced by many of your members is that it might be impossible to know what happens further down the supply chain. What more could be done to achieve effective enforcement of labour market standards down the supply chain and out of the sight of your members?

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

Do you think that there are sufficient resources, as the situation currently stands, to achieve the objectives you are talking about?

Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)

Good afternoon. Do you think there is a risk of the Bill making it harder for migrant workers to access the labour market because employers are afraid that they will be breaking the law, and don’t understand how it works, so they err on the side of caution?

Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)

Would the CBI be willing to keep an eye on that? In my constituency, I have already had people coming to me who have been offered jobs and then the employers—and it is large employers—have backed off, saying that they want actual evidence; phoning the hotline is not evidence for them. I wonder whether the reason why I am getting quite a few people coming to me now is that they know that the legislation is going to change; it would be interesting to see if there was an effect once this came in.

Mims Davies (Conservative, Eastleigh)

I would like to ask about the role of the director, in terms of vulnerable workers, and more broadly whether that role could help the Government’s agenda of redressing the balance on equality issues and addressing the gender pay gap, so as to shine a broader light on these employment issues.

Mims Davies (Conservative, Eastleigh)

So you see them as clearly separate issues.

Mims Davies (Conservative, Eastleigh)

That is my feeling, and I am on the Women and Equalities Committee, hence why I asked that question. I hear what you say, but it worries me if we completely disconnect the two.

Mims Davies (Conservative, Eastleigh)

Fantastic. Are you also able to expand on the CBI’s concerns about the apprenticeships levy? It is obviously the Government’s ambition to see apprenticeships grow. Will the levy affect your members, or the immigration skills charge? What is the impact that you see on businesses?

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

In trying to target action against criminals who exploit workers, which is something we can all agree on, do you think the Bill blurs the lines between employment law and criminal activity?

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

Do you think that it should be employers’ or the Government’s responsibility to prevent illegal working, especially given the move away from civil penalties to criminal charges?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

Just to come back on that last question, what is your assessment of the level of knowledge among your members, recognising that part of the role of the labour market enforcement strategy, which the director will obviously have a key role in developing, is to focus on advice to the Secretary of State about education and training? What further steps, in practice, should be undertaken around that, and what about the role of the director in that piece?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

So I suppose in other words, to draw out another comment in Committee this afternoon, you are suggesting that the focus on that awareness should be at the smaller business end, the SME end, and on the some of the challenges that might reside there. Equally, I am assuming that you would not say that the larger firms themselves have no potential issues, given the supply chain elements touched on previously—who your sub-sub-contractor is, who is on a building site or has been contracted into a particular job—and the need for alertness around those sorts of elements, from a reputational as well as a legal perspective.

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Just before you answer that, we have a couple of minutes. Will any other Member wish to ask a question in that short time? No. Neil.

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Okay. We are coming to the end, so if there are no further questions I will thank our witness for giving evidence today. If there is any other information that you would like to give to the Committee, please feel free to write in.

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

We look forward to receiving that. Thank you very much.

Examination of Witnesses

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Good afternoon. We now move on to the fifth panel of witnesses and we are to hear oral evidence from Migration Watch UK. To remind everyone, this session will finish at 3 pm. Can I call on the witnesses to introduce themselves?

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

You are all very welcome.

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

Thank you all for coming today. Lord Green, to give us some context, what is your estimate of the current size of the irregular migrant population in the UK?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

To expand on that, at a practical level, you rightly said that there are 11 Acts of Parliament, and that we still do not know who is coming in and who is going out. Groups have said that if support to asylum seekers is withdrawn, there is concern that they might abscond from the system. On a practical level, what do you believe the Bill will add to existing legislation, so that we can deal with the problem? From my casework, I know that the biggest problem is that once the Home Office team has gone through the process to recognise that someone needs to be deported, it does not have the resources to deport them. On a practical level, I cannot see how the legislation will make that process more straightforward. Are there specific proposals in the Bill that will do so?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

My final question—

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Very briefly.

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

In that case, I will let other people have a go.

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

Lord Green, there has been some questioning during the course of this session about the introduction of offences relating to illegal working, in particular the creation of an illegal working offence against employees. Could you share any thoughts and comments on how we can have a firm response and crack down on illegal working in all its different forms, as well as some of the draws that entice people into migration? How would you respond to the challenge that this may somehow prevent people from coming forward who may be victims of exploitation or trafficking, for example?

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Sure. It was a good opening exchange.

Byron Davies (Conservative, Gower)

Lord Green, in response to an earlier question, you talked about an effective removal system. Could you expand on that and tell us what you think would be an effective removal system?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

Lord Green, you have already said there should be a duty on employers. I presume you put into the same category people such as landlords, whom the Bill specifically addresses. How can we better prevent illegal working without imposing additional burdens on business generally?

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

I wonder whether I could follow up on your answer to the Minister, Lord Green. You were saying that the criminalisation of workers would be helpful in achieving labour market compliance.

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

Effectively, the Bill criminalises undocumented workers, does it not?

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

In your evidence to the Migration Advisory Committee review of low-skilled work, you talked about the problem of fear in the workplace and of there effectively being a climate in which employees would not challenge their employers. Do you not think that creating a criminal offence assists the hand of unscrupulous and exploitative employers and gangmasters, and therefore negates the desire that we all share to achieve effective compliance in the labour market?

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

I wondered whether you were hesitating because you wanted to add to that answer.

Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)

I wonder whether I can ask another question. Your evidence to the MAC review of low-skilled work also talked about the need for more effective enforcement of minimum wage compliance and other areas. Do you think that it is a problem that the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate only has nine full-time staff, and do you think that more resources need to be allocated for effective enforcement?

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

We are just over halfway.

Mims Davies (Conservative, Eastleigh)

I want to pick up on something that was raised this morning by the Refugee Council and Still Human Still Here. They were inferring that the reform of the support will affect asylum seekers, leaving children destitute and obviously affecting social services and local authorities. I wondered whether you had an understanding of the level of numbers that may be affected by that, and therefore the impact that could be anticipated, or whether that is in essence scaremongering?

Rebecca Harris (Conservative, Castle Point)

Back to that point, there are two questions relating to what we were told early this morning by witnesses. On that point—namely, we were told that with a lack of resources, when people have finally lost their appeal, that would drive them further underground and they would cease to engage; it would not work and we would find that less people were leaving—can you comment on whether that is a fair assessment? Will that measure and the other measures in this Bill make it more likely that people go underground and less likely that they are going to come forward and engage, as we are told the term is, and come to the conclusion that they need to go of their own accord?

Rebecca Harris (Conservative, Castle Point)

Thank you. That takes me back to the other point, which is about making working illegal, in particular, although it equally applies to some of the other measures in the Bill. I put it to one of our earlier witnesses that quite a lot of potential migrants—even those who might be considered to be being trafficked or abused or taken advantage of when they get here—are quite well informed about the rules and the system here, and, as you said, their chances of remaining indefinitely. Would you say that they are more likely to know that it will be illegal and more difficult to work here, and will that, along with the other measures in the Bill, stop the draw factor? We were told this morning that it was unlikely that people who come from abroad would really know what the rules were here.

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

I just want to ask for a quick clarification of an earlier answer to the Minister, in which you used the phrase “these people”. To be clear, can you define “these people” for the Committee?

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

At the start of an answer to the Minister, you used the phrase “these people”.

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

You might have been referring to asylum seekers or to migrants, but you gave the answer.

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

You used the phrase.

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

My main question is, to what extent do you consider that the Bill carries the risk of encouraging everyday discrimination against people who do not appear to be British?

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

To what extent do you consider that the Bill carries the risk of encouraging everyday discrimination against people who do not appear to be British?

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Lord Green, are you having difficulty with the sound?

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Okay. You can try again, Gavin.

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

Do you think this Bill carries a risk that it will encourage everyday discrimination against people who do not appear to be British?

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

There is a very crowded field and we have about seven minutes. Kelly?

Kelly Tolhurst (Conservative, Rochester and Strood)

Earlier on you mentioned some of the numbers and the applicants to stay here. To what extent do you believe that the opportunities and ease of obtaining illegal work in this country are a pull for people to continue to come here?

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

Mr Owen, it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I apologise for arriving late.

I would like to ask the panel some questions about illegal working. At the moment, a number of measures can be taken in relation to both employers and employees where there is an inspection of premises and people are found to be in the country without proper status. The problem, as I understand it, has been the low rates of inspection and even lower rates of enforcement. That is the really critical issue. For that reason, steps have been taken to create a director of labour market enforcement and it is hoped there will be better strategy—streamlining and all the rest of it—but throughout those debates, and certainly when I was Director of Public Prosecutions, I cannot remember people saying that there was a problem with not having an offence that can be prosecuted. In other words, nobody has suggested, as far as I know, that there is a problem because there is not an action that can be taken against employees. There is obvious action that can be taken.

Do you know of any evidence of any cases that have not progressed because the offence of illegal working by the employee was not in place? In other words, there was an inspection, something was found to be wrong, but then there was a problem over not being able to bring a case because you did not have an offence against employees. I do not know of any evidence of that.

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

No, I am sorry to interrupt you, but there are plenty of examples throughout our criminal proceedings sector where something happens and a team will have carried out an inspection or arrest and realised that they cannot proceed any further because there is no offence that fits the action they are trying to deal with. That is not uncommon. Usually the response is to legislate to fill what is seen to be a gap in the available offences. I have never seen any evidence here that it is a gap in the available offences that caused the problem. It seems to be that there are not enough resources to carry out inspections to enforce the measures that are already there.

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Can I ask for briefer answers and questions, please, if we are going to satisfy everybody on the list? Thank you.

Simon Hoare (Conservative, North Dorset)

Lord Green, although I, too, cannot remember the context in which you used the phrase, I would like to support what Mr Newlands was saying. There was a very disparaging tone with regard to “these people”. It certainly jarred with me. On such a sensitive issue as this we all need to be careful about language.

What I did not follow in the logic of your response to an earlier question about the financial support provided to people who have had their applications refused and who have exhausted the appeal process was why there should be an exemption for those with children, or a different style of treatment for those who have children. It seems to me, and I would welcome your views, that if a parent is told that they do not have the right to remain, they are by definition responsible for the welfare of their child. If the child is going to suffer disproportionately because there is a lack of central Government or local government funding, the solution remains in their hands. They have exhausted the appeal process; they have no right to remain. Surely, to safeguard the future and wellbeing of their child or children they should return to their country of origin as quickly as possible. I did not follow the logic that you were deploying as to why there should be two separate streams merely predicated on the fact that people had children.

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Lord Green, I have one more Member, Anne, wanting to ask a question. If you do not finish your response, would you please give some written response to that?

Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)

I will try to be quick. In answer to an earlier question regarding asylum seekers, Lord Green, you said that they know that they have a 70% chance of staying—I am paraphrasing—and that some of them even have mobile phones. I wonder if you are aware of a detailed report from 2010 that Swansea University carried out for the Refugee Council on this very matter of whether asylum seekers set out to come to the UK. They said that the belief that many politicians have is not supported by the existing research evidence, much of which suggests that destinations are determined not by personal choices about lifestyle but by the practicalities and demands of the situation—

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Order. I am sorry to stop the hon. Lady in full flow. Lord Green, Mr Hoare and Ms McLaughlin have asked questions that are on the record, and if you could provide answers we would very much appreciate it. On behalf of the Committee I thank you for the answers you have given. If you have additional information that you want to supply to the Committee, please feel free to do so.

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Good afternoon. We are now hearing evidence from the sixth panel of witnesses, from the National Landlords Association, the Residential Landlords Association and the British Bankers Association. For this session we have until 3.45 pm. Could the witnesses please introduce themselves for the record?

Keir Starmer (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras)

May I ask the panel—but I think probably Mr Lambert and Mr Smith in the first instance—about the provisions in the Bill dealing with the duties on landlords to carry out checks before renting to, or allowing premises to be occupied by, a person without the right immigration status? Do you have concerns about those provisions, from the perspective of the landlords, and do you have any comment about the concern of others that there could be a default position leading to discrimination—in other words, landlords being so concerned, because it is a complicated exercise and they are not entirely sure what they are doing, that it is easier simply to default to a position where you rent to somebody who is pretty obviously British, or who has a British passport?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

I thank our witnesses for giving evidence this afternoon, and I also thank the relevant landlord bodies for their participation in the round-table sessions that we have had and will continue to have throughout the detailed implementation of the Bill.

I want to come on to one of the parts of the Bill that relates to the termination of tenancies. When landlords discover someone who is in the country illegally, they will be able to resolve that issue in a speedier fashion through the landlord and tenant legislation. Would that be welcomed by the sector?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

The detailed input given thus far has been helpful in flushing some of those issues and, no doubt, those discussions will continue.

Given the time, I should ask Mr Leenders about the banking provisions. The new provisions in clause 18 are on existing bank accounts and the ability to take action. That may be linked to some of the other issues we have touched on in the session, such as proceeds of crime legislation, linked to the employee criminal sanction that was highlighted in a previous session. Will you comment on the practicality and operation of that?

James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)

Thank you for that detailed and comprehensive answer on the provisions, which is quite helpful and instructive on the level of detail that is engaged here. Just briefly, perhaps you could reflect on the provisions of the Immigration Act 2014 and their implementation. What has been the practical experience? Clearly a lot of this quite detailed analysis was engaged there as well. What has been the situation to date?

Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)

I want to talk about potential discrimination under the right to rent aspects of the Bill. Not everyone is as enlightened as Mr Lambert, and so not everyone believes that you cannot tell by a face, a name or an accent whether someone is British. I was very struck by a statement sent out by the Residential Landlords Association, which I am going to read from:

“Whilst the Residential Landlords Association condemns all acts of racism the threat of sanctions will inevitably lead many landlords to err on the side of caution and not rent to anyone whose nationality cannot be easily proved.”

How concerned are you that the Bill will allow some people to use it as an excuse for their racism and that others will inadvertently end up acting in a racist manner, not because they want to but out of fear that they may end up breaking the law if they do not?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

I declare an interest as per my declared interest in the Members’ register. For the record, I am probably what Mr Smith calls one of those in his sector who are amateurs and accidental landlords. One thing I know from experience, although I may be an amateur, is that the eviction process is incredibly burdensome for landlords. It is far too lengthy and hugely costly, and when you are going through the process, you do not get any rent from the tenant who is in your property. That is the current situation, whether they are an illegal immigrant or not. I cannot for the life of me understand, and neither can the members of Calderdale Landlords Association, whom I have spoken to, why on earth as an organisation you would be against something that is far better and makes it far quicker for a landlord to evict a tenant in these circumstances.

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

You said very clearly that you had some real concerns around the eviction process that was being proposed. You mentioned the 28 days, for example. That is a much quicker process than what is currently in place.

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

But they are already committing an offence as the law currently stands, and the process of evicting a tenant takes much longer. What I would like to know is why on earth you are advising landlords that this element of the Bill is not particularly—

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

So the new eviction process in the Bill is a good thing. Is that what you are saying?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

Okay. Can I just ask you about document checks, which have been mentioned? I just wonder whether you guys actually understand what is going on in your sector. If you try to get accommodation from an agency, for example, as I recently did here in London, first, you have got to be there on the day to secure something, and if you cannot get down to London to physically go and see it, you will lose it. Secondly, if you do not have the checks, whether you are an illegal or a legal resident in this country, it is a very difficult process anyway, because that is what people demand. Have you considered for one minute that for the amateurs and accidental landlords that you refer to, the introduction of some form of check, as is happening in the Bill, will protect them in other ways as well as just against potential illegal immigrants?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

But we have that in place anyway. If I do not have those documents to prove to an agency that I am who I am when I want to rent a property, whoever I am, guess what? I do not get the property.

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

Okay. Let me just ask one final question, because I think I have made my point on that one. My question is to you, Mr Lambert, because you mentioned an undercurrent of discrimination in the system. May I point out that no evidence at all from the pilot—which, okay, was only published this morning—suggests that there is a discrimination there? You said that you have heard hearsay from people you have spoken to, but may I ask whether you have any physical evidence to suggest that there might be some form of discrimination in the system?

Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)

So there is no real evidence—

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

Will the panel give us their assessment of what numbers might be involved in the area of policy that we are talking about? Do you have any assessment in particular of how many prospective tenants might present themselves to your members, or how many bank accounts in the case of Mr Leenders?

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

Of those, do you have a sense of how many might fall under the provisions of the Bill?

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

That is exactly what I am driving at. Could you give us your view on it?

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

Just sticking with the two landlords, if I may, before coming to Mr Leenders on the same question, your organisations are membership organisations, clearly, and you know how many members you have. Do you have any sense of how many members you do not have? In other words, how many landlords are under the radar, to use your phrase?

Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)

Mr Leenders, any reflections?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

I have two small, mopping-up questions. Mr Leenders, you went through the customer service and administrative burdens that the legislation puts on you, but are you largely in favour of it? Are there any unintended consequences of the legislation that we should be aware of?

Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham)

Mr Smith and Mr Lambert, I was surprised by how small the sample size was in the west midlands pilot results. Of the 67 respondents who are tenants, 60 are students. My assumption is that students are much more likely to have passports and letters of authority from their institutions. Do you believe that this is a skewed sample?

Gavin Newlands (Scottish National Party, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)

I know from your written evidence that you call for a clearly understood and properly resourced helpline for landlords. Will you share your members’ experiences of the helpline during the pilot? A recent written answer from the Minister, for which I am very grateful, revealed that there were two full-time equivalent staff for the helpline. Was that sufficient for your members?

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

Can we just get the questions and then we will have the answers?

Kelly Tolhurst (Conservative, Rochester and Strood)

Mr Smith, you mentioned earlier businesses or associations that are part of your organisation, and you said that landlords who wilfully engage in this sort of activity will fall under the radar. Do you agree that the tougher penalties in the Bill target those very people?

Simon Hoare (Conservative, North Dorset)

I wondered whether Mr Smith wanted to reflect on his comment that there were not many students in Dudley. That will come as a shock to Dudley College, which has worked closely with the University of Wolverhampton since 1999, offering, among other courses, a PGCE and a Certificate in Education post compulsory education, and has six campuses. That suggests to me that there are quite a lot of students in Dudley.

Simon Hoare (Conservative, North Dorset)

So the corollary is that the baseline with the data that the evaluation mentioned is possibly a little more bona fide than you first indicated.

Albert Owen (Labour, Ynys Môn)

That brings us to the end of the time allocated for the Committee to ask questions in this session. On behalf of the Committee, I thank the witnesses for their evidence. Again, if there is anything they feel they need to add to the answers they have given, please write to the Committee Clerks.

The rest of the debate is in Hansard.