Nationality and Borders Bill
Public Bill Committee, 23 September 2021.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
We will now hear from Rossella Pagliuchi-Lor, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees representative to the UK, and Elizabeth Ruddick, senior legal associate, both representing UNHCR UK. We have until 2.30 pm for this session. Will you please both introduce yourselves for the record?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Welcome, Elizabeth and Rossella. I will ask you a few questions, primarily about the legality of the Bill in relation to international law. In your opinion, do various clauses in the Bill comply with international lawQ137 ?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q Just to paraphrase, you think that the Bill will not achieve its objectives because it will mean that people stay here longer, and because it does not comply with international law as you see it?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q Just to follow up about other countries that neighbour areas where there are war zones and conflicts, can you talk about an example of one of the countries that border Syria, such as Jordan or Turkey?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q As you have indicated, the Bill seeks to punish people on how they arrive in the UK, by giving them less temporary protection. Are you aware of any other countries that do that apart from Australia? We heard this morning from the high commissioner for Australia.
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q The vulnerable persons resettlement scheme closed. Do you think that the closure of schemes like that has an impact on the increased numbers of people seeking asylum in places like the UK?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
I know other colleagues wish to come in, so I will leave my questioning there. Thank you very much.
Robert Goodwill (Conservative, Scarborough and Whitby)
When I visited the refugee camps in Jordan in 2017, I was greatly impressed by the work of the UNHCR selecting the most vulnerable people to bring them under the 20,000 scheme that David Cameron had announced. Could I ask whether you think the best way to select those who are the most needy is by using organisations like the UNHCR, or whether the economic test of who can afford to pay a people smuggler is a better way of going forward? At the moment, we seem to be swamped by people who use people smugglers rather than the legitimate, legal routes using the amazing services of the UNHCRQ .
Robert Goodwill (Conservative, Scarborough and Whitby)
Q That is certainly what I heard from the Nigerian Minister of Interior, who said that the most vulnerable people in the areas Boko Haram controlled had no chance, no way to afford paying people smugglers. It was middle-class people—by Nigerian standards—who could afford to send, say, son No. 2 on that hazardous journey.
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Thank you very much for your time today. I have one quick question on that: if a person is middle class in the country they live in, can they still be a refugee, still be in danger and still have protection needsQ ?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q Thank you. If the Bill is enacted, anyone acting with purely humanitarian motives could be criminalised just for facilitating the arrival of a person who does not have entry clearance for the UK. They could face a long time in prison. The Canadian Supreme Court found that similar provisions in Canada violated article 31 of the refugee convention. Can you tell me more about that?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q Do you know anything about what happened in Canada?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q It is important for the Government to hear that. They will face the same possible actions if they go ahead with this.
My other question involves the raging debates we have here all the time, which has come down to, “Yes, it does”, or, “No, it doesn’t”. People who are refugees seeking protection do not have to seek protection in the first country that they come to. We say that all the time, but we have debates with our colleagues who say, “Yes, they do. If they don’t, they are not refugees.” You say, “No, they don’t.” Will you explain that more?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
That really does help. I have one more brief question. Would you say that you are an authority on the refugee convention?
Duncan Baker (Conservative, North Norfolk)
When you spoke first, you said that the Bill would not carry out its intentions. To pick up on that, many parts of the Bill have similarities to the Australian model, which was implemented in 2014. As we know, that was very successful —no migrants were crossing after about nine months of that policy coming in. You said that there were differences from the situation that arose in Australia. I get that, there are differences between them and us, but there are also a great deal of similarities. In your eyes, what are the differences that would make this legislation so unsuccessful?
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
I am sorry to interrupt when you are giving such good testimony, but quite a few people want to ask questions and I would like to get them in if I could. We will take Jonathan Gullis, then Paul Blomfield, and then the Minister. Apologies.
Jonathan Gullis (Conservative, Stoke-on-Trent North)
I will keep it brief. Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and Talke residents, in the overwhelming majorityQ —
Jonathan Gullis (Conservative, Stoke-on-Trent North)
In the constituency I serve, the residents are livid with the situation in the English Channel. We are more than happy to do our fair share on a global perspective—we have seen that with Afghanistan and Syria—but illegal economic migrants crossing the Channel is totally unacceptable. Do you not think that having a system in place that says that if you enter this country illegally, that will have an impact on your application, that will help to deter people and make them understand that it will harm their opportunity to get permanent residency in this country?
Jonathan Gullis (Conservative, Stoke-on-Trent North)
We know—
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Sorry, Jonathan; can I just bring in Paul Blomfield? Paul, I am then going to have to interrupt you to get the Minister in.
Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)
Of course, Chair, I will be very quick. You mentioned that in your view the Bill will be counterproductive to its own objectives. I think I heard you right in saying that it would hamper returns. Could you develop that pointQ ?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q Clearly, one of the fundamental cornerstones of the policy is prioritising safe and legal routes, and I am sure that you would strongly support that. Presumably you also think it is right to try to deter and dissuade people from making those very dangerous crossings across the channel, which pose a grave risk to life. What do you suggest, if not the approach we are suggesting?
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Order. I am sorry, but that brings us to the end of the time allotted for the Committee to ask questions. On behalf of the Committee, I thank our witnesses for their evidence.
Examination of Witnesses
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
We will now hear from Siobhán Mullally, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Trafficking in Persons, and Dame Sara Thornton, the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner. We have until 3.15 pm, so slightly longer than the last session. Would the witnesses please introduce themselves for the record?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Thank you to both of our witnesses. On part 4 of the Bill, on modern slavery, I think we can all agree that securing prosecutions against the perpetrators of trafficking and modern slavery has to be a priority. With that in mind, do you think that the Bill will improve our ability to secure prosecutionsQ ?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q Thank you. Before I bring in Ms Mullally, with your concerns around clause 51 in particular, do you think it is incompatible with some of the protections in section 45 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q Thank you. Ms Mullally, do you think the Bill will help us secure prosecutions?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q That is incredibly helpful. On the point about children entering the NRM, Dame Sara, I know that in your written correspondence with the Home Secretary, you have identified concerns about a lack of detail and provision for children that is cause for concern with this piece of legislation? Given that last year 47% of referrals to the NRM were from those exploited as children, what sorts of provisions would you expect to see in this legislation to protect children?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q Thank you very much. Ms Mullally, I ask you the same question about what specific protections for children you would expect to see in this legislation?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Thank you very much, I will leave it there, unless there is time at the end.
Paul Blomfield (Labour, Sheffield Central)
Q I wondered if I could follow up on clause 48—a clause you did not mention—and the proposals in the Bill that would, effectively, increase the threshold for initial identification for a reasonable grounds decision through the national referral mechanism. Do you think the threshold is currently set too low? Are there risks associated with setting it higher in the way the Bill does?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
I thank the witnesses for their evidence so far. If I may start with Dame Sara, in answer to Holly Lynch’s questions earlier about clause 51 you expressed concern about the range of offences that might end up excluding people from access to the NRM. Are there concerns that some of the offences created by the Bill might also have that effectQ ?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q Something to be aware of, then. On disclosure, you have both expressed concern about the traffic information notices, particularly in relation to children. More generally, how awkward is it to have that sort of system and deadline in place when you are talking about victims of trafficking and their ability to disclose information about their experiences in a timely manner?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q Dame Sara, have you anything to add?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q Thank you. In your correspondence with the Home Secretary you query the idea behind the Bill that deterrence is an effective strategy. You also express concern that differential treatment of refugees based on the nature of their arrival may serve only to exacerbate vulnerability. Can you say a little about those two points?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q A final question: what are your thoughts and views on the proposals in the Bill to reduce the recovery period?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q Thank you. To push you a little, imagine that we lived in a country where things moved a bit more efficiently, there was not a 400-odd day wait and, generally speaking, these decisions were made timeously. Would you have concerns if the recovery period had been reduced from 45 days to 30 days, if that was the reality?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
One more question, Ms McDonagh?
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
I have not seen anybody indicate, so yes.
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q Dame Sara, another thing that you mentioned is the consultation process. You had some concern that there had not been enough involvement with survivors or people with lived experience of trafficking. Can you say a bit more about that?
Neil Coyle (Labour, Bermondsey and Old Southwark)
DameQ Sara, you just mentioned the 10 pilots that the Home Office is undertaking on local safeguarding boards and you said that you would not want to see good practice that is being developed there being undermined by this Bill. Can you please be more specific and say what the Bill could do to undermine other Home Office work—important work?
Neil Coyle (Labour, Bermondsey and Old Southwark)
Q Thank you. You mentioned some exemptions in the more recent equality impact assessment that you would like to see for children. What are those specific exemptions that you would like to see in the Bill?
Neil Coyle (Labour, Bermondsey and Old Southwark)
Q Ms Mullally, you also mentioned some specific cases where you fear this Bill could contradict existing case precedent—you mentioned a Greek case and a Croatian case. If it has not already been supplied, would you please put in writing to the Committee the detail of those cases?
Neil Coyle (Labour, Bermondsey and Old Southwark)
Q In your opinion, are there clauses in the Bill that need to be completely removed for it to be compliant, or are you able to suggest amendments or tweaks that could make it in some way more amenable?
Neil Coyle (Labour, Bermondsey and Old Southwark)
That is very clear and helpful. Thank you.
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q It has been put to me by a police officer working on the frontline in this area that, because we have British citizens and migrants entering the NRM, if somebody goes missing from it, it is dealt with primarily in terms of immigration compliance rather than safeguarding concerns. Do you think that is a fair assessment? What are your thoughts on that? Dame Sara, first.
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Thank you. Ms Mullally?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q Just a few questions for Dame Sara, if I may. As you will know, we are bringing in more staff as decision makers, and we have brought in the new modern slavery victim care contract. For the benefit of the Committee, can you describe what the principal drivers of the pressure on the national referral mechanism are, from your perspective?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q Are there challenges around bringing clarity to victims about precisely what their rights are and around how the processes themselves work? Is there more that needs to be done to boost awareness in that area? Does that act as a barrier?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q Obviously, the Government are very clear that we want to send an unequivocal message to those responsible for people smuggling that what they do simply will not be tolerated and that the punishment for that will be harsh. We are proposing through the Bill to introduce life sentences for people smugglers. Is that something that you welcome, and what would you observe about that and the difference that it might make?
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
I see no further questioners. I thank the witnesses for their evidence. We will move on to the next panel.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Welcome, everybody. We will now hear from Lisa Doyle, executive director of advocacy and engagement at the Refugee Council and Mariam Kemple-Hardy, head of campaigns at Refugee Action, both of whom are appearing in person. We will also hear from Priscilla Dudhia, advocacy co-ordinator at Women for Refugee Women, and Alphonsine Kabagabo, director of Women for Refugee Women, who are both joining us remotely via Zoom. Given that this panel is split between physical and video link contributions, it is especially important that Members direct their questions at specific witnesses to avoid confusion. We have until 4 pm for this session. Please could the witnesses introduce themselves for the record? Can we start with the witnesses who are present in the room?
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Welcome to all our witnesses. Who would like to start?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q The purpose of the Bill is to increase fairness, better protect people seeking asylum, deter illegal entry to the UK, break the business of human trafficking and remove more easily those who have no right to be in the UK. In your opinion, does the Bill achieve those aims? Can I start off with Lisa?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q Picking up on what Alphonsine mentioned about late provision of evidence and disclosing evidence, which is mentioned in clause 23, and about people being penalised for not disclosing evidence that they may not be willing to share straight away, what are your thoughts on that? Also, what are your thoughts on the inadmissibility clause and about clause 10, the two-tier clause about treating people differently based on how they arrive?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q I ask the same question to Alphonsine and Priscilla.
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q Thank you. I have one more question on something that Priscilla touched on, about how the Bill will increase the need for asylum accommodation. We have heard about the issues at Napier Barracks. People from Afghanistan are being kept in hotels at the moment. What are your thoughts on the clauses to do with accommodation and their impact? I will ask Lisa first.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
I am terribly sorry to our witnesses on Zoom, but I would like to get some more questions in, if that is okay. I call Jonathan Gullis.
Jonathan Gullis (Conservative, Stoke-on-Trent North)
Q We have heard about safe routes to safety. I am interested in knowing why the European Union is not a safe destination.
Jonathan Gullis (Conservative, Stoke-on-Trent North)
Q But he would not have that concern if he came to this country through a safe and legal route. If you enter this country illegally—via the English channel with other illegal economic migrants—that would count against your application. People in Stoke-on-Trent think it is totally fair. I do not understand why coming through safe and legal routes is a problem. People who make dangerous journeys of their own choice, rather than going through safe and legal routes, put money in the hands of criminal gangs, which inevitably leads to more criminality, whether in the UK or in mainland Europe.
Jonathan Gullis (Conservative, Stoke-on-Trent North)
Q Would you not agree, then, with His Excellency George Brandis, the Australian high commissioner, that one of the solutions is to disrupt and deter people from making that dangerous journey, so that they are not endangering their lives or those of their family members? That means regional offshore processing, pushbacks and harsher action, so that if you enter this country illegally, it will count against you when you make an asylum claim. If we do that stuff, people will not make those dangerous journeys, and that will ultimately be what saves their lives.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
I am ever so sorry, but owing to the shortness of time, rather than go to another member of the panel, I would like to get someone to ask a question. I would like to give Alphonsine and Priscilla their first go at answering. I call Robert Goodwill.
Robert Goodwill (Conservative, Scarborough and Whitby)
Q My question is directed to the ladies joining us down the line. When we worked with the French Government to clear the camps at Sangatte and brought 750 asylum seekers across, about 90% of those were men. Do you share my concerns that illegal routes of entry to the UK tend to very much favour men, whereas some of the more organised routes through the UNHCR and the resettlement programmes could ensure that women who are particularly at risk through exploitation or sexual exploitation could be prioritised or allowed to have equal opportunities? By having a situation where we have people coming illegally into the country, that tends to favour men; women are being disadvantaged.
Robert Goodwill (Conservative, Scarborough and Whitby)
Q I have a quick follow-up questions. We heard this morning from the Australian high commissioner that the people smugglers who were bringing people to Australia did not in the main have connections with organised criminals in Australia, but we know that the organised smugglers who bring people to the UK most certainly have connections with modern slavery. Vietnamese people are brought to work in nail bars. We have people in car washes, and maybe even also people in garment factories or being brought into prostitution. Do you not agree that if we could deter people from coming from the continent to the UK—where those criminal gangs need to deliver their passengers to get the payback that modern slavery will give them—we would be better encouraging people to claim asylum in France, which is a safe country and a place where they can get the support they need?
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Thank you. I would like to bring in a representative from the SNP now, because they are yet to ask any questions.
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q Thank you very much for your time today and for everything you do for some of the world’s most vulnerable people. I have a question for Lisa. You say in your written evidence that the cost of prosecuting and imprisoning those seeking asylum, if we go ahead with this Bill, could be up to £400 million a year more than under the current system. Given that in parts of the UK the prison system is already bursting at the seams, and there is an asylum decision backlog of 70,000 people living in limbo, unable to contribute to the economy, if you could spend that £400 million, how would you use it to improve the immigration system?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q Thank you very much for that. Mariam, the Australian high commissioner was here this morning—you saw that—and I was not able to ask my question, which was about resignation syndrome. You might not know much about that, but I want to talk about mental health generally. My question to him was about how offshoring impacts on everyone’s mental health, but particularly on children who suffer from resignation syndrome. I just want to get this on the record, because these children were in a catatonic state. Some of them had not moved for four months, and still the Australian Government were saying, “No, we can’t help.” Do you know anything about that? If not, you talked about people who attempted to take their own lives in the barracks, so perhaps you could say something about the impact on mental health of living in that type of accommodation.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
I am sorry to intervene. Paul Howell.
Paul Howell (Conservative, Sedgefield)
Mariam, you were talking about the information that refugees had in terms of the decisions they were making and the outcomes they were expecting. I want to go back to something we heard in discussions yesterday. I have never been in your world, and I really respect the work that you do in this space, but we seem to be getting conflicting information. If the legislation is to make a difference, it has to make more diversions into what actions the refugees take in coming here. On the one hand, you talk about push being what is driving them, not pull, but on the other hand, we hear people talking about how, because of this rule or part of the legislation, it stops them coming or makes them concerned about coming.Q
How can they be concerned? How do they get that information? I do not see that the information that they are getting about the Bill will be a motivator, because it all seems to be about push—about getting away from where you are—as opposed to any thoughts even about what they will find when they get here. I cannot square that circle—what knowledge refugees actually have about our place when they set off, other than, “It’s a nice place to go to.”
Paul Howell (Conservative, Sedgefield)
I get that, but my concern is how to get the message back around to the beginning. The refugees who get here and can therefore get messages back to people where they came from—is that not the most efficient method of getting anything true back to those people, as opposed to the noise they get from people smugglers and so on? That message should be that the best way to come is the safe route. If they come across the channel they will run into all sorts of problems, and therefore we want to motivate them to go the safe way, rather than any other way.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
I am sorry, but I want to get another question in. Neil, do you want to ask your question? That will probably be the last one—both questions can be answered together.
Neil Coyle (Labour, Bermondsey and Old Southwark)
Q I think Mariam mentioned that there is a vanishingly small number of safe routes, which creates the incentive to take dangerous routes into the UK. Could any of the witnesses say which safer routes they would like to see extended, and how those could be added to the Bill?
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
We have a couple of minutes. Do any other witnesses want to say something briefly?
Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)
I have a quick question on what you just said. For absolute clarity, are you saying that we should not be closing down routes where people are drowning and dying to get hereQ ?
Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)
Q But you said that we should not be closing those routes down.
Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)
Q So for absolute clarity, you would rather see people drown—
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Thank you. I am afraid that brings us to the end of the time allotted for the Committee to ask questions. I thank our witnesses on behalf of the Committee for their evidence.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Q We will hear from all the next panellists remotely. They are Patricia Durr, chief executive of Every Child Protected Against Trafficking UK, Patricia Cabral, legal policy officer at the European Network on Statelessness, and Adrian Berry from the Immigration Law Practitioners Association. We have until 5 pm for this session. Could the witnesses please introduce themselves for the record?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q I thank our witnesses for joining us this afternoon. To ECPAT first, you said in your written evidence that, although the Government’s stated intention is to improve support for child victims of trafficking, that is incompatible with their plans in the Bill. Can you explain that?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q Thank you very much; that is incredibly helpful. Looking at some of the statistics for last year for the national referral mechanism, the data suggests there was an increase of nearly 10% in children being identified as potential victims of trafficking. Do you have a sense of what some of the reasons might be for that increase in children being referred?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q With that in mind, looking at clause 51 specifically and given the prevalence, as you have just said, of children in the NRM who have been subject to child criminal exploitation, to what extent are you concerned that the measures in clause 51 will not only make it harder for children to come forward to seek support having been exploited, but make it harder to secure prosecutions against those who have been exploiting them?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q In the light of what you have just said, do you have concerns that clause 51 may not be compatible with section 45 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 in particular?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q Thank you very much. I have just one more question for Adrian, if I may, Ms McDonagh. Turning to access to legal advice, particularly in relation to the NRM, could I get your thoughts on whether the system would be improved if people received legal advice upon entering the NRM, and whether that is appropriate?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q We are still waiting to probe some of the information around these trafficking information notices, perhaps in Committee, but do you have a sense that it would be appropriate to receive legal aid and legal advice at the point at which you receive a trafficking information notice, as well?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q I will address this question to Patricia Cabral and the European Network on Statelessness. Could you just explain what the implications of this Bill are for children who face statelessness, and how this might impact on them?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q Adrian Berry, you wanted to come in on that question. At the same time, can you say whether the Home Office has explained why it wants to make it more difficult for already vulnerable children not to have access to recognition of statelessness?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q On a slightly different question, perhaps one area where we can all be fairly positive is clauses 1 to 8. This is about correcting historical unfairness in the nationality system—is that right? Are we right to welcome these provisions but with the caveat that we have to see how effective the provisions become, how accessible they are, what fees are charged and so on?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Can I ask about the scope of the criminal offence created by the Bill for coming into the United Kingdom irregularly? The Government’s Q focus is on boats, but does that catch other people who arrive here and claim asylum? For example, if I arrived here on a visit visa and then sought to claim asylum, and clearly I had applied for the visit visa only for the purposes of coming to claim asylum, would that be a criminal offence? Is it clear from the Bill?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
In essence, the only part of the asylum system that would be left would be people who happened to be in this country and there was a dramatic change of circumstances in their home country—refugee sur place. It is not so much an objection to shutting down unsafe routes; it is an objection to shutting down the UK asylum system, pretty much.Q
Paul Howell (Conservative, Sedgefield)
I have a question for PatriciaQ Durr, more focused on children. One of the things we hear about is people claiming to be children when they are not, and where the boundary is in that. There are questions about what the boundary of assessment is. Do you have an opinion on that, because I do not think we have heard anything so far on that? Where do you feel that sits? Obviously, it is very important that we keep adults separate from children in any holding pattern.
Paul Howell (Conservative, Sedgefield)
I agree that it is a difficult one either way—children to adult or adult to children. It is just a question of where the boundaries sit and making sure we get those in the right place.
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q I have some questions for Adrian about enforcement and the legal parts of the Bill. I will start with clauses 23 and 24. This is about the late provision of evidence, giving weight to the late provision of evidence and then, following on from that, appeals. What are your thoughts in relation to that? You probably need to look at it in conjunction with clauses 16 to 20. Just give us your assessment of those clauses.
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q I also want to ask about the impact on appeals, because there is a limit on where you can appeal to. What do you think the impact of that will be on decision making?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q Adrian, still on the issue of telling judges and courts what to do, clauses 62 and 63 are on wasted costs orders. I just wondered what your thoughts were on those clauses.
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q Looking at the enforcement part of the Bill, I am looking at clause 41, which is about maritime enforcement and introduces new schedule 5, which relates to the Immigration Act 1971. It is to do with pushbacks and other associated measures. What is your interpretation of what this clause does and how effective it will be?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q There is a clause in the Bill that removes the words “for profit” from one of the pieces of legislation on rescuing, so that would clearly impact on anybody rescuing anybody in distress. Is that your reading of it?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q A number of clauses seek to interpret the 1951 refugee convention, particularly clauses 27 to 36. By trying to do that, does it put the UK in a better position or would that be laughed out of court, for want of a better phrase?
Bambos Charalambous (Labour, Enfield, Southgate)
Q A final question from me. Looking at the Bill as a whole, bearing in mind that it seeks to make the system fairer, to deter people from using illegal routes and to break the smuggling model, do you think that it will achieve any of those objectives?
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Thank you. I call the Minister.
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q I have a question for Mr Berry. Do you see any benefit whatsoever in streamlining the processing of applications in the way that the Bill seeks to do, and providing clarity for the claimants sooner?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q If you had the opportunity, what would you do to better shape the system to remove those with no right to be here and to deport foreign national offenders?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
To be clear, I am talking about the Bill as a whole.
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
No further questions.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Are there any other questions? Mr McDonald, I stopped you on a question. Would you like to carry on?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q Thank you, Ms McDonagh. I have just a couple more questions. Mr Charalambous was very comprehensive in his own questioning. Can I go back to the change to the standard of proof? How problematic is it having this balance of probabilities test in there alongside the refugee convention definition of a refugee, which talks of real risk?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Q Thank you. Finally, can I ask Patricia Cabral about statelessness? You have indicated what is wrong with the Bill and how it makes access to recognition of statelessness for children more difficult. What would you like to see in the Bill? Is it fair to say that the system for applying to be recognised as stateless in the United Kingdom is fairly good by international standards, but there are still hurdles and problems that need to be improved? What could be put in the Bill to improve the system for recognising statelessness in the UK?
Stuart McDonald (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Thank you very much.
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q I have a question for Every Child Protected Against Trafficking. Patricia, in your written submission you were very critical of the lack of due process. Could you take me through just how dissatisfied you were with the consultation process and why?
Holly Lynch (Labour, Halifax)
Q Based on what you have just said, this came as a bit of a surprise. Would it be fair to say that you think that part 4, on modern slavery, does not belong in a piece of legislation around borders? Perhaps it should be removed, the consultation process should be done properly, and then revised proposals around properly tackling modern slavery and trafficking, supporting victims and bringing perpetrators to justice, could come back in a way that we would all like to see?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q I have one further question. On Tuesday, one of the issues that the local government witnesses referred to as being particularly problematic was around age assessments. I would be interested to know whether any of the witnesses have come into contact with that challenge? They mentioned that sometimes those cases end up in quite long and protracted judicial review processes. I would be keen to hear any reflections that the witnesses have around the Bill’s approach to this.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Are there any further questions?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q I have a question for Patricia Durr from ECPAT. When trailing the Bill, the Home Office talked about the widespread abuse of the system by child rapists and criminals—foreign national offenders. We heard the Minister alluding to that earlier. Of course, nobody wants to have a system that is abused, but I understand that ECPAT submitted a freedom of information request on that. I wonder whether you could tell us how widespread that abuse was.
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Perhaps the Minister will get it for us for the next meeting. Thank you very much.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
If there are no further questions from Members, I thank the witnesses for their evidence. That brings us to the end of our oral evidence sessions. The Committee will meet again after the recess on Tuesday 19 October at 9.25 am to commence line-by-line consideration of the Bill.