Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill

My Lords, I am grateful to noble Lords for raising the issues. I could not agree more about the principle of having high standards. That includes, as the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, said, making sure that people are competent and understanding about dealing with children. The noble Earl and I discussed that point earlier today: they are potentially the most vulnerable children. I turn to the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Hylton, about an earlier amendment. I read his mind sufficiently to have obtained the answer but I did not read it out, which was a fundamental flaw in what happened. As he said, it was about ministers of religion in tier two being required to show evidence of English language skills. They will have to speak an appropriate level of English. That is a requirement. I apologise; but at least I got 50 per cent of the way there, if not the whole way. I do not accept Amendment No. 8 because it is not necessary. We have already said that the Secretary of State has to consider each individual’s level of training and suitability before issuing authorisation. The certification in a sense does not add anything to the process but I take what is underneath the amendment to be the opportunity to talk again about some of the principles within the legislation. We have to begin from an understanding that we are not delegating responsibility for these activities and the proposals will ensure that the borders receive additional resources. The operation of the UK border remains in the hands of the UK immigration authority. Noble Lords will recall that we spent some time on Report and particularly in Committee talking about the fact that it is possible to consider certain jobs to be carried out by people outside the Immigration Service and the type of expertise that will be necessary. That led us in a sense to being sure that we had the right level of expertise within the contract being given out by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State and ensuring that we do not hand over responsibility to private contractors. We retain responsibility and people are properly trained and understand the functions and roles with which they will be concerned. That is a fundamental part of what is being considered here. The noble Lord, Lord Hylton, raised issues about language, which I will address before I come to talk about children. If the person detained does not speak English, they will be transferred to the offices of the UK Immigration Service, where there are facilities for the language line—a 24-hour translation and interpreting service. So their needs will be met in that way. Equally, a contractor who is brought in must be able to speak sufficient English to be able to converse with the officers of the UK Immigration Service, under whose supervision they will operate, and to be able to carry out their functions properly. It is inherent in the requirement that you have to be fit and proper for the purpose. We talked in Grand Committee about the strict safeguards that will apply to the recruitment and the work of the contractors. These include security checks, which will be undertaken in both the UK and France. The training will include cultural awareness, race relations, the legal framework, interpersonal skills and care for vulnerable detainees, including—perhaps I would say especially—unaccompanied minors. The French police will screen all contractors who work on the post, and will check criminal records, including those for sex offences. As noble Lords know, no freight searching is envisaged anywhere else other than at Calais port. There is no freight at the Gare du Midi, so that is not relevant in this context. The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, asked about the inspection carried out by the Chief Inspector of Prisons and the statutory right to inspect places of detention. Of course there is a statutory right there. The Children’s Commissioner does not have a statutory right, but would be welcomed. In fact, an invitation has already been issued to him. He has not, to my knowledge, been to Calais. I will check that; I am pretty certain that he has not been, but he is invited to visit to have a look at what is going on there. I also indicated on Report to the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, that my honourable friend Tony McNulty would meet the Children’s Commissioner to discuss these clauses, and he has done so. The Children’s Commissioner wanted further information, which has been sent to him. We have also invited him to view the Immigration Service, as I said, and to look at the care of unaccompanied children at Heathrow Airport, which may be an area of particular interest. As the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, said, I told him in a letter that we will not award any contract to private contractors until the Bill is ratified, but we want to identify a contractor through an open and fair competition that will require any potential bidder to submit references and their work-related history for verification. We further propose that a contract will be awarded on the same basis as that issued to detention custody officers. Firms will have to operate in accordance with their operational policy standard and procedures that are agreed with the IND’s detention services department. I note what the noble Lord said about what I said about commercial confidentiality. It is very common practice to retain commercially sensitive information, and we will of course put all that we can into the public domain. The noble Lord will probably know that I have responsibility for the Freedom of Information Act in my department, so I am very familiar with Section 2 and some of the issues that it raises, as well as with Richard Thomas, who does a sterling job as the Information Commissioner. I am very happy to talk further to the noble Lord about this, but I am clear that commercial confidentiality is always relevant. The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, is right that that lends credence to his view that it should be kept in the public sphere, but we are trying to be as open and transparent about the work that the contractors will be doing. We are trying not to usurp the work of the Immigration Service or to de-professionalise the work of the professionals, but to recognise the particular functions that can be undertaken within a very clear set of guidelines and to a clear contract. Expectations will be high, and I think that we can reassure the noble Lord that there will be absolute clarity about the vetting of each individual. We will continue to talk about that because of my particular interest in freedom of information. I take what my noble friend Lady Turner said about the Joint Committee on Human Rights. There is no desire, as I have said, to have anything other than a very professional service. I believe that by bringing in contractors to carry out particular functions, we can professionalise the service even more by allowing those who need to concentrate on particular issues and particular aspects of the work to do so more effectively. I want to devote a little time to talking about children, a subject which the noble Earl and I have returned to over the years, often late at night; indeed, we will return to it later in our consideration of the Bill. I have been very grateful for the noble Earl’s time. It is important to ensure that we give careful consideration to issues involving children. As I said to the noble Earl, the Immigration and Nationality Department has the Children’s Champion, which is new. We will ensure that the contractors’ training is appropriate and that children who need support from social services get it as quickly as possible. These children could be very vulnerable. If they are unaccompanied, they may even try to run away, and we will ensure that people know how to handle them properly, that we lessen their fears, and that they get the proper support as quickly as possible. We will involve the Children’s Commissioner, as we have sought to do already, but, as the noble Earl and I discussed a few hours ago, I am conscious, as he pointed out to me, that the Children’s Commissioner has a huge amount to do, so we will do this sensitively and in collaboration with him so that he feels he has the right level of information and involvement. I make a commitment that I will keep the noble Earl in touch with those issues and that we will consider any questions that need to be further addressed. I absolutely commit that the Government are very alive to the sensitivities, especially around children, that have been raised. We want to make sure that this contract is awarded properly; that there is transparency to ensure that that is the case; and that we are very sensitive to ensuring that this job is done well by contractors, thus enabling the professionalism of the Immigration Service to continue within and under their control. I hope that that will enable the noble Lord to withdraw his amendment.