Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL]

My Lords, information is obviously an essential tool in support of law enforcement and national security and is key to our ability to secure the border effectively. That is why Part 1 establishes a comprehensive framework covering the use and disclosure of customs information, including personal customs information. I understand that the amendment is meant to probe e-Borders, rather than the Bill itself. We are exploiting modern technology such as e-Borders to make our border even more secure and to target terrorist suspects, known criminals and would-be illegal immigrants before they can do harm, so as to protect the public. To do that, we need to monitor all cross-border travel. That does not mean that we are interested in where law-abiding members of the public go on their holidays, but it is a sad fact that terrorists and criminals make use of the latest technology and we would therefore be negligent if we did not harness the same technology to protect our border. An increased use of technology enables us to target our resources where risks have been identified and facilitate travel where they have not. We must make clear that e-Borders information is information that people give to carriers. We will not ask people for it—the carriers have a liability to provide it. The carriers can only provide the data that they have received from passengers: there is no question of passengers having to complete a form or questionnaire when they travel. The data are provided electronically by the carrier—that is what some of the debate on e-Borders is about. It is not absolutely clear how that will be done, but it will probably be via some form of data transfer. This is travel document information, known as the "passenger name record". When details crop up of high-risk movements and people whom we have background data on, we will be able to find out more about those people. E-Borders was successfully trialled through a prototype, Project Semaphore. It did not stop people making short-notice journeys, or several journeys in a row. It was the subject of extensive consultation with the travel industry. The then Prime Minister announced plans for an e-Borders system in September 2004. Up until February 2009, there were 82 million passenger movements, which generated 35,000 alerts. More than 3,000 arrests were made for crimes including murder, rape and assault. The arrests also included a number of counterterrorist interventions. Significant numbers of passengers were properly refused leave to enter the UK on the basis of this information. The e-Borders programme has been subject to appropriate scrutiny both by Parliament and the Information Commissioner’s Office, with which we engage regularly. The code of practice on data-sharing was drawn up in consultation with the Information Commissioner’s Office and is available in the Commons Library. We are due to publish a review of that code shortly. Clause 14 sets out the purposes for which customs information may be used and disclosed, and by whom. Clause 15 imposes statutory duties of confidentiality in respect of personal customs information. Clause 16 sets out the limited and strictly prescribed exceptions to those duties. The framework ensures that the operational needs of the border force to protect the public from harm are balanced against the right protections for personal customs information. I do not consider that a further restriction, such as that proposed in this amendment, is necessary or appropriate. I know that the noble Baroness does not intend to impose in this Bill a sweeping ban on the use of information, but instead seeks to identify what information is in the e-Borders programme. Of course there is no restriction on the right of UK citizens to enter or leave the United Kingdom for legitimate purposes. The noble Lord, Lord Puttnam, raised an issue that I know is being dealt with. He has talked at length with the deputy chief executive of the border force. I apologise for the confusion and problems that he has confronted and assure him that there is no intention that anyone other than properly designated border force officials will be responsible for entry to, or departure from, this country. I will write to him with a fuller reply on that point. It is important to knock into touch the claim that we will all have to fill out long forms detailing where we are going and where we will be going next. The information is just the data that the airline holds when one applies for a ticket. That airline information has already given us an amazing ability to home in on people who are a danger to this country. People who are travelling normally will not notice anything different. Sometimes scare stories are put out that are not real. Information is fundamental to the delivery of many modern services. There have been some bad hiccups over data protection and IT systems, not just for the Government, but also in the private sector. However, to try to turn back the clock 30 years and pretend that we do not have to use information to protect and administer ourselves is mad. E-Borders will fulfil a very important role. It will not impinge on the privacy of individuals, or their ability to live their lives with no interference from the state. However, it will enable us to get those who intend to do us harm, criminals and those who have no right to come into this great country of ours. On that basis, I call on the noble Baroness to withdraw her amendment.