Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL]

My Lords, I return to a subject we have already discussed in Committee. So far as the citizenship requirements are concerned, we have been through the changes of names of the various stages—I do not think that we have achieved anything—but we now move to the requirements for citizenship. I want to concentrate on what those requirements will be under the earned citizenship proposals. It is ironic that while the Bill is so short on detail that we have been trying to instil some transparency into it, Part 2 sets out a prescriptive list of requirements for naturalisation that will have to be fulfilled. They include that people are of good character, have sufficient knowledge of the English, Welsh or Scottish Gaelic language, and know about life in the United Kingdom. Those are already requirements under previous legislation. They are not new; they have been part of the nationalisation procedure for some time. I do not complain about them, although this is the first time that we have seen provisions from other legislation in this area laid out. It is right that they should be easily identifiable. However, the one requirement that has not been part of the process so far is the need to undertake an activity. Perhaps I may declare my role as chair of the England Volunteering Development Council, which is part of Volunteering England. Two members of the staff of Volunteering England are on the design group that is formulating recommendations on how the activity requirement is to work. I want to underline once again not my objection to the notion that some sort of voluntary service could be a useful contribution to citizenship, but to its virtually compulsory nature. In Committee the noble Lord, Lord Brett, said that it is not compulsory, but if people want to expedite their citizenship application and get there on a faster track by reducing the number of years on the journey, they will feel compelled to fulfil this requirement. It is therefore essential to ensure that there is clarity about what "activity" actually means, how potential citizens are going to know what they should do, and what would qualify as voluntary work. It is also essential that they know how to access the relevant information. Many people who come to this country hail from completely different cultures with no detailed idea of what active citizenship or voluntary service actually mean. We need much greater clarity on the amount of time they need to be involved. I understand that the current suggestion is likely to be a minimum of 50 hours; that is the recommendation from the design group. But how those 50 hours are to be achieved, and over what timescale, has still not been properly identified. It could be 50 hours over six months or even six years. The information I have seen does not make it clear. Another problem is that the Independent Safeguarding Authority, which will operate from September this year, is to be the arbiter of the CRB checks. Can the Minister tell us what level of checking citizenship applicants will have to go through if they wish to work with children or older people, and how long the delay is likely to be before they could start on what will be a necessary process? The entire experience of the CRB and ISA is based on checking people who come from this country, and not on those who do not necessarily have a history over here which can be identified. It could be a long time before the checks to see whether people are suitable are ratified. It could also rule out a great deal of voluntary work if whichever of the ISA or the CRB deals with it is not able to bring those forward at some speed. It will also be a requirement that anyone doing voluntary work will have to have a referee, who will have to sign the document confirming that the applicant’s activity had been properly carried out. However, while the design group suggested that any regulation of applicants will be light touch, there are potential penalties if the referee makes any false statement. There is concern that that may deter some people from acting as referees, particularly if they are from small organisations or not absolutely certain what qualifies as a suitable activity. The referee will, as I understand it, have to come from the organisation supervising the activity; will it, then, be a requirement that that person is sufficiently senior to know all the answers about whether the activity is proper? Questions remain, therefore, about those who will find it difficult to give the time to an activity, such as mothers with young children, particularly as we have just discussed that one requirement for full citizenship is that there will be people who will have been in virtually full-time employment. Mothers with small or disabled children are going to find that difficult, and it seems hard to jeopardise their possibility of an expedited citizenship for that reason. Will there be any let-out or exceptions made for people whose position makes it completely impossible for them to do an activity but who, under any other circumstances, would want to because that activity is in the list of requirements? I beg to move.