Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL]

My Lords, I appreciate the contributions that have been made. I heard some of these points made in great detail in Committee. I will not repeat what I said then, except for two points. First, the Government are clear that they see active citizenship as a positive way for migrants to earn citizenship more quickly and to assist with their integration into British society. However, I hear a number of terms, and I heard them in Committee, such as "roped in" and "compulsory". It would not be compulsory for any migrant to participate in the active citizenship scheme. It would not be compulsory for any voluntary organisation to take part in the scheme. It would not be compulsory for any local authority. This scheme is, we hope, designed by those who know rather better than Home Office civil servants and—dare I say it?—Ministers what will work and what incentive we are seeking to create. In fact, the design group itself is voluntary. Volunteering England has asked a series of relevant questions and there are others. All the questions put by noble Lords tonight have the validity of a question to which there must be an answer. However, that answer is coming through the design group. The questions are discussed within the design group, although some of them will be external and will have to be addressed to the Home Office as the sponsoring department that wants to see this light-touch, non-bureaucratic system put in place. It is a mistake to suggest that the compulsion element is severe. It is not. If people do not want to volunteer in real life, they do not, and they will not do so in these circumstances or otherwise. However, this is about providing an incentive, which will help not only the individual but the integration of migrants into our society so that our society is at ease with itself and understands the multicultural and multiethnic backgrounds of its citizens. In Committee, several noble Lords expressed interest in the work of the design group. I believe that a document exists entitled Clearing the Fog. A further substantial document has been produced and I have arranged to have it put in the Library. However, this is not the end game by any means. The Bill will proceed through the other place, where no doubt demands will be made for updated information, and the questions which have been posed here and others will be asked and will need to be answered. However, the situation is not entirely as has been suggested tonight because in Committee I heard some noble Lords speak in support of the proposal. Indeed, some noble Lords support it tonight. They are not questioning the concept but asking practical questions about how to make it successful. Those questions deserve to be answered. It is vital that people understand how the measure will operate. That is why we have placed a further document in the Library which contains more information from the Active Citizenship Design Group on its emerging thinking. Where I cannot deal with noble Lords’ questions tonight I undertake to write to them with a more detailed response. I hope that the information we have provided goes some way to alleviate noble Lords’ concerns and shows that we are willing to share our findings as soon as they have been agreed by the design group. We want provisions that will work and be transparent. I also trust that this information demonstrates that we are developing proposals on active citizenship in the fairest and most common-sense manner. Therefore, I hope that noble Lords will not feel that they have to press their amendments. These amendments would severely restrict the ability of the Secretary of State to prescribe in regulations the conditions which will be used to determine when a person meets the active citizenship requirement. However, we are not seeking to determine that from on high. The design group is discussing the legitimate questions asked by Volunteering England and other bodies, and no doubt will in turn ask those questions of the Home Office. The noble Baroness, Lady Miller, asked about people effectively being able to self-assess their contributions. It is hard to see how a system that relies solely on evidence submitted by the applicant would operate. We need to set down certain parameters to this requirement which can be easily understood and followed by all concerned so that we produce a not overly bureaucratic system which people value and seek to take up. Noble Lords have mentioned people with disabilities or those with family responsibilities. Discretion is built in to the system to allow such circumstances to be taken into account. Noble Lords also referred to the need for a light touch to be applied. The noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, asked what CRB checks are required with regard to active citizenship. Criminal Record Bureau checks are a key concern. We acknowledge that there is clear benefit in carrying out these checks in order to protect our children and vulnerable adults from harm. Clearly, it is not an option to abandon those checks. Protection issues must take precedence in this area. CRB checks are relevant to certain existing volunteering opportunities. However, many of the individuals and organisations who take part in active citizenship will not have to get involved in CRB checks. But as part of our communications strategy we will ensure that migrants are aware of what is expected in terms of CRB checks if they choose to volunteer to work with children or vulnerable adults. I was also asked about the role of the referee. We need to prescribe who can act as referee to ensure that those verifying active citizenship can make a quick objective decision and that applicants can approach a suitable person for that reference. Our current proposal is that a referee should be defined as someone in a supervisory capacity with personal knowledge of the applicant’s active citizenship. This presents a lower risk of fraud compared to allowing simply anyone to act as a referee. The referee will have personal knowledge of the activity and, because they are in a supervisory capacity, they will be keen to protect the reputation of the organisation that they represent, as well as assisting the applicant. As I said, it is important that we have information available, that migrants can find out what the opportunities are and that those from different cultures can understand the concept of volunteering as it has grown up in the UK over the past century or more. One of the suggestions is providing an information pack for migrants on arrival in the UK and, equally, when they are seeking probationary citizenship. There may be other questions that I have not been able to answer, but I offer to pick those up and write to noble Lords. I appreciate that noble Lords are concerned that we are coming with a lot of information which, if not a fog, still has a degree of mist around it. I offer the assurance that the regulations will be subject to the affirmative procedure, so that Parliament will be able to scrutinise and agree beforehand what emerges from this very hands-on—for those involved—and, we hope, voluntary system, which will assist the migrants and the aims not only of the Government but of everyone in this House for a more integrated society which is at ease with itself.