My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, and the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of London for having tabled their Amendments 124A and 140, and for again giving the Committee a chance to discuss this important topic. Noble Lords will recall that this issue was debated at some length during the passage of the Domestic Abuse Bill, as referenced by the right reverend Prelate.
Indeed, Section 81 of what is now the Domestic Abuse Act requires the Home Secretary to review the processing of domestic abuse data carried out by certain public authorities for immigration purposes, to prepare and publish a report setting out the findings of that review and to lay a copy of that report before Parliament. We conducted that review last year and the report was published on 15 December. The review examined the legal framework and policy considerations concerning the data-sharing arrangements between the Home Office and police in respect of migrant victims and witnesses of crime with insecure immigration status, as well as the wider considerations of public policy relating to policing and crime, including domestic abuse. During the review we engaged extensively with the police, the domestic abuse and modern slavery sector, the domestic abuse commissioner and the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner.
Taking all that into account, and all the evidence provided, the Home Office review recommended establishing an Immigration Enforcement migrant victims protocol, which has been referred to in this debate, to give greater transparency to migrant victims and their dependants on how their data will be shared. The protocol will set out that no immigration enforcement action should be taken against that victim while investigation and prosecution proceedings are ongoing and the victim is receiving support and advice to make an application to regularise their stay. It will set out, in line with the code of practice for victims’ rights, what information and signposting could be offered to migrant victims to help them regularise their stay and thereby reduce the threat of them being subjected to coercion and control.
Midnight
It is worth expanding on this a little. It is in the public interest that individuals without lawful status are brought into the immigration system to enable their status to be resolved, but it may also protect the public, including vulnerable migrants, from individuals who are considered a harm to their local communities. I wish to emphasise that the immediate priority is always the welfare of the individual and to ensure that all vulnerable migrants receive the support and assistance they need, regardless of their immigration status.
In addition to the protocol, which will be implemented by the end of August 2022, we are considering ways in which we can enhance our support for migrant victims of domestic abuse and encourage reporting of crime to the police. This includes strengthening Immigration Enforcement’s vulnerability strategy so that caseworkers can provide the most effective response, as well as engaging with migrant communities to build confidence and trust.
In answer to the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of London, the proposals to cease or delay data sharing between the Home Office and other authorities on migrant victims and witnesses of crime with irregular immigration status would be harmful to both the safeguarding of those victims and witnesses and to the public interest. Neither would they provide a clear commitment to no enforcement action being taken while migrant victims address immediate needs for information required to access services, support and advice, which would result in delays, prolonging uncertainty for victims. The introduction of Immigration Enforcement’s migrant victims protocol provides that commitment for relief from immigration enforcement action.
Data sharing is already strictly regulated, and the Home Office complies fully with the requirements of the law. The immigration exemption applies only when there would be a prejudice to effective immigration control. It is not applicable and therefore would not be used in the scenarios referenced in this amendment and, as such, it is not possible to disapply it. As outlined to this House in other debates, whenever the Home Office uses the immigration exemption it must always be in a targeted, limited way that is proportionate, necessary and lawful. The immigration exemption in the Data Protection Act 2018 enables the Home Office to redact certain information related to any ongoing operational activity and related matters or any security checks that may have been carried out where to release it would be likely to prejudice the maintenance of effective immigration control.
Data is shared where it is proportionate and in the public interest. It allows the Home Office to maintain effective immigration control by helping to identify those who are present in the United Kingdom without valid leave, to prevent abuse of our immigration controls and to identify people at risk. The amendment could therefore have the unintended consequence of making it more likely that victims of trafficking and exploitation are not identified and that those who exploit them will therefore not be brought to justice.
Accurate and current information about a migrant victim or witness enables the Home Office to work with authorities to identify vulnerabilities and safeguarding
needs and to assess whether the migrant may be eligible to qualify for the leave under the Immigration Rules or bespoke routes. Securing immigration status may allow eligible migrants access to a range of benefits, including legal advice and health and housing provisions. There is often an immediate need for this to safeguard victims.
In addition, Section 82 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 confers a power on the Secretary of State to issue a code of practice relating to the processing of domestic abuse data for immigration control purposes by specified public authorities. The Home Office and the National Police Chiefs’ Council are working together to develop the code of practice alongside the Immigration Enforcement migrant victims protocol. I appreciate the case that the right reverend Prelate made, and her concerns, but the Government are of the view—