HL Deb 25 February 1997 vol 578 cc1038-40

3.2 p.m.

Earl Russell asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether, in the light of the Court of Appeal judgment on 17th February, they will fully compensate local authorities for their expenditure in complying with their duties to asylum seekers under the National Assistance Act 1948.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Cumberlege)

My Lords, the Government intend, in the current financial year, to reimburse local authorities for reasonable expenditure incurred in accommodating asylum seekers.

Earl Russell

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for that Answer. I notice she gave no answer to the word "fully". May I take it that that was the proverbial stern reply? Does she agree that the fact that, for example, the London Borough of Westminster is supporting asylum seekers, some of whose claims go back to 1988, is no fault of that borough and that, in present circumstances, for the Government to treat their remaining friends in this way is not good justice, good administration or good politics?

Baroness Cumberlege

My Lords, in my reply I told the noble Earl that we are going to reimburse local authorities their reasonable expenditure. That is fair. With regard to the councils that are having to support asylum seekers—they are mainly London boroughs—we recognise that this is beyond the duties they expected to have to finance in this year and therefore we are supporting them financially and in other ways.

Lord Pearson of Rannoch

My Lords, will my noble friend go a little further than in her answer to the noble Earl, Lord Russell, bearing in mind that Westminster is something of a special case for compensation? Given its geographic position and other attractions, some 65 per cent. of its temporary housing stock is now taken up by asylum seekers, and that percentage is growing by the week.

Baroness Cumberlege

Yes, my Lords, we are having discussions with the London boroughs and the other local authorities concerned. In fact, Westminster is third in terms of the number of asylum seekers that it has to accommodate. We have taken into account the case that has been made to us and we believe that we are treating it fairly.

The Lord Bishop of Hereford

My Lords, the outcome of the Government's policy on asylum seekers was made abundantly clear by many people, not least by Church leaders. Does the Minister not now agree that, in view of the legal judgment that asylum seekers are not to be allowed to be destitute, in view of the indignities at present suffered by asylum seekers, in view of the unfairness created by the fact that different local authorities offer support at different levels and in view of the fundamental injustice that local authorities should be expected to solve a national problem, the right course of action is to restore entitlement to benefit for those who are applying for asylum and whose cases remain to be heard?

Baroness Cumberlege

My Lords, this Government support very strongly genuine asylum seekers—those who really come here because they are being persecuted abroad. As I am sure your Lordships are aware, if they declare their intentions at the port of entry, they get their benefits while their case is being heard. It was a great surprise to the Government that the court should rule that it was the National Assistance Act which should be used for this purpose. We have never accepted that the National Assistance Act applies to adults who are not elderly, infirm or disabled or in need of community care services. As your Lordships may be aware, we are appealing to the House of Lords for that ruling to be overturned.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham

My Lords, will the Minister kindly confirm the figures supplies to me by the Refugee Council this morning that an adult asylum seeker who applies at port of entry and gets benefit on average costs public funds £110 a week but an adult asylum seeker who applies in-country and is therefore refused benefit is now costing public funds on average £200 a week, nearly twice as much?

Baroness Cumberlege

No, my Lords, I dispute those figures. They are not correct. Our discussions with the local authorities have revealed that local authorities are spending on average £165 a week for an asylum seeker.

Lord Brabazon of Tara

My Lords, what has happened to the number of asylum seekers since the benefit rules were changed?

Baroness Cumberlege

My Lords, my noble friend asks a very pertinent question. Before benefits were withdrawn from asylum seekers we had enormous numbers coming to this country. When we passed the Act and the regulations initially, between March and August the numbers of asylum seekers fell by 35 per cent. over the same period last year. Since then it has been 50 per cent. month on month. When the benefits were restored, the number of applications from asylum seekers already in this country rose by 82 per cent. in one month alone.

Lord Dubs

My Lords, will the Minister confirm that it is the Government's intention that this support for local authorities will be through an order to be placed before Parliament shortly? Given the complexities of the issue and the heat that has been generated in discussing the subject, will the Government consider publishing that order in draft so that the details can be debated before the final Motion is presented to Parliament?

Baroness Cumberlege

My Lords, I understand that the special grant report has already been laid in another place and that it is up for debate next month.

Forward to