Immigrants (Hansard, 13 February 1969)

§ 15. Sir J. Langford-Holt
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in cases where immigrants holding vouchers have been accompanied or been followed by dependants, what is the maximum number of dependants which have been admitted for one such voucher holder in each of the last three years; and what is the average number of dependants admitted for voucher holders with dependants in these years.

§ Mr. Merlyn Rees
It is not possible to answer the first part of the hon. Member's Question. But the figures suggest that about three dependants have entered for each voucher holder, their entry being spread over eight to 10 years.

§ Sir J. Langford-Holt
What does the Home Office consider to be a dependant in relation to the directness or remoteness of relationship?

§ Mr. Rees
This comes in the Regulations and in the Act. The main dependants are the wife and children under the age of 16. In certain cases on compassionate grounds children between 16 and 18 may be included, but principally children under 16 and the wife are the main dependants.

§ 28. Sir G. Nabarro
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many would-be immigrants were refused entry into the United Kingdom in 1968 and returned to the country of their origin; what was the cost to public funds of their return fares; and what estimates he has made for 1969.

§ Mr. Merlyn Rees
In 1968, 4,060 aliens and 2,570 Commonwealth citizens were refused admission to the United Kingdom. The cost of repatriation is met from public funds in only a small number of cases. In 1968 the cost was £16,500, and I expect expenditure in 1969 to be of the same order.

§ Sir G. Nabarro
Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the Home Office is now making progress with the examination of the admissibility of these people at the point of departure instead of at the point of arrival and how soon we may expect some progress in that important reversal of procedure?

§ Mr. Rees
I should point out to the hon. Gentleman that this refers to aliens as well as to Commonwealth citizens. We are looking very closely into this concerning Commonwealth citizens. But concerning aliens, visas would be involved if the hon. Gentleman's plan were taken up. Visas have been abolished in Europe by most countries for the last 20 years, and it would be regarded as a retrograde steps to reintroduce visas in a Europe which has become freer.

§ Mr. Robert Cooke
Can the hon. Gentleman tell the House how much has been paid out from public funds in the last year, say, to help immigrants already here who wish to go home?

§ Mr. Rees
That is not my responsibility. The hon. Gentleman should put down that Question to the Department of Health and Social Security.

§ 31. Mr. Fisher
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether 1552 he will seek to arrange for trained teams of officials to test the applications of immigrants in their countries of origin instead of when they arrive at ports and airports in Great Britain.

§ Mr. Callaghan
Posts overseas in the main Commonwealth centres of immigration to the United Kingdom are already staffed to assess applications for entry certificates. Every effort has been made to publicise the desirability of immigrants applying for certificates. If the hon. Member has it in mind that certificates should be made compulsory, I would refer him to what I said in the Expiring Laws Continuance debate on 13th November.

§ Mr. Fisher
Surely it would be more efficient and more humane to test these applications at source than to keep a lot of people hanging about the ports and airports of this country and perhaps having to repatriate them at more expense, and disappointment to themselves, if their applications are not successful?

§ Mr. Callaghan
On the surface that seems an attractive argument until one penetrates it further. There are many difficulties. I am not sure that it would be either to our advantage or to the advantage of those coming here. I repeat my previous suggestion that, as this is a detailed administrative matter, I should like a body, like the Select Committee which has been set up with the agreement of the House, to go into the question. I am not yet satisfied that administratively this would be an improvement. There is no issue of principle here, and if it could be proved to work I should certainly consider it.