HC Deb 18 July 1974 vol 877 cc644-6
10. Mr. Brittan

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action he proposes to take or has taken in respect of illegal immigrants who have applied for indefinite leave to remain in this country as a result of his statement in the House of 11th April 1974 and have been found ineligible under the terms of the statement.

Mr. Roy Jenkins

As I said in reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Stanbrook) on 20th June, where a person applies under the terms of the announcement which I made on 11th April and is found to be ineligible to benefit, his case is considered in the light of all the relevant circumstances. It is not possible to generalise about the way in which such applications are dealt with, but each case is very carefully considered on its individual merits.

Mr. Brittan

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that it appears from that statement that some at least of those who apply and are found ineligible are deported? Does he not feel that in respect of those people the amnesty has proved to be not an act of mercy but a trap?

Mr. Jenkins

This is a new approach to it. Certain difficulties arise here but the law has to be applied, though we endeavour to do so with humanity where there is a genuine misunderstanding. What is manifestly the case is that the figures which were put forward—mainly from the Opposition benches and from outside the House—about the numbers involved have proved to be grossly exaggerated. In fact, 61 have been given permission to stay and 82 have been found to be ineligible.

Mr. Whitehead

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are serious anomalies, such as the case of my constituent, Mr. Harjail Singh Bains, about whom I am in correspondence with the Minister of State? People who have been in this country for six, seven and eight years and who thought that they were eligible for the amnesty find that they are not. Is there not a strong case for a compassionate response and for my right hon. Friend to vary deportation orders?

Mr. Jenkins

That is why I say that each case is considered carefully on its merits. That is not a form of words; it is the reality of the position. We consider cases in that way. The amnesty was intended to apply to those who had been caught by the retrospective aspects of the 1971 Act, and it does not apply more widely, for example, to seamen deserters and overstayers. But where these came to light and there is genuine misunderstanding, we try to apply a mixture of sense and humanity.

Mr. Lane

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what further action this Government have taken on the lines that the previous administration were developing to counter current and future illegal immigration, not only by means in this country but by co-operation with the authorities overseas?

Mr. Jenkins

We have followed up what the hon. Gentleman himself did during his visits there. As I indicated on 11th April and as I have repeated since, stringent measures continue to be taken, with considerable effect. It is also of great importance, if we are to counter this effectively, to have the highest degree of co-operation not only with Governments overseas but with the recently arrived immigrant community here. I think that the measures that I have taken will help to secure such co-operation.