HC Deb 15 December 1977 vol 941 cc907-8
29. Mr. Budgen

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people he estimates are eligible to apply for the amnesty for illegal immigrants announced on 29th November 1977.

Dr. Summerskill

I refer the hon. Member to the reply that my right hon. Friend gave to a Question by the hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Brotherton) on 9th December.

Mr. Budgen

Does the Minister agree that these amnesties encourage immigrants to believe that so long as they can enter this country by one means or another they are likely to be able to remain here eventually, openly and legally?

Dr. Summerskill

This is a completely ignorant question based, presumably, on ignorance of the facts. This extension of the amnesty was introduced for people who had entered by deception, as opposed to illegally, before January 1973. It does not apply to anybody else. The Immigration Act 1971, introduced by the Conservative Party, put people in jeopardy retrospectively. I am sure that nobody in the House would approve of retrospective powers in such legislation. All amnesty for everybody will finish at the end of next year, on 31st December. After that, no amnesty will apply at all.

Mr. Bidwell

Does my hon. Friend agree that the amnesty has been magnified out of all proportion to the numbers that it can possibly affect, and simply seeks to put right what was expected to be put right way back in 1973 by her right hon. Friend's predecessor? Does she agree also that the villains of the piece, to a great extent, have been employers, especially in the Midlands, who support the hon. Member who brings this matter before us?

Dr. Summerskill

My hon. Friend's question is an informed question, based on knowledge of the facts. This decision was made as a result of recent court judgments, and that is why my right hon. Friend has been honourable in carrying it out.

Mr. Whitelaw

Does the hon. Lady appreciate that her reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Budgen) is extremely unreasonable, in that he asked a perfectly sensible and proper question? Does she appreciate that there is a very narrow line—which, apparently, she draws but few others do—between deception and illegal entry, which many people find difficult to understand? If it be deception or illegal entry, will she not be the first to agree that an amnesty of this sort inevitably encourages the belief by people that if, in the future, they can get into this country by any means, they will be allowed to stay? That is very damaging indeed to those who have come in legally and who will have much resentment stirred up against them by this action.

Dr. Summerskill

I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman lends weight to his argument by decibels. This measure follows court judgments, and I am sure that the whole House would wish to put right the irregularities of the Opposition's own Act. No new distinction is being drawn between the illegal immigrant who came in by deception and the illegal immigrant who came in clandestinely. That is the whole point of this measure. The amnesty provision will apply to both those groups until the end of next year.

Mr. Speaker

I shall allow three minutes after half-past three for Prime Minister's Questions.

Forward to