Work Permits (Hansard, 31 July 1984)

§ 8. Mr. Dickens
asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he has yet received the report of the investigation to establish whether further procedural safeguards are needed in the issue of work permits; and if he will make a statement.

§ Mr. Alan Clark
The report concludes that there is no evidence that an official in my Department approved the issue of a work permit knowing the application to be fraudulent. The report indicates that there were certain procedural and management shortcomings which had contributed to the failure to prevent the approval of fraudulent applications. The investigators consider that measures already taken have greatly reduced the scope for abuse of the system. They have made additional recommendations designed to make the system even more secure.
My right hon. Friend and I will be giving urgent consideration to ensure that all possible steps will have been taken to protect the system from abuse.

§ Mr. Dickens
How can my hon. Friend expect the House to see a web of intrigue, corruption and, of course, vast fortunes go by default? Is it not a fact that the shallow police inquiry which led the Director of Public Prosecutions to say that he would not prosecute has all the hallmarks of the involvement of the police and, indeed, of my hon. Friend's Department? If a case had come to court, would not a few names have been revealed which would not otherwise have been revealed? My information—which is contrary to my hon. Friend's—is that there is intrigue. Is my hon. Friend aware that Reuben Davis was charging £5,000 to £8,000 a time for work permits issued via his Department and that he has now fled the country? Will my hon. Friend have the courage to call in another police force and let more senior officers investigate the case so that the miserable man, who has been moved to other duties, and others within his Department, do not go unrevealed?

§ Mr. Clark
Matters relating to police investigations are for my right hon. Friend.
As my hon. Friend knows, the Director of Public Prosecutions decided that there was insufficient evidence to instigate a prosecution. It would clearly be inappropriate in those circumstances for my Department to refer the papers back to him again. The internal investigations looked very carefully at all 34 cases, concluded that two individuals were principally associated with the issue of permits and is considering what disciplinary action should be taken.
I entirely repudiate the allegation of a web of intrigue. Not only the police proceedings, but an exhaustive internal investigation, found nothing to substantiate it.