§ 3. Ms. Clare Shortasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many visitors were refused admission in the last 12 months; and how many of these came from the New Commonwealth or Pakistan.
§ The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. David Waddington)In the 12 months ending August 1985, 17,624 people were refused leave to enter, of whom 9,533 were citizens of New Commonwealth countries or Pakistan. Statistics on those refused entry do not identify would-be visitors. To put these figures in context, 8 million passengers were granted leave to enter in the 12 months up to April, of whom 1 million were from the New Commonwealth or Pakistan.
§ Ms. ShortDoes the Minister accept that the existing arrangements for family visits from the Indian subcontinent are not acceptable? Is he aware that at least 20 times each week in my constituency I am telephoned because people are being held at the airport for eight or 12 hours? They are often refused entry simply because they come from a poor background. They are allowed in only through the cumbersome procedure that involves my writing to the Minister. Those people always return home at the end of their visit. Does he understand that my constituents feel that they are put through a humiliating process simply to visit their families? It is not good enough.
§ Mr. WaddingtonThe arrangements are not working as well as they might, partly because some hon. Members are abusing their right to make representations in cases. Recently, cases have come to my attention where hon. Members have actually invited people to come to this country, knowing that they had no claim to enter, telling them that they need only mention the name of the hon. Member and temporary admission would be obtained for them. That is highly unsatisfactory, and I hope that hon. Members will not make our task in the immigration service impossible. In 1980, representations were made by hon. Members in 1,000 cases. We estimate that in 1985 representations will have been made in 4,500 cases. The same standards are being applied by immigration officers, as the percentage of refusals have hardly deviated over the years.
§ Mr. KaufmanReally!
§ Mr. WaddingtonIn view of what I have said, the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman) and his hon. Friends can draw their own conclusions.
§ Mr. SpencerIs it not a fact that the number of people granted temporary admission this year will be twice the number granted temporary admission in the last year of the Labour Government? Does that not give the lie to the suggestion that there is something draconian about the way in which our immigration policy is being applied?
§ Mr. WaddingtonMy hon. and learned Friend is entirely right. In fact, we have been employing a more relaxed policy in respect of temporary admission. I must hammer home the point that our system of representations 411 being made in these cases by hon. Members will not work if some hon. Members continue to behave in a manner that was never envisaged when the system was set up in the first place.
§ Mr. Tony LloydIs the Minister aware that hon. Members would have more confidence in the system if they thought that on many occasions the reasons given for refusal were acceptable? How many of those granted temporary admission are granted a visa at the end of that time? How many of them abscond or disappear? If the temporary admission system is designed to prevent the fraudulent use of the appeal system, overstaying, and so on, the fact that, I understand, few people disappear or otherwise abuse the system shows that too many innocent people are refused admission at the ports.
§ Mr. WaddingtonThe hon. Gentleman should table specific questions to obtain the answers that he requires. Any fair-minded hon. Member looking at the letters that I write explaining why people have been refused entry will recognise at once that our immigration officers are carrying out their job in a perfectly respectable and proper fashion. As I said, some hon. Members are making our task extremely difficult.
§ Mr. DickensWithout mincing words, is it not a fact that many hon. Members, sometimes innocently, aid and abet the illegal entry of visitors into the United Kingdom? Is there not a strong case for the whole procedure of hon. Members raising the cases of visitors to this country with the Home Secretary being seriously reviewed and a new system introduced?
§ Mr. WaddingtonI shall not adopt the words used by my hon. Friend, but the vast majority of people in Britain would be amazed to learn that 4,500 people will get into this country this year, having been refused admission by skilled immigration officers who believed that they were not qualified to enter. The vast majority of British people must be amazed to learn that the system is being used by hon. Members in such a way as to allow vast numbers of people to enter who clearly are not qualified to enter.
§ Mr. DubsIs the Minister aware that he cannot shelter an unacceptable policy by attacking hon. Members? People are perfectly aware of what he is doing. Has the policy on visitors from Bangladesh altered recently? Is he aware that many of us are getting representations from increasing numbers of visitors from Bangladesh who have been refused admission? Moreover, so many of them are being detained that Harmondsworth is full and people are being held in Ashford remand centre? Has there been a change in policy, and, if so, why?
§ Mr. WaddingtonThe policy on the representations of Members of Parliament is reasonable, provided hon. Members are prepared to operate it in a sensible and responsible fashion. Unfortunately, some hon. Members are not. Recently, a large number of young men have been arriving at Heathrow from Bangladesh in most suspicious circumstances, which have resulted in our detention facilities being very strained. Something fishy is going on. So far we have not identified the species, but I hope that the message goes back to the operators in Bangladesh that they have been rumbled.