HC Deb 08 July 1988 vol 136 cc1375-84 2.42 pm

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Garel-Jones.]

Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North)

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Can you tell the House to how many Bills the hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones) has objected today and how many people will be adversely affected as a result?

Madam Deputy Speaker (Miss Betty Boothroyd)

It is not within my remit to notice who is actually objecting. I hear voices.

Mr. Eric Forth (Mid-Worcestershire)

Further to that point of order. Madam Deputy Speaker. Will you confirm that, quite correctly, objections have been made from both sides of the House? Will you further confirm that a Bill which had passed most of its stages in the House was objected to by Opposition Members? Will you make it clear that any Member in any part of the House is entitled to object on a Friday?

Madam Deputy Speaker

I am sure that when hon. Members read the Official Report on Monday they will see that that is the case. Meanwhile, this discussion is coming out of a private Member's time. I call Mr. Tom Clarke.

2.43 pm
Mr. Tom Clarke (Monklands, West)

This debate concerns the treatment of the late Bahadur Singh in Barlinnie prison. Even as I speak these words, I find it difficult to contemplate that a man 26 years of age, who lived for a short time in Coatbridge in my constituency and for whom I had been making representations from mid-winter until spring this year, died on 12 May—the day after his release, following six months in Barlinnie prison. Time after time, as his solicitor took up the case, his friends the Banga family in Coatbridge came to see me. I can still hear them saying, as they frequently did, "They will kill him, they will kill him." Throughout, they had a lack of faith in the administration of British justice which many now think proved chillingly perceptive.

I consider the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, the hon. Member for Edinburgh, West (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton), to be one of the most humane of hon. Members, with a fine record as a Back Bencher interested in penal reform issues. I have to say, however, that after a number of representations and warnings, I cannot regard Mr. Singh's death on a bus on the way home in the Punjab as a coincidence. There are far wider implications—of civil liberties, of basic human rights, of racism in Scottish prisons and, until recent times, a lack of Scottish Office concern about the problem—and I believe that these should be urgently addressed.

Bahadur Singh had been languishing in Barlinnie prison after his arrest for a breach of the immigration laws, for not having proper documentation. Last year, he went to stay in Scotland with his friends, restaurant owner Autar Banga and Mrs. Jasbir Banga. In November, he was reported to the immigration authorities and arrested. He appeared in Airdrie sheriff court on Monday 9 November, when he pleaded guilty to a contravention of the Immigration Act 1971. He was fined £120 but because he had no money on his person, he was sentenced to 28 days and sent to Barlinnie pending the outcome of an appeal.

I first took up his case with the Home Office on 18 November 1987, as Mr. Singh had sought political asylum. He was kept in prison while his application was processed. The inevitable questions arise: why did it take so long for the Home Ofice to make a decision and why, during the decision-making process, was he kept in prison? Those matters are diminished in importance by the most basic question of all: how was Bahadur Singh treated while he was in Barlinnie prison?

I first drew the Government's attention to allegations of violence against Bahadur Singh when I wrote to the Minister of State, Home Office, the hon. Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Renton), on 11 February and again on 26 February 1988. I understand that Mr. Singh changed his mind about appealing for political asylum from time to time, but as I said then in my letter to the Minister, Mr. Singh's indecision over his appeal results from … bullying and abuse which has caused very great distress. The Minister's written reply, received more than a month later, directed me to the Scottish Office, while the Minister proposed to maintain his detention in view of his previous disregard for … immigration control. Allegations of violence and racism continued, so on 28 March I wrote to the prison governor, Mr. Walker, that from the outset of Mr. Singh's committal to Barlinnie, I have had reports from his visitors of physical and cruel verbal abuse. After a brief acknowledgment, the governor replied on 21 April, nearly a month later, in the following words: I have had the allegations investigated by a member of my senior management team. Mr. Singh speaks virtually no English and it was necessary to interview him through another inmate who was acting as an interpreter. In that interview, according to the governor's letter, Mr. Singh apparently stated that he had no particular problems at that time and no real fears for his own safety, although a few slogans had been daubed on his cell door. That account of the investigation is strongly disputed and I shall return to it later.

I would have expected that a matter as serious as this, raised by a Member of the House, would have been personally investigated by the governor and not delegated as a matter of little importance. Moreover, a letter from the governor to Strathclyde community relations council a few weeks later implied that there had been no problems with the treatment of ethnic minority prisoners. In the words of the council, his reply was "complacent" and "misleading"; it was not consistent with the facts.

I was still very unhappy as allegations continued to mount, so I wrote to the Secretary of State for Scotland on 3 May 1988. One of the most unacceptable aspects of the whole affair is that the Secretary of State's office did not reply to my letter until Thursday 2 June—the day when, by another remarkable coincidence, the Glasgow Evening Times broke the news to his office that Mr. Singh had died several weeks before. I believe that the House is entitled to an explanation for that insensitive delay from t he Secretary of State. At the very least, his role seems to represent administrative incompetence which cannot be dismissed lightly in view of the tragic consequences.

I have now had the opportunity to speak at length to crucial witnesses of the alleged events. Mr. Mohammed Sattar is a young Pakistani who at one point shared a cell with Bahadur Singh. It should be said in passing that Mr. Sattar had a fracas with his girl friend—now happily his wife—which led to a short stay in prison. There is a conflict of evidence between Mr. Sattar and Mr. Walker, the prison governor. Whereas Mr. Walker had said—I return to my earlier point—that Mr. Singh had made no complaint, Mohammed Sattar insists—and I can confirm that his English is very fluent—that he acted as an interpreter for Mr. Singh in the presence of the governor's representative, and that Mr. Singh did, indeed, complain about beatings and racist behaviour. In my conversation with Mr. Sattar he repeated the allegations that he had first made in the Glasgow Evening Times when he said: They were just banging at them with steel bars and Bahadur and the other man were on their knees trying to protect themselves. I can do no other than underline that conflict of evidence in the hope that the matter will be investigated.

I have also talked, with the help of an interpreter, to another key witness, Mr. Vijay Kumar. Mr. Kumar had also alleged that he had suffered racial harassment while an inmate in Barlinnie prison, again as a result of a breach of immigration rules. However, on 16 June 1988, when his case came before Lord Weir in the Court of Session, Mr. Kumar was set free. Lord Weir used the following words: It was not in the tradition of the Scottish administration of justice for someone to be detained for months and months in such circumstances. I cannot stress too strongly that it is of the utmost importance that no steps should be taken to deport Mr. Kumar from this country before he has the opportunity to give evidence to an inquiry into the scale of racial harassment in Scottish prisons and, in particular, the death of Bahadur Singh. My hon. Friends and I hope that the Under-Secretary can give us an assurance to that effect today. Let me add that it is a tragic pity that Lord Weir was never given the opportunity to reach the same conclusion in the case of Bahadur Singh.

Having spent four hours last Sunday listening to Mohammed Sattar and Vijay Kumar, I am convinced that they are telling the truth. I understand that the Minister has already taken some steps, and I thank him for that; but I insist that the problem warrants a full and open public inquiry. The Scottish Office must demonstrate that it takes the issue of racism seriously by responding to that call.

The allegations are serious ones. They are that Mr. Bahadur Singh was subjected to a series of harrowing racial attacks while in one of Her Majesty's prisons; that Mr. Singh, a timid man who spoke virtually no English, was beaten up in his cell by five white inmates carrying metal bars and kitchen knives; that he was attacked while he mixed with other prisoners; that he had hot tea and soup thrown at him and was struck by a metal tray in the dining room; that racial slogans and threats were daubed on his cell door; and that the wardens specifically responsible for that part of the prison pretended not to notice any of this. It could hardly have helped that there is the suggestion—and I can go no further than that—that Mr. Singh was kept for some of his stay in a cell for 23 hours per day with a light on permanently.

I have been told by the Under-Secretary that Mr. Singh was medically examined on 28 April. But even if that was so, it does not explain what happened between that date and 12 May when he was released.

There are other questions to be answered. Why did it take six months to deal with such a case? Are there other similar cases in Scottish prisons at the moment? Why, after such delays, was he rushed straight on to a plane and deported without being allowed to let friends and relations know what was happening? Is it true that he spent his last night in Scotland, not in Barlinnie, but in a police cell in Strathclyde police headquarters, and if so, why was he moved and why did his friends not have access? What precisely was the state of Mr. Singh's health at that time and, frankly, was he fit to undertake that long flight?

Why do we lock up illegal immigrants beside violent criminals in our toughest jails? Why do we run that risk of racist intimidation or, to put it another way, condemn people, whose only crime was to want to live here, to long periods of solitary confinement for their own protection? Why is there no purpose-built detention centre for immigration cases in Scotland, or at least a special arrangement with low security prisons? In a recent reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Pollok (Mr. Dunnachie), the Minister said that there are so few such cases in Scottish prisons that special arrangements are not neccessary. Surely the Minister accepts that if the numbers involved are so small, the establishment of a special detention centre would be so much simpler. It might be even less costly than present arrangements.

What special arrangements exist in our prisons for religious worship by minorities? What proportion of our prison officers come from ethnic minorities, and what steps are the Government taking to boost recruitment? What arrangements for special diets exist in Scottish prisons, and how sensitively are cultural questions tackled by prison administrators? Are there any members of ethnic minorities who are prison visitors in Barlinnie, and will the Under-Secretary tell us how he plans to increase their number around Scotland? I understand that the Home Office in England and Wales has recommended that each prison should have a race relations policy and senior management given proper training. Has any such policy even been talked about by the Scottish Office? Is racial harassment a problem in its own right or does the Scottish Office treat it as just another breach of prison rules?

For all those reasons, I have called for an official inquiry into Bahadur Singh's detention and subsequent death. I try not to underestimate the problems of administering Scottish prisons and I have no difficulty in accepting that the vast majority of prison staff are thoroughly decent people. But that cannot, on its own, be enough. If there is something wrong with the system we must try to put it right, and what is wrong is the absence of a clear, central anti-racist policy.

Bahadur Singh is dead. But there are, I hope, many lessons that we can learn from his short life—particularly the last six months of it. We must face facts and tackle racism in our prisons and in wider society as a matter of urgency. This is, I believe, the least we can do in tribute to a young man whose love for this land was greater than we could return.

2.58 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton)

The hon. Member for Monklands, West (Mr. Clarke) contributes a service by raising some extremely serious matters.

I share the concern of the hon. Member that the members of the ethnic community who find themselves for whatever reason detained in Scottish prisons, should have no fear of persecution and should be able to enjoy a satisfactory quality of life. In particular, I utterly condemn racism, wherever it occurs.

It would be fair to say that I have received no evidence that there is any widespread problem of abuse against inmates of ethnic origin in Scottish prisons. Prison staff are aware that they must be vigilant for evidence of abuse, and any breach of prison discipline by an inmate which is related to racial discrimination of any sort would be treated very seriously indeed.

If it became clear that measures were needed either to help members of ethnic communities or to stamp out racial discrimination, such measures would be taken swiftly by prison governors. Indeed, following the allegations of abuse against Mr. Singh, the governor of Barlinnie prison has held constructive discussions with representatives of the Asian community and has taken a number of immediate measures to help ease the problems which might be encountered by members of the ethnic community in prison. In particular, the governor has introduced a practice of locating inmates from ethnic communities together for mutual support and companionship; invited the community groups to undertake the translation of the prison's rule book into the four major Asian languages—an invitation that I understand has been accepted; discussed with the community groups visit arrangements for members of ethnic communities; discussed the special diet requirements of members of ethnic communities; and discussed with the community groups the provision of newspapers and reading materials in the major Asian languages.

All those steps should make a positive contribution towards improving the well-being and the quality of life of members of the ethnic communities located in Barlinnie prison. It is Barlinnie prison which holds the majority of persons detained under the Immigration Acts in Scotland. The numbers held at any one time are small and I understand that 11 are currently being held.

Nevertheless, my Department will be writing to governors of all other Scottish prisons, outlining the steps taken at Barlinnie, and inviting them to consider how far it may be appropriate to introduce similar procedures in their own establishments.

In addition, I have asked Her Majesty's chief inspector of prisons to consider whether there are any further improvements which the prison service ought to be making to the general arrangements for accommodating members of ethnic groups in Scottish prisons. I am anxious that the study should be concluded as soon as is practicable and I expect to have the chief inspector's report well before the end of the year.

The decision that Mr. Singh should be detained under the Immigration Act 1971, on completion of his prison sentence on 4 December, as the subject of deportation proceedings for overstaying, is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. He tells me that a deportation order was signed on 3 February 1988. Enforcement of the order was delayed by the need to take full account of the representations made on Mr. Singh's behalf and by the need to consider his application for asylum, as well as the statutory requirements which prevent an order from being made and enforced before the expiry of the time limit set for appeal against deportation.

These are, as I have said, matters for my right hon. Friend. But the hon. Gentleman has also raised a number of matters concerning Mr. Singh's treatment while he was held in Barlinnie prison, and for these I accept full responsibility.

Mr. William McKelvey (Kilmarnock and Loudoun)

rose—

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton

I am reluctant to give way because I have so much ground to cover.

Let me assure the hon. Member for Monklands, West that I take all such allegations very seriously. The hon. Gentleman has questioned the time—five weeks—which it took me to reply after he raised the allegations with me on 3 May. By that time Mr. Singh had been moved to accommodation where he could be kept under close observation. I first saw a photocopy of the hon. Gentleman's letter on 9 May. In his letter, the hon. Gentleman expressed dissatisfaction with the replies he had received from the governor of Barlinnie prison and asked for a more thorough investigation into the alleged assaults. Such an investigation was instigated immediately. It took three weeks to complete and the report was received by my Department on 26 May. I do not think that the period is unreasonable, given that the hon. Gentleman had expressed dissatisfaction with the earlier replies and asked for a more thorough and careful investigation.

I understand that the hon. Gentleman first raised the question of Mr. Singh's treatment in Barlinnie with the Home Office on 26 February and was immediately advised that complaints about Mr. Singh's treatment in Barlinnie were a matter for the Scottish Office. It was not until 3 May—some three months later—that the hon. Gentleman wrote to my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State and myself about the allegations.

Mr. Tom Clarke

If the Minister reads my speech he will see that I took the matter up immediately with the governor of Barlinnie prison. I went to the Scottish Office when I regarded the reply from the governor as being unsatisfactory.

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton

Yes. However, the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that the letter that he sent to me included a letter from the lawyers which said: perhaps you would pursue this matter with the Secretary of State and urge that either Mr. Singh be given full protection or alternatively the deportation procedure be speeded up as quickly as possible. In fact, he was deported three days later.

I wrote to the hon. Member on 9 June, setting out the results of my Department's investigations into the complaints of assaults on and prior to 23 April. I should make it clear that neither the prison authorities nor the prisons department have received any complaint, from any source, of alleged assaults on Mr. Singh after that date. The hon. Member will know that the procurator fiscal is conducting his own investigation into the allegations that Mr. Singh and another Asian inmate, Mr. Kumar, were assaulted by other inmates at Barlinnie. I am not able to comment upon the alleged assaults in any detail today. However, I have passed papers on this case to the Crown Office in the hope that they will be of assistance to the procurator fiscal.

Although I cannot comment on the alleged assaults in detail, I would like to make clear to the House that, at the governor's request, a medical examination of Mr. Singh was carried out at Barlinnie prison on 28 April following complaints of assaults. The medical officer noted minor bruising to Mr. Singh's left upper arm. Mr. Singh also complained of discomfort in the left loin. In the medical officer's opinion, Mr. Singh's injuries were of a minor nature and no treatment was required. Mr. Singh made no further complaints to the medical officer at that time. In particular, he did not complain, when examined, of any pain or discomfort in his head. Consequently, neither the prison authorities nor the Home Office had any reason to think that Mr. Singh was not in a fit state to travel to India. No evidence is available to my Department to link Mr. Singh's reported death in India with his stay at Barlinnie prison. Were evidence to become available to the Department, it would be passed to the procurator fiscal.

Mr. Tom Clarke

Will the Minister confirm that between 28 April—the Minister referred to the medical examination—and 12 May, when Mr. Singh was released from Barlinnie, no medical assessment was made?

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton

If I am unable to complete my speech, I shall write to the hon. Gentleman about any matters that I have omitted. I want to set out the Home Office procedures, but I may not have time.

As to accommodation for persons detained under the Immigration Act, the decision on whether a person should be held in custody is, as I have explained, one for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, who may exercise administrative powers in certain circumstances, and the courts. Where, in the considered opinion of the courts or my right hon. Friend, custody is necessary to prevent absconding, or for any other reason, the Scottish prison service takes all necessary measures to ensure that inmates are held under the proper conditions. In particular—contrary to what has been alleged in certain press reports —persons detained under the Immigration Act are not usually put in beside convicted inmates. The normal practice is for them to be held at local prisons beside other untried inmates. They receive all the same privileges as untried inmates, including the right to visits every day except Sunday.

It is open to any inmate to discuss with prison staff any difficulties which he or she may be experiencing. They will always take steps to ensure his safety. This may include transfer to another location, or special supervision, on occasion. This is what happened at Barlinnie after the alleged assaults were brought to the attention of the governor.

The hon. Member has suggested that there is a need for special accommodation for persons detained under the Immigration Act. It has been suggested that the arrangements in Scotland are inadequate compared with those in England and Wales. This is not so.

I am told that there is a detention unit at Harmondsworth, adjacent to Heathrow airport, which is managed by the immigration service and which may be used for any person liable to detention under the Immigration Act. It can be used for potential deportees but its capacity is limited to about 90 and it is primarily used for passengers who have been refused leave to enter or who have been detained pending further inquiries. It is a statutory requirement in both jurisdictions that any such persons detained for more than five days must be held in the detention unit at Harmondsworth, in prison or in a remand centre. I should clarify my statement of Tuesday last by making it clear that detention in legalised police cells is used for up to five days.

It is certainly true that the greater number of such detainees held at any one time in England and Wales means that they may be located together. There is, for example, a remand centre in the London area which can hold a number of potential deportees at any one time. In Scotland, we have no adult remand centres, but remand prisoners are kept separate from convicted prisoners. In this, there is no difference in the way potential deportees are treated on this side of the border. On individual cases, the Scottish Office and the Home Office do and will keep in close contact about the most appropriate location for the individual concerned. We are always ready to listen to representations from community groups or representatives of those waiting to be deported.

I should mention that only a very small number of persons are held in Scottish prisons at any one time under the Immigration Act. This week, for example, there were just 11 cases. Three of those persons also face drug charges and, if convicted, may well be given prison sentences. Another is due to be deported next week. I should imagine that such a very small number from a prison population of more than 5,000 would make it difficult to justify the cost of providing special accommodation, but that is an aspect that I would expect Her Majesty's chief inspector of prisons to cover in the report that I have requested from him. We shall of course approach his recommendation with a completely open mind.

I hope that I have made it clear to the House that the Scottish prison service takes seriously its responsibilities towards members of the ethnic community who are detained in custody. Racial discrimination in our prisons will not be condoned and swift measures will be taken if it occurs. I have already said that the procurator fiscal is investigating the specific allegation of assault against Mr. Singh and Mr. Kumar, the inmates whose cases the hon. Member for Monklands, West raised with me. The governor of Barlinnie has had constructive discussions with—

Mr. Tom Clarke

Will the Minister give way?

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will allow me to answer the point about Mr. Kumar. That allegation is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. I shall make certain that he receives the representations and that he is kept informed. The hon. Gentleman also referred to lights in the prison cells. It appears from inquiries that I made this morning that Mr. Singh was not at any time kept in a cell with a light on during the night. Mr. Kumar was briefly kept under close observation on the medical officer's advice after he reacted badly to the news of the death of his friend in India. That involved observations at regular intervals during the night, so a light was kept on in the cell. That is standard procedure when an inmate is distressed, and it is followed on the medical officer's advice.

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary told me that Mr. Singh, a native of India, was given leave on 18 May 1986 to enter the United Kingdom to attend a family wedding in Derby. A condition of his entry was that he would not take up any employment while he was here. He was subsequently given an extension to remain in the country until 28 January 1987.

I understand that Mr. Singh then disappeared from view. He did not leave the country on the agreed date. Nothing further was heard from him until 6 November 1987 when he was discovered by the immigration service working without authority at a restaurant in Coatbridge. He was arrested and charged with knowingly overstaying his leave in the United Kingdom. On 17 November 1987 he was sentenced to 28 days in prison, instead of a fine, for this offence.

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary then decided that, following completion of that sentence, Mr. Singh should be deported from the United Kingdom. He was served with notice of the intention to deport him and given the appropriate forms to enable him to appeal, should he wish to do so. Taking into account Mr. Singh's conduct since his entry to this country, my right hon. Friend took the view that Mr. Singh would abscond on completion of his sentence. He therefore concluded that Mr. Singh should be kept in detention, pending his deportation.

I am told that Mr. Singh chose not to appeal formally against his deportation. However, on 18 November 1987 the hon. Member for Monklands, West wrote to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary enclosing a letter from Mr. Singh's solicitors—

The motion having been made after hall-past Two o'clock and the debate having continued for half an hour, MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at twelve minutes past Three o'clock.