HC Deb 30 November 1998 vol 321 cc535-7
19. Mr. Neil Gerrard (Walthamstow)

What representations he has received recently about improper practices by solicitors and immigration advisers. [61109]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Mike O'Brien)

Many Members of Parliament have made representations to me about constituents whose immigration or asylum cases have been undermined by incompetent or unscrupulous advisers. The Government will introduce legislation to regulate advisers in the forthcoming immigration and asylum Bill.

Mr. Gerrard

I have drawn my hon. Friend's attention to a number of firms in my constituency that have been involved in very dubious practices.

When my hon. Friend introduces the legislation and provides for registration schemes, will he please include solicitors? There are far too many solicitors around who seem to think that knowing nothing about immigration law is no barrier to taking on cases and giving advice.

In setting fees, will my hon. Friend bear in mind the fact that there are small voluntary organisations that may be capable of giving good advice? May I ask him not to set fees at a level that would drive them out of business?

Mr. O'Brien

My hon. Friend is right to point out that a number of reputable small organisations—and, indeed, law firms—operate in this sphere; but unscrupulous, incompetent, dishonest firms also operate. We need to introduce a system that regulates advisers.

I will pass on to my right hon. and noble Friend the Lord Chancellor, who is in charge of the legal profession, my hon. Friend's strong and properly expressed views on some solicitors whom he and I have encountered when dealing with constituency cases.

Mr. Roger Gale (North Thanet)

The Minister will know that, as a result of the practices of some solicitors and immigration advisers, the county of Kent is now playing host to a large number of economic migrants, who impose a burden on it. In the Queen's Speech, the Home Secretary indicated that that financial burden would be removed and that central Government would pay, but in earlier parliamentary answers he has suggested the payment would cover only board and lodging. That means that the burdens of health care, education, policing and social services will continue to fall on the county.

Will the Minister clarify the position? What are the Government prepared to pay for?

Mr. O'Brien

We very much appreciate the work of Kent county council, and many councillors of all parties on that council. It has handled with skill and fortitude problems arising from the number of asylum seekers. I also praise the hon. Gentleman's constituents, and many others in Kent, for the way in which they have responded to the pressures on the area.

The hon. Gentleman is right: we intend to shift most of the burden of dealing with asylum seekers, in particular, on to Government, where it should have been in the first place. It fell on local authorities because of the way in which legislation was passed by the last Government. Support for asylum seekers will in future be dealt with by the central Government agency. There may well be other costs in relation to education; it is possible that they can be met by section 11 and other grants, but that will have to be discussed by the local authority and central Government.

I think that we shall be able to try to deal with many of the issues raised by the hon. Gentleman—issues that I consider to be genuine—during the next year.

Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)

Is my hon. Friend aware that a number of so-called immigration advice firms encourage unrealistic claims, at a high cost to clients? When it is clear that there is no way in which an appeal can be upheld by an adjudicator, the client is told to go and see his Member of Parliament. Is it not time that all the racketeering that is going on in so-called immigration advice was cleaned up? It is unfortunate that the last Government took no action, but we hope that the present Administration will do so soon.

Mr. O'Brien

We are committed to taking such action, and we shall do so as soon as possible. The whole way in which these rackets have been run is a scandal. All too frequently Members of Parliament are dragged into such cases, supposedly making representations that have often been made by law firms. Let me tell hon. Members that they should consider carefully before deciding to support an application from someone who has merely written to them. They should consider whether it is a good case. If it is, by all means let them put it to the Minister—but Members of Parliament should not advance cases that have been submitted to them as a way of dragging out the procedure, with requests for them to meet the Minister, so that people can stay in the United Kingdom for longer.

We need firm immigration controls. The Government are committed to such controls, and we ask hon. Members to support us.

Mr. Humfrey Malins (Woking)

I agree with the Minister that unscrupulous immigration advisers are appalling, but will he take this opportunity to remind the House of the existence of the Immigration Advisory Service, a free national charity that gives expert legal advice? It has offices throughout the country, to which applicants could and should go to get the good, free and independent advice that is often missing.

Mr. O'Brien

The hon. Gentleman is right. The Immigration Advisory Service, the Refugee Legal Centre and other organisations have a great record in advising asylum applicants and people with immigration problems. Unfortunately, that record is not replicated among some unscrupulous advisers. In passing, I pay tribute to the hon. Gentleman's work in setting up the Immigration Advisory Service and to his record as its chairman.