ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS (Hansard, 23 February 1965)

§ VISCOUNT DILHORNE
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Stonham)
My Lords, the figure mentioned in the noble and learned Viscount's Question relates to Commonwealth citizens who have evaded the immigration control, but they are not necessarily in breach of the law. One of the devices employed is to pose as a person who is entitled under the Commonwealth Immigrants Act, 1962, to admission for settlement, for example, by claiming to be under 16 years of age and to be the son of a Commonwealth citizen resident here, when the claimant is over 16 and is not so related. It is not always easy to expose a false claim of that kind, especially when supported by a genuine passport, and it is thought that a considerable number have succeeded in gaining admission in this way. In addition, numbers of people admitted for an ostensibly temporary purpose, mainly as visitors and students, have stayed on. Our estimate of the scale on which this is happening is based on a comparison of the net balance of Commonwealth immigration over a given period (that is, the excess of arrivals over departures) with the number deliberately admitted for settlement during the same period. For the two years, 1963 and 1964, the difference between these two figures, in respect of territories other than Canada, Australia and New Zealand, was approximately 10,000.

LORD HAWKE
My Lords, will the Government not agree that this shocking state of affairs shows that during the last year or two there has been a lack of officials in the immigration department with a knowledge of the Oriental mind?

§ LORD STONHAM
My Lords, Her Majesty's Government certainly do not regard this as a shocking state of affairs; nor would I accept that the immigration officers lack a knowledge of the Oriental mind. But it is rather more difficult to distinguish between a young Asian of, say, 25 years of age and a boy of 16, than it is to distinguish between a man of similar age and a boy of 16 coming from, say, Australia or Canada.

§ VISCOUNT DILHORNE
My Lords, the noble Lord repeated the statement made recently that the figure was not less than 10,000. That is presumably his estimate of the minimum figure. May 682 not the number be considerably in excess of 10,000? What is the supposed upper limit?

§ LORD STONHAM
No, my Lords, the actual crude average difference between arrivals and departures for the two years was 10,255.

§ THE EARL OF SWINTON
My Lords, may I ask the Minister this question? While accepting, as I am sure most of us do, that the immigration authorities are doing everything in their power to see that the law is carried out, do not all these difficulties and loopholes (which seem to multiply all the time, quite irrespective of which Minister is in power, much less which immigration officer) really show that there is only one effective way of controlling the numbers of those whom we want to come here and who have a right under the law to do so—that is, to take absolute power to send back to their countries of origin any persons who it is found, after any lapse of time, have entered the country through some illegal loophole?

§ LORD STONHAM
No, my Lords, the amount of the crude evasion figure is small in comparison with the total number intentionally admitted. I would point out to the noble Earl that on February 4 my right honourable friend announced a number of measures for more effective control, for which power has always existed under the 1962 Act, by imposing conditions of entry; and we are now doing that. When those conditions are not complied with, we shall have power to deal with offenders.

§ LORD BROCKWAY
My Lords in reference to the number of immigrants who are here illicitly, my noble friend excluded Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Has he any figures regarding the older Dominions?

§ LORD STONHAM
Yes, my Lords. the corresponding figures for 1963 and 1964 in respect of Canada, Australia and New Zealand are of the order of 15,000 a year. But I would point out to my noble friend that most of these people have No 1ntention of permanent settlement.

LORD REA
My Lords, am I right in thinking that the noble Lord is referring in both answers to members of the Commonwealth? Can he give 683 any indication of the number of illegal immigrants who are not members of the Commonwealth—that is, foreigners.

§ LORD STONHAM
My Lords, is the noble Lord referring to aliens?

LORD REA
Yes, my Lords.

§ LORD STONHAM
The number of aliens admitted for settlement each year is, on average, about 16,000 or 17,000. It is not thought that there can possibly be any similar amount of illegal immigration, because conditions are imposed on the entry of aliens and the power is at hand to see that they are complied with.

§ LORD BROCKWAY
My Lords, whilst recognising the duty of the Government to take action against those who enter this country illegally, may I ask whether the Government will pay particular concern to two types of immigrant coming into this country: first the women immigrants, whose balancing of the sex proportion in the population is very important for the health of the community; and, secondly, the students, many of whom have to seek a livelihood in order to maintain their studies?

§ LORD STONHAM
My Lords, on the first point raised by my noble friend, there is no change in the position. We admit the women dependants of immigrants who have a right to come here, and also those who satisfy the authorities of their position as Common Law wives. On my noble friend's second point, with regard to students, we are now taking what steps we can to satisfy ourselves that they are bona fide students. Once they are here, there is normally no restriction on the length of their stay.

§ LORD DERWENT
My Lords, the noble Lord said that entry had been tightened up since February 4. Can he say how many have been sent back or not admitted since that date?

§ LORD STONHAM
No, my Lords, figures will not be available until about three weeks after the expiry of one month. If the noble Lord cares to put down a Question then, I shall be delighted to answer him.

§ VISCOUNT DILHORNE
My Lords, I thank the Minister for the information 684 he has given. Is he aware that we shall be debating this subject in the near future? I hope that he will make these figures available before that debate.

§ LORD STONHAM
My Lords, I am afraid that I cannot give any guarantee about that. The debate, I understand, will be on March 10, and it may be something like March 21 before these figures are available for the first month, having regard to the fact that we started under the new arrangement only on February 5. I will, however, endeavour to give the noble Viscount some indication of the differences which now arise under the new arrangements.