§ 3.15 p.m.
Lord Campbell of Croyasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will advise ferry operators how to identify, among prospective passengers possessing all the necessary personal papers and documents for travel and entry into the United Kingdom, those who will not be permitted by the British immigration authorities to stay in this country.
§ Lord Williams of MostynMy Lords, the authority to grant or refuse leave to enter is vested in the immigration officer at the point of entry. This authority cannot be exercised without a proper interview, nor in advance of the ferry passenger arriving in the United Kingdom. While advice may be given in general terms as to liability for detention and removal costs, the decision whether or not to carry a passenger is ultimately a commercial decision for the carrying companies.
Lord Campbell of CroyMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his reply. Why cannot ferries be treated like Eurotunnel where British officials, stationed on the French side, take quick decisions on passengers before they cross the Channel instead of the ferries being expected to pay for expensive return journeys for correctly documented tourist visitors who have, much later, applied for asylum?
§ Lord Williams of MostynMy Lords, carrying passengers for commercial purposes is exactly that. If commercial organisations wish to take a commercial risk, sometimes there will be adverse financial consequences. For the life of me, I cannot see why the taxpayer should pay for what may have been a commercial misjudgment.
§ Earl RussellMy Lords, I hear what the Minister says about commercial risk, but does he agree that the safety of life at sea is more important than immigration control? Does he further agree that a ferry from Ireland to France, putting into, say, Plymouth rather than founder at sea in a gale, should be immune from penalties under the carrier's liability Act?
§ Lord Williams of MostynMy Lords, of course I agree that the safety of life, whether at sea or on land, is infinitely more important than commercial considerations. But the Question of the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy, is really dealing with the situation that your Lordships well know about at Dover. It has nothing to do with misadventure at sea—stormy winds driving a ferry into a particular port—but is concerned with ferry companies deliberately, for purposes which are commercial, carrying passengers from the Czech Republic and Slovakia. I repeat that if they wish to make those commercial decisions, the Government believe, rightly, I suggest, that if commercial mischance comes about, the company should pay and not the taxpayer.
Lord Campbell of CroyMy Lords, is it correct that the gypsy visitors from central Europe were actuated by 754 television programmes giving the impression that seeking asylum produced a worthwhile stay in Britain? Did they not also believe that even if their application was unsuccessful, they would still be welcome because of the impression given by Labour and Liberal Democrat spokesmen when in opposition?
§ Lord Williams of MostynMy Lords, I dare say that television programmes had some influence on some of the people who came from the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Quite which programme I simply cannot say. I do now know. It may have been the televised proceedings of your Lordships' House which caused them to want to come here. That is possible, but unlikely. The fact is that these unfortunate people have come here to better themselves. We recognise that. But our system of immigration control is not designed for people in that category. We have to make it perfectly plain that the immigration and asylum regime will be properly, fairly and efficiently put into practice. That is what we have done. I believe it is significant that the numbers coming have fallen very significantly. Since the ameliorative regime which the Home Secretary introduced, namely, the opportunity for making further representations, the numbers have been very significantly reduced.