Immigration (Hansard, 14 June 1989)

§ Mr. Burt
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he has for the use of DNA testing in immigration cases; and if he will make a statement.

§ Mr. Hurd
I announced in July 1988 that DNA profiling appeared to be the most accurate available method of determining parentage in immigration cases, and that we would continue to accept the results of DNA tests commissioned by applicants themselves. Since then, many hundreds of cases have been satisfactorily determined on that basis. In the light of the experience we have gained from this, my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary and I have concluded that there is scope for introducing DNA testing into the entry clearance process more generally as a means of resolving relationship disputes. We have therefore set in hand the necessary arrangements with the view to the implementation of a Government scheme later this year in relation to first-time settlement applicants.
DNA testing will not be offered as a matter of routine. We envisage that entry clearance officers will offer to arrange tests, with the consent of the applicant and sponsor, in cases where the relevant relationships could not easily be demonstrated by other means. If an applicant or his sponsor declines to undergo a test that would not of itself be a ground for refusing the application. But if an entry clearance officer is not satisfied as to relationship on the basis of the evidence before him, these arrangements will provide applicants with an opportunity to resolve the matter by taking a DNA test.
DNA tests will be carried out, as at present, by independent scientific experts on a commercial basis. The level of the fee to be charged for application will need to strike a balance between not imposing too great a burden either on the individual applicant or on the taxpayer. My right hon. Friend and I will work up arrangements for financing a centrally-organised scheme on this basis.
A number of cases have come to light where an applicant previously refused entry as a child (frequently after appeal to the independent appellate authorities), on the ground that there was no satisfactory evidence as to relationship, is now able to establish relationship by means of DNA evidence but is now over 18 and does not satisfy the requirements in the rules relating to the admission of adults.
I do not believe that it would now be right to waive those requirements as a matter of course in all such cases, irrespective of the applicant's present age or circumstances. Previous decisions, including those of the appellate authorities, were taken in good faith on the basis of the information available at the time. There can be no automatic presumption that applicants now established as related after all should be admitted regardless of current circumstances. We have always distinguished between children, who are readily admitted to join parents here, 462W and adults, who will be admitted to join parents or relatives only in certain exceptional circumstances. Someone who was refused admission as a child when DNA was not available but has later established the claimed relationship should not by virtue of that fact automatically qualify for admission if the other qualification, namely childhood, is no longer fulfilled.
I do not propose any change in the rules which would have the effect of blurring this fundamental distinction, which has been a settled feature of our immigration policy for many years. In many cases over-age applicants are likely to have settled into independent adult life and may also have married and established a family of their own overseas and I do not propose to waive the requirements of the rules in these cases.
However, in the context of outstanding and future re-applications I am prepared to consider waiving the requirements of the rules in certain circumstances. To be eligible for such consideration a re-applicant aged 18 or over will have to show:

(a) that he was refused entry clearance as a child on relationship grounds;

(b) that DNA evidence establishes that he was, after all, related as claimed;

(c) that he is still wholly or mainly dependent on his sponsor in the United Kingdom; and

(d) that there are compassionate circumstances in his case.

I shall not regard the fact that a re-applicant was refused entry clearance as a child on relationship grounds on any earlier occasion and was therefore unable to join his sponsor in the United Kingdom as satisfying the requirement that there be compassionate circumstances.
In deciding whether to waive the requirements of the rules in cases which fall into this category I will consider all circumstances of the case including in particular:

(a) the degree and nature of the dependency;

(b) the extent and nature of the compassionate circumstances;

(c) the re-applicant's present age and marital status;

(d) whether other close family members, such as siblings, are already settled in the United Kingdom;

(e) the lapse of time between the original application and the re-application.

In considering the compassionate circumstances of the case, I will attach greater weight to compassionate circumstances relating to the situation of the re-applicant abroad than I will to those relating to the situation of his sponsor in the United Kingdom.

§ Mr. Nicholas Bennett
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he intends to lay before Parliament changes to the immigration rules.

§ Mr. Hurd
I have today laid before Parliament a statement of changes in the immigration rules in consolidated form. The main changes of content are the introduction of a visa requirement for nationals of Turkey and Haiti; curtailing the ability of visa nationals to switch after arrival from visitor to student status; and a provision relating to the status of husbands of women admitted for employment or business. The changes are due to enter into force with effect from 8 July 1989, except for the visa requirement for Turkish nationals, which takes effect from 23 June 1989. A full explanatory statement listing all the changes of content and the reasons for them is available in the Vote Office.