House of Commons Home Affairs
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12
First Report of Session 2012–13
Report, together with formal minutes
Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 23 May 2012
HC 144 Published on 12 June 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00
The Home Affairs Committee
The Home Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Home Office and its associated public bodies.
Current membership Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP (Labour, Leicester East) (Chair) Nicola Blackwood MP (Conservative, Oxford West and Abingdon) James Clappison MP (Conservative, Hertsmere) Michael Ellis MP (Conservative, Northampton North) Lorraine Fullbrook MP (Conservative, South Ribble) Dr Julian Huppert MP (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge) Steve McCabe MP (Labour, Birmingham Selly Oak) Rt Hon Alun Michael MP (Labour & Co-operative, Cardiff South and Penarth) Bridget Phillipson MP (Labour, Houghton and Sunderland South) Mark Reckless MP (Conservative, Rochester and Strood) Mr David Winnick MP (Labour, Walsall North)
Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk.
Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/homeaffairscom.
Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Tom Healey (Clerk), Richard Benwell (Second Clerk), Ruth Davis (Committee Specialist), Eleanor Scarnell (Inquiry Manager), Andy Boyd (Senior Committee Assistant), John Graddon (Committee Support Officer) and Alex Paterson (Select Committee Media Officer).
Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Home Affairs Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 3276; the Committee’s email address is [email protected].
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 1
Contents
Report Page
Introduction 3 First Report, Immigration Cap (HC 361) 11 Second Report, Police and Crime Commissioners (HC 511) 26 Third Report, Firearms Control (HC 447) 33 Fourth Report, The work of the UK Border Agency (HC 587) 52 Fifth Report, Police use of Tasers (HC 646) 66 Sixth Report, Police Finances (HC 695) 69 Seventh Report, Student Visas (HC 773) 77 Eight Report, Forced Marriage (HC 880) 90 Ninth Report, The Work of the UK Border Agency (HC 929) 103 Tenth Report, Home Office— Implications for the Justice and Home Affairs area of the accession of Turkey to the European Union (HC 789) 125 Eleventh Report, Student Visas-follow up (HC 1445) 145 Twelfth Report, Home Office—Work of the Permanent Secretary (HC 928) 152 Thirteenth Report, Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile communications (HC 907) 154 Fourteenth Report, New Landscape of Policing (HC 939) 174 Fifteenth Report, The work of the UK Border Agency (April-July 2011) (HC 1497) 226 Sixteenth Report, Policing Large Scale Disorder (HC 1456-I) 250 Seventeenth Report, UK Border Controls (HC 1647) 268 Eighteenth Report, Rules governing enforced removals from the UK (HC 563) 272
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 3
Introduction
1. In order to monitor the effectiveness of its Report, the Home Affairs Committee maintains a colour-coded grid of its recommendations. Recommendations are coded green if, in our view, the Government has accepted them; red if they have been rejected; and yellow if they have been partially accepted, or if the Government has undertaken to give them further consideration.
2. The grid for the reports of 2010–12 to which a response has so far been received is published as an Annex to this Report. The Committee intends to repeat this exercise after the end of every Session for the remainder of this Parliament.
3. This is not a simple box-ticking exercise. The Committee will use the grid to inform its choice of inquiries over the course of the Parliament, returning to earlier recommendations where it appears that there may be some merit in doing so, but avoiding duplication of earlier work where it appears unlikely to prove beneficial.
4. The Committee has had several major successes over the course of the Session, for example: a) On immigration, the introduction of exit checks;1 the exclusion of short-term, intra- company transfers from the immigration cap;2 greater focus in the UK Border Agency on removing foreign national prisoners at the end of their sentences;3 changes to the student visa system to protect the UK knowledge economy;4 better monitoring of enforced removals;5 and improved internal communications processes within the UK Border Agency.6 b) On policing, the publication of information that will enable the public to assess the performance of elected Police and Crime Commissioners;7 the introduction of the Policing Protocol to set out the relationship between Commissioners and Chief Constables;8 greater clarity about the legal framework for the supply of tasers and other weapons to the police;9 the adoption by the Government of a clear definition of “front- line” policing;10 and greater emphasis on improving the quality and procurement of police information technology.11
1 p 10 2 p 18 3 p 51 4 pp 76ff 5 p 277 6 p 267ff 7 p 25ff 8 pp 27–28 9 pp 65–67 10 p 68 11 p 72
4 Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12
c) On crime, tougher restrictions on imitation firearms and greater protection against forced marriage.12 The Committee was also instrumental in exposing the scale of the phone-hacking scandal and the relationship between certain sections of the media and the police.13
5. However, this grid of recommendations does not reflect the entirety of the Committee’s work. As well as these major, policy-based inquiries, we have continued to keep the wider work of the Home Office under review by holding regular, general evidence sessions with the Home Secretary.14 The Committee also holds regular sessions with the Permanent Secretary, focusing primarily on expenditure and administration of the Department.15 The Committee has also held several one-off evidence sessions on the work of Home Office agencies: the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre,16 the newly- established National Crime Agency,17 the Equality and Human Rights Commission,18 the Home Office’s Chief Scientific Adviser,19 the National Policing Improvement Agency,20 and Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary.21 The Committee has also held several one-off sessions on the national functions of the Metropolitan Police Service.22
6. The impact of our current inquiries, as well as those inquiries from 2010–12 which have yet to receive a response, will be covered in our next effectiveness report, which we expect to publish in May or June 2013.
12 pp 32ff; pp 89ff 13 p 153ff 1414 December 2010 (HC 647), 5 July 2011 (HC 1372), 8 November 2011 (HC 1631), and 24 April 2012 (HC 1939) 15 23 November 2010 (on the effect of the CSR on the Home Office) (HC 626), 27 June 2011 (on managing cuts) (HC 928), and 17 January 2012 (HC 1751) 16 HC 510 (2010–12) 17 HC 1553 (2010–12) 18 HC 732 (2010–12) 19 HC 694 (2010–12) 20 HC 588 (2010–12) 21 HC 548 (2010–12) 22 Counter terrorism (HC 1775), policing major demonstrations in London (HC 917), undercover operations at the G20 protests (HC 772) , and Specialist Operations (HC 441).
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 5
Formal Minutes
Wednesday 23 May 2012
Members present:
Keith Vaz, in the Chair
Mr James Clappison Dr Julian Huppert Michael Ellis Alun Michael Lorraine Fullbrook Mr David Winnick
Draft Report (Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12), proposed by the Chair, brought up and read.
Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.
Paragraphs 1 to 6 read and agreed to.
Annex agreed to.
Resolved, That the Report be the First Report of the Committee to the House.
Ordered, That the Chair make the Report to the House.
Ordered, That embargoed copies of the Report be made available, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order No. 134.
[Adjourned till Tuesday 12 June 2012 at 10.40 am
6 Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12
List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament
The reference number of the Government’s response to each Report is printed in brackets after the HC printing number.
Session 2012–13 First Report Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 HC 144 Second Report Work of the Permanent Secretary (April–December HC 145 2011)
Session 2010–12 First Report Immigration Cap HC 361 Second Report Policing: Police and Crime Commissioners HC 511 Third Report Firearms Control HC 447 Fourth Report The work of the UK Border Agency HC 587 Fifth Report Police use of Tasers HC 646 Sixth Report Police Finances HC 695 Seventh Report Student Visas HC 773 Eighth Report Forced marriage HC 880 Ninth Report The work of the UK Border Agency (November 2010- HC 929 March 2011) Tenth Report Implications for the Justice and Home Affairs area of HC 789 the accession of Turkey to the European Union Eleventh Report Student Visas – follow up HC 1445 Twelfth Report Home Office – Work of the Permanent Secretary HC 928 Thirteenth Report Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile HC 907 communications Fourteenth Report New Landscape of Policing HC 939 Fifteenth Report The work of the UK Border Agency (April-July 2011) HC 1497 Sixteenth Report Policing large scale disorder HC 1456 Seventeenth Report UK Border Controls HC 1647 Eighteenth Report Rules governing enforced removals from the UK HC 563 Nineteenth Report Roots of violent radicalisation HC 1446 Twentieth Report Extradition HC 644 Twenty-first Report Work of the UK Border Agency (August-December HC 1722 2011)
Annex Summary of Government Responses 2010–2012
Report Subject Response Accepted Qualified Rejected Total acceptance
First Immigration cap (HC 361), Fifth Special Report, 16 (76%) 4 (19%) 1 (5%) 21 published 3 November published 01 March 2010 2011
Second Policing: Police and Crime Seventh Special Report, 4 (36%) 5 (45%) 2 (18%) 11 Commissioners (HC 511) , published 28 March published 1 December 2010 2011
Third Firearms control (HC 447-I) , Cm 8155, published 17 7 (37%) 10 (53%) 2 (11%) 19 published 20 December October 2011 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 2010
Fourth The work of the UK Border Eighth Special Report, 4 (44%) 5 (56%) 0 (0%) 9 Agency (HC 587-I), published 16 May 2011 published 11 January 2011
Fifth Police use of tasers (HC Cm 8098, published 16 1 (33%) 2 (67%) 0 (0%) 3 646), published 7 March June 2011 2011
Sixth Police finances (HC 695), Cm 8093, published 13 4 (80%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 5 published 15 February 2011 June 2011 7
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 8 Effectiveness Seventh Student visas (HC 773), Eleventh Report 14 (52%) 6 (22%) 7 (26%) 27 published 15 March 2011 Student Visas–follow up (HC 1445) , published 26 July 2011
Eighth Forced marriage (HC 880), Cm 8151, published 17 4 (40%) 2 (20%) 4 (40%) 10 published 17 May 2011 October 2011
Ninth The work of the UK Border First Special Report 5 (26%) 4 (21%) 10 (53%) 19 Agency (HC 929), published [2012-13], published 15 February 2011 28 May 2012
Tenth Implications for the Justice Cm 8187, published 17 12 (67%) 6 (33%) 0 (0%) 18 and Home Affairs area of October 2011 the accession of Turkey to the European Union (HC 789), published 1 August 2011
Eleventh Student visas—follow up Cm 8193, published 21 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%) 6 (HC 1445), published 26 October 2011 July 2011
Twelfth Home Office—work of the Second Special Report 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 2 Permanent Secretary (HC [2012-13], published 928), published 22 August 28 May 2012 2011
Thirteenth Unauthorised tapping into Cm 8182, published 17 7 (58%) 3 (25%) 2 (17%) 12 or hacking of mobile October 2011 communications (HC 907), published 20 July 2011
Fourteenth New landscape of policing Cm 8223, published 21 37 (63%) 20 (34%) 2 (3%) 59
(HC 939), published 23 December 2011. September 2011
Fifteenth The work of the UK Border Cm 8253, published 21 5 (28%) 11 (61%) 2 (11%) 18 Agency (April-July 2011) December 2011 (HC 1497), published 4 November 2011
Sixteenth Policing large scale disorder Cm 8292, published 02 13 (54%) 11 (46%) 0 (0%) 24 (HC 1456), published 22 March 2011 December 2011
Seventeenth UK border controls (HC Cm 8341, published 19 4 (57%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%) 7 1647), published 19 January April 2012 2012
Eighteenth Rules governing enforced Cm 8342, published 19 4 (57%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 7 removals from the UK (HC April 2012 563), published 26 January 2012 Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness Nineteenth Roots of violent Due: 6 April (late) radicalisation (HC 1446), published 6 February 2012
Twentieth The US-UK Extradition Expected: 30 May Treaty (HC 644), published 30 March 2012
Twenty-First The work of the UK Border Expected: 11June Agency (August-December 2011) (HC 1722), published 11 April 2012
9
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 10 Effectiveness
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12
First Report, Immigration cap (HC 361), published 3 November 2010
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation Immigration figures
1. There is no single source of migration data in the In the report, you have discussed the fact that there is no single Recommendation for exit checks accepted and included UK. Until exit checks are implemented in the form source of migration data. Sources obviously include the in the Home Office Business Plan (item 4.7) for of e-Borders, it is not possible to count individuals International Passenger Survey, Long-Term International implementation by March 2015. out of the country, and so figures on the inflow Migration data and the Control of Immigration data. You and outflow of migrants cannot be matched. therefore urge “the Government to implement exit checks as Migration is currently measured in several different soon as possible to ensure that immigrants leaving the country ways, which are not directly comparable one to can be matched with those entering it”. another. This can obscure and complicate the public policy debate on immigration, a difficulty which The Coalition Agreement states that “We support e-Borders and was highlighted by the use of varying sets of will reintroduce exit checks”. However exit checks will not be a 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness figures by different witnesses, and exemplified by suitable alternative to the ONS method of measuring inflows and the fact that the Government itself is using one set outflows—and hence calculating net migration—on a yearly of data for its immigration target (net long-term basis. (page 3) immigration) but is acting on another set (entry clearance visas issued) to implement a cap. We urge the Government to implement exit checks as soon as possible to ensure that immigrants leaving the country can be matched with those entering it. (Paragraph 12)
11
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 12 Effectiveness 2. The figure of ‘hundreds of thousands’ of Conclusion and statement of fact: no recommendation immigrants cited by the Government in respect of for the Government to respond to. its immigration policy objective (see paragraph 1) comes from Long-Term International Migration data and relates to the net number of immigrants entering the UK for a year or longer (immigrants minus emigrants), and includes British and EEA citizens. The latest data show that 196,000 net immigrants entered the UK in 2009. Net long-term migration peaked in 2004 at 245,000 and continued at an annual rate of about 200,000 in the five years to 2009. Data from the International Passenger Survey show that non-EEA citizens consistently make up the majority of net immigrants, but that the overall rise in 2009 was accounted for by a decrease in the number of British citizens emigrating. (Paragraph 13)
3. In 2008, according to the International Passenger Conclusion and statement of fact: no recommendation Survey, non-EEA migrants accounted for 52% of all for the Government to respond to. gross long-term immigrants (British, EEA and non- EEA citizens). However, non-EEA immigrants giving ‘having a definite job’ or ‘looking for work’ as their reason for immigration accounted for only 12% of all gross long term immigrants. Amongst non-EEA migrants, economic migration accounted for 24% of those entering the UK in 2008, whereas formal study was the biggest single reason for immigration amongst this group (45%). (Paragraph 16)
4. International Passenger Survey data (see table 2) Conclusion and statement of fact: no recommendation shows that in 2008, some 45% (126,000) of all non- for the Government to respond to. EEA long-term immigrants to the UK stated on their arrival that they had come to study; and some 22% (61,000) similarly stated that they came to accompany or join a family member. (Paragraph 19)
Whom will the cap affect?
5. The net immigration figure—which the We think this is an interesting recommendation but there is little Government rejects the recommendation for more Government intends to reduce to ‘tens of that the Government can do to affect the decisions of British research about patterns of British and EEA migration, thousands’—is affected by inflows and outflows of citizens to leave the UK and those in the EEA have the right of on the ground that there is little they can do to British, EEA and non-EEA citizens. In 2008, British free movement. The latest net migration figures show that British influence it. citizens accounted for 15% of gross long-term and EEA migration broadly cancel each other out, so we believe immigrants, EEA citizens for 33% and non-EEA our focus is rightly on non EU migrants. (page 4) citizens for 52%. Under EU law the Government cannot limit numbers of British or EEA citizens entering the UK, and consequently can only influence the numbers of non-EEA migrants entering and leaving the country, whilst expecting that natural patterns of British and EEA migration will stabilise over the long term as we have seen with patterns of migration from and back to Spain and Portugal when they joined the EU, and as we are now observing with the A8. The Minister further stated that the impact of any future EU enlargement would be mitigated by transitional arrangements. We recommend that the Government commissions a programme of research better to understand the likely path of British and EEA migration. (Paragraph 27) 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness
6. As the Government pursues its aim to reduce I believe we have been clear that limiting non-EU economic High-level recommendation which it is difficult to overall immigration to the UK, it is important that migration is the first step in a wider programme of work where translate into concrete action. Government broadly it does not underestimate the impact of all the other main immigration routes will be reviewed. I hope the accepts. immigration routes which it cannot control. We Committee will also welcome the fact that the reduction to the urge the Government not to treat the routes it can economic routes we have announced is proportionate to their control too stringently in order to compensate for impact on net migration. (page 4) the routes it cannot control. (Paragraph 28)
13
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 14 Effectiveness 7. It is possible the Government will need to act to Conclusion and statement of fact: no recommendation increase the outflow of non-EEA citizens as well as for the Government to respond to. the inflow, probably through policy changes to break the link between certain immigration routes and settlement. However, we note Professor Metcalf’s comments that any changes to length of stay, to influence the outflow, would not take effect until 2013–14, and so for the Government to make an immediate impact the inflow is key. (Paragraph 29)
8. Two different, albeit imperfect, measures of Conclusion: no recommendation for the Government to immigration suggest that non-EEA economic respond to. immigrants account for less than 20% of overall gross immigration. International Passenger Survey data show that they accounted for 12% of gross long term immigrants in 2008, and in 2009 the number of visas issued to Tier 1 and 2 immigrants and their dependants under the Points Based System accounted for 17% of the gross long-term immigration total. If Tiers 1 and 2 were to be suspended altogether, this would reduce gross immigration by 17%; and if the cap were implemented at the 5% reduction rate introduced in the temporary cap, the reduction in overall gross immigration would amount to 0.9%. (Paragraph 30)
9. It is therefore clear from the figures that the Conclusion: no recommendation for the Government to proposed cap—unless it is set close to 100%—will respond to. have little significant impact on overall immigration levels. Our witnesses, including the Minister himself, acknowledged that the current measures were only a first step in achieving the reduction in overall immigration sought by the Government, and that other immigration routes would also need to be examined. (Paragraph 31)
Impact on business and services
10. There does not seem to be strong argument in favour of merging the resident labour market and shortage occupation list routes under Tier 2. They serve separate and distinct purposes, the former being a tool to fill specific or regional shortages, the latter a mechanism for recruiting skills in national shortage. (Paragraph 56)
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 15
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 16 Effectiveness 11. The proposed cap on Tiers 1 and 2 will by Elite sportspeople will continue to be covered by a separate route The principle of making it easier for top scientists to definition only affect skilled workers. Tier 1 under Tier 2 of the Points-Based System. They have been enter the country is accepted, but the Government consists of very highly skilled individuals, likely to accorded this status because the Governing Bodies of the sports proposes an alternative to the Committee’s make a significant contribution not only to the concerned have agreed an approach which controls the quality of recommendation of using Tier 1, by re-designing Tier 2. UK’s skills, but also directly to its economy through those entering the UK under this route, and will also limit tax and income spending; and Tier 2 is driven by numbers, as too many foreign players undermines the national the business requirements of employers across a teams. We have no plans to extend this type of provision to cover range of private and public sector skills shortages. any other categories of skilled worker but the Home Secretary’s Both private sector businesses and public sector announcement made it clear that we also have no intention of services made compelling arguments—many of creating an immigration system that denies the British economy which have been well rehearsed in public debate— the services of international calibre scientists, researchers or about the negative impact a cap on Tiers 1 and 2 academics. will have on their ability to operate, leaving vacancies unfilled unless it is properly designed Making Tier 2 a route for graduate level entry only will create with business needs in mind. However, we also further space for the highly skilled scientists, researchers and agree with the evidence given by many employers, academics who will be more favoured than they were in the past. that the country should be better training the Re-designing the operation of Tier 2 will ensure that priority for skilled people we need to reduce the need for the allocation for Certificates of Sponsorship, in the event that immigration in the future, and we believe there is the monthly allocations are over-subscribed, is given to workers an important role for Government in providing a filling the most valuable jobs. Jobs which require a Doctorate will strategy to ensure that occurs. We note the be prioritised, expressly to ensure that the jobs with very specialised skills, but typically lower Fifth Special Report 5 pay, concerns, expressed to us by eight Nobel prize- are pushed towards the front of the queue. We also propose to winners in science, about the potentially negative retain some Tier 1 provision for the exceptionally talented. This effect of the cap on the UK’s position of will also cover those who have achieved a high degree of international excellence in science and engineering. eminence in the field of science. Together we believe these We consider it totally illogical that professional routes will better serve the science community in this country. sportspeople should be exempted from the cap but (page 4) elite international scientists are not. (Paragraph 64)
12. Despite agreement that a cap set too low Conclusion: no direct recommendation for Government would have an adverse impact on businesses— action. both international companies such as Tata Consultancy Services, and the UK companies which utilised their services—it remains unclear what the extent of that impact would be. Several witnesses told us that companies might seek to establish headquarters elsewhere, but others were well- established in the UK and unlikely to leave. The level of the cap will be key in determining the effect it will have on this kind of business decision. It is hard to assess whether disruption would be of sufficient magnitude to force businesses to relocate overseas—they may not be in a position themselves to answer this question before the details of a cap are set out. (Paragraph 65)
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 17
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 18 Effectiveness 13. Although we note the Minister’s evidence I do not believe that the limit is the only reason a company may Committee welcomes Government’s proposals. about wider social and public policy concerns, the or may not choose to locate here. Other key issues such as tax, evidence we received from businesses alerted us to planning and employment laws, as well as the general the possible negative impacts the non-EEA environment and infrastructure will inform these choices. economic migrant cap could have on business However, I would also contend that the new limit has actually investment in the UK, and on tax revenues from been designed in a way to help business, by giving more high-earning immigrants. We emphasise that the allocation in Tier 2, thus meeting business needs. Government must closely study the recruitment needs of businesses when determining the level at I am pleased that the report welcomes our plans to exclude which the cap is set, as it has promised to do. This investors and entrepreneurs from the limit and to encourage will be relevant to the UK’s economic recovery, more of them and we are currently working with some of our especially if, as has been said by the Office for key corporate partners to finalise details of these routes to make Budget Responsibility, one-third of the economic them more attractive to the high value migrants we want. (page growth needed in the next year must come from 5) business investment. However, we were told that the macroeconomic effects may be small. We are pleased that the Government is planning not only to protect the migrant route for investors and entrepreneurs, but also to encourage high net worth individuals to come to the UK to drive economic growth. (Paragraph 66)
14. The Government must decide whether or not to I hope therefore that you will welcome our decision to exclude Recommendation accepted. exclude intra-company transfers from the cap. them completely but also to make some changes to the ICT route Whilst it is meant to be a temporary immigration so that it cannot be used to undermine the recruitment of the route, migrants on intra-company transfers can resident labour force. (page 4) remain for up to five years, and we heard that a third stay in the country permanently, having transferred to another visa route. There is significant pressure from some businesses not to cap the route. However, to make any significant reduction in non-EEA economic immigration, a cap would have to include intra-company transfers, which in 2009 accounted for 60% of all Tier 2 visas and 40% of Tier 1 and 2 combined. We recommend that intra-company transfers under 2 years’ duration should be excluded from the cap. (Paragraph 67)
Dependants Identifies two options without favouring either preliminary to recommendation 16, below. 15. Under Tiers 1 and 2 there have been approximately the same number of main applicants and dependants, a ratio of 5:4. The immigration
figures cited by the Government include 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness dependants, indicating that, if it is to meet its target of reducing immigration to ‘tens of thousands’, dependants will have to be accounted for in some form. As Professor Metcalf set out, a cap could either be applied to main applicants— with the assumption that there will be approximately the same number again of dependants—or to the combined total of main applicants and dependants. (Paragraph 71)
19
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 20 Effectiveness 16. The evidence we received argued against I hope therefore that you will welcome our decision that Accepted—dependents limited indirectly by limiting the applying the cap directly to dependants, since a dependants will not form part of the limit. As the number of number of main applicants. dependant might displace a main applicant whose main applicants is limited we can expect that the number of skills were needed, and we are pleased that the dependants will also decrease. (page 5) Government has stated it has no plans to change the policy towards dependants. We therefore recommend that Tier 1 and 2 limits should apply to main applicants only, and we recognise that the cap will consequently only represent half of the total number of immigrants being issued with visas. The Government must make explicit the way in which dependants will be counted in contributing to the overall reduction in immigrants, and make its policy clear to the public. (Paragraph 72)
Level of the cap Not a recommendation.
17. Since its consultation was still underway during our inquiry, the Migration Advisory Committee was unable to indicate the level at which the permanent cap on non-EEA economic migration might be set, and consequently we were not able to examine the implications of specific numbers. We did, however, receive representations concerning the effects caused by the temporary cap—set at a 5% reduction to Tiers 1 and 2 on the previous year—and discuss these by way of illustration. (Paragraph 76)
18. If the Government is to be judged on its success The Office of National Statistics (ONS) is the authority on Accepted—Government makes the basis for the or otherwise in reducing net immigration to within calculating net migration figures and their methodology has been calculation explicit. the ‘tens of thousands’ within this Parliament, in place since 1991. There are no plans to put a new system in given the current basis of compilation the figures place to measure this. There is an understandable time lag on which it will be assessed in May 2015 will be an between the end of the calendar year and the ONS being in extrapolation from data available for the calendar position to present a robust measurement. While we may not year 2013. We recommend that the Government have the final net migration figures for 2015, until November make explicit the basis on which it will calculate 2016, based on the current reporting schedule of ONS, we this extrapolation. (Paragraph 77) believe the number of visas being issued for work, study or family formation will be moving in the right direction. (page 5)
19. The 5% reduction imposed under the See below temporary cap seems to have had an unpredictable effect across various sectors, hitting small businesses particularly hard. Our witnesses argued that the limit had been based on a figure taken during the previous year’s recession, and had been applied with little notice. We caution that these difficulties should be mitigated in setting the level of the permanent cap, and the limits should be calculated on the basis of a considered assessment of need as well as prior use of certificates of sponsorship. (Paragraph 80) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness
21
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 22 Effectiveness 20. The Migration Advisory Committee has been We are aware of the concerns raised over the operation of the Committee’s concerns are noted, and “lessons learned” asked to propose the numerical limit for the interim limit, and believe that lessons have been learned for our but no undertaking to change the current permanent cap before the Government has proposed mechanism for operating the new limit (see below). We arrangements. determined which groups will be included in the simply do not agree that the MAC’s ability to provide advice cap and how limits will be applied to different about the limit was reduced by not knowing how the limit would sectors of the economy. This has reduced the work and received no adverse comments from the MAC about Migration Advisory Committee’s ability to predict this. (page 6) the effects of the cuts on different economic sectors and geographical regions, although Professor Metcalf stated that it would still be able to note in its report what some of the potential consequences would be for different sectors and regions. He also noted that the Migration Advisory Committee would review the cap and its effects each year to improve its operation. It is important that the Migration Advisory Committee provides different options for what may emerge from the UK Border Agency consultation so that the Government can tailor the figures of the final design of the permanent cap. We await the publication of the results of both consultations, and urge the Government to ensure that the limit is delivered in a joined-up way. (Paragraph 81)
Students Conclusions and observations: no substantive 21. It is quite clear that, to achieve the reductions it recommendation for response. is seeking, the Government will have to make significant changes to student immigration routes. As the Government is currently reviewing student visas it has not yet made any detailed proposals to effect such changes. We intend to return to this issue once the Government brings forward firm proposals for action. In the meantime, however, we underline the continuing importance of international students to UK educational institutions and the UK economy, and echo the
conclusions drawn by our predecessor Committee, which said that efforts would be far better directed towards tackling bogus colleges and those who overstay their visas in order to seek employment, than penalising legitimate students. We also warn against constraining the activities of teaching in both the public sector and private sector, which are highly regarded internationally and make a significant contribution to the British economy. (Paragraph 87)
Administering the cap General observation: no specific recommendation. 22. We support the administration of the cap through the structure of the existing Points Based System. This would allow limits to be applied flexibly—as the Business Secretary has called for— and thus bear some relation to industry demand and sectors where shortages are. Given that there is no right of appeal under the Points Based System, it is also important that decision-making should be as open and transparent as possible.
Currently, a visa is issued when an immigrant 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness meets specific, objective criteria, which are publicly available, and applicants can check their eligibility against an online calculator. We caution that, in determining how the cap will be administered, care must be taken not to lose this transparency. (Paragraph 90)
23. We received mixed views on the merits of Rehearses different views expressed in evidence—no allocating Tier 1 visas under a pooling system. recommendation. Several argued that it would be overly bureaucratic and uncertain for highly skilled immigrants who could be held in the pool for up to six months, only to be told that their qualification had expired. There does not seem any reason why, rather than a
pooling or other new system, the Tier 1 cap should 23
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 24 Effectiveness not be administered simply by raising the points requirements to a sufficient level to match the desired quota. This would allow a limit to be applied whilst ensuring that the most highly skilled were not turned away, nor kept waiting for months on end with no guarantee of a visa at the end. (Paragraph 102)
24. Tier 2 is more complex, since the particular skills Rehearses different views expressed in evidence—no and individuals required by companies should be recommendation. the key determinant of whether a candidate is successful under this route. It is vital that the Government finalises plans for Tier 2 in very close consultation with business and service leaders, to take full account of those needs. We do not consider an auction workable with regard to Tier 2, since it would almost certainly have a disproportionate impact on the skills recruitment to the public sector and small businesses, neither of which could afford to bid large sums. A first come, first served system for Tier 2—the Government’s preferred option—met with multiple objections, including that there would be a high volume of precautionary applications and that releasing visas only at certain times in the year would hamper business planning. Principally, some witnesses felt that such a system took no account of an applicant’s merit. None was, however, able to propose a preferable alternative. It may be possible to mitigate some of the criticisms of first come, first served by stratifying the cap by Tier 2 sectors, to ensure that some do not dominate to the exclusion of others, that market needs are always recognised, and to release visas at regular intervals during the year. (Paragraph 103)
25. We recommend that the cap should be I hope therefore the Committee will welcome our decision not to Government accepts underlying principle of administered more frequently than annually, pre-allocate Certificates of sponsorship to employers based on Committee’s position, but proposes different method of particularly given the experiences of businesses their previous year’s allocations. Instead applications will be implementation. under the US system, where annual visa allocations considered on a monthly basis, to ensure an even spread are exhausted within a day or two of opening. This throughout the year. The CBI also supports this approach. If the would better meet changes in sector needs over monthly allocation is oversubscribed, applications will be ranked the course of the year, and could be monthly, as firstly by shortage occupations, then by academic qualification the Confederation of British Industry has proposed. and finally by salary. We do not expect to be oversubscribed We also recommend that a number of visas be held given the level of the limit and the other policy changes on skills in reserve so that where businesses or services can level and salary, but if that were the case, we will give higher demonstrate a clear business case for bringing in a priority to those in shortage occupations, researchers and then migrant outside the usual allocation period, they those paid higher salaries. (page 6) are able to apply for an emergency visa. (Paragraph 108)
26. There has been a consistent tendency, under Having reported to Parliament on 23 November on the Accepted. both the current and previous Governments, to outline of the limits policy we believe the Immigration Rules are rush through complex changes to the immigration the appropriate means of making changes to the immigration system via amendments to the Immigration Rules, system. I would like to reassure the Committee that the new and we note that this has caused problems. In Rules to give effect to the changes will be laid before Parliament many cases changes have been enacted with in due course and Parliament will have time to scrutinise them. almost immediate effect, failing to respect the (page 6)
parliamentary convention of 21 days’ notice, and 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness leading to a spate of judicial reviews. Such unnecessary haste leads to poor decision-making which is more likely to be challenged in the courts. We recognise the need to institute a temporary cap to prevent a rush of immigration applications ahead of the creation of a permanent cap. However, the Government must ensure that Parliament be given the opportunity fully to scrutinise all significant changes to the immigration system before they are introduced. (Paragraph 110)
25
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 26 Effectiveness
Second Report, Police and Crime Commissioners (HC 511), published 23 November 2010
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. We recommend that Police and Crime We agree that it is important Police and Crime Accepted in principle but for implementation by elected Commissioners are directed to take the workload Commissioners take the size and diversity of their Commissioners themselves; no specific statutory duty to and the diversity of the community they are communities into account; it will be down to them do so. representing into account when making support to demonstrate to the public that they can team arrangements. (Paragraph 14) properly represent all their views. It would be very difficult to impose such a requirement in any meaningful way from the centre, and as such it must be left to Police and Crime Commissioners and the electorate. (page 3)
2. We recommend that consideration be given to We agree that the Police and Crime Commissioner No guarantees about staff retention, as this is a matter the importance of retaining experienced should be able to benefit from the skills and for the new Commissioners, but confirmation that TUPE members of staff in the team supporting the experience currently in police authority will apply. Police and Crime Commissioner following the secretariats. The Government is committed to election of a new person to the post. (Paragraph ensuring that TUPE principles are applied to police 17) authority staff following elections of Police and Crime Commissioners, and those staff engaged in police authority functions should transfer to the employment of the Police and Crime Commissioner, subject to the transfer schemes developed by each police authority and approved by the Home Secretary. However, it will be for the Police and Crime Commissioner to decide the size and shape of their team going forward. (page 3)
3. We endorse the desire to reduce unnecessary We agree it is of vital importance that the public The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 bureaucracy in the police service, but we have access to the information they need to hold requires Commissioners to publish such information as is emphasise that local record-keeping that enables their Police and Crime Commissioner properly to necessary to allow local people to assess their people to see what is happening in their account. The Police Reform and Social performance and that of the chief constable (s. 11). neighbourhoods, and ideally on their streets, will Responsibility Bill ensures that the Secretary of
be crucial if local priority setting is to be State can continue to collect and publish, or have successful. This information must be made published, information relating to the policing of available to the public on the internet. an area directly from a Chief Constable. This may (Paragraph 19) include statistical or other information relating to policing, crime and disorder and will support the ongoing delivery of street level crime data so that the public have access to street level crime data and maps from January 2011. Police forces will provide information on a variety of crime types at a much more local level than is currently available including burglary, robbery, vehicle crime, violence and ASB. They will also provide key local policing information such as details of neighbourhood policing teams and community engagement events. We will build on this over time—not only providing the public with more meaningful and comparable information on crime and policing in their area—but also empowering them to better understand, and contribute to, the work of criminal justice agencies and other local services. (page 3)
4. We recommend that there should be no The public must decide who their Police and Crime Not accepted, but serving officers are excluded from 27 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness restrictions on who can stand for the post of Commissioner should be, and we should not seek election. Police and Crime Commissioner beyond the to take people out of the democratic process criteria that normally apply to standing for public without good reason. However the post of Police office. However, we consider that there should and Crime Commissioner is one that holds singular be a cooling off period of four years—one term responsibility for the delivery of policing and for a Police and Crime Commissioner—if a former crime reduction within a force area. We are senior officer of the rank of Assistant Chief interested in essential safeguards that will ensure Constable or above decides to stand as a Police that the Police and Crime Commissioner's conduct and Crime Commissioner in the same area in and character are not compromised and that which he or she has served. This is because neither public safety, nor the Police and Crime otherwise a former senior officer could be in the Commissioner's statutory obligations are put at position of scrutinising the effects of decisions risk. With this in mind further consideration will he or she had made while still in office. be given to this issue as part of the debate at (Paragraph 26) committee stage in both houses.
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 28 Effectiveness As set out in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill, the Police and Crime Commissioner will be responsible to the public for the governance of policing in their force area, and therefore it is essential the public can have confidence in the character and conduct of their elected Police and Crime Commissioner. Furthermore, we acknowledge the professional experience that ex-police officers could bring to the post of Police and Crime Commissioner. However there still needs to be an open and healthy debate about how we can best harness the experience, dedication and motivation of such officers. (page 4)
5. We recommend that Police and Crime We agree it is important for Police and Crime Not accepted in relation to the appointment of senior Commissioners be responsible for the budget, Commissioners to be responsible for the budget, officers. staff, estate and other assets in their force area, estate and other assets within their force area, so and that they have the same power to appoint that there is a direct path of accountability to the and dismiss senior officers that is currently held public for how their money is spent. However we by Police Authorities. (Paragraph 38) feel it is important for Chief Constables to have control of their own staff, and as such the Chief Constable will be employer of police staff, and will be responsible for the senior officer appointments within their force. Police and Crime Commissioners will appoint, and where necessary dismiss, the Chief Constable—and we are clear that the Police and Crime Commissioner's relationship must be with the Chief Officer, rather than all senior officers or all police staff, to ensure clear lines of accountability. (page 4)
6. We recommend that the concept of We agree that the Police and Crime Commissioner The Committee has seen and commented on a draft operational independence should continue to and Chief Constable roles must be clearly version of the Memorandum of Understanding, which is apply in respect of the important work of the defined—but we are clear that our legislation now called a Protocol. police in detection and law enforcement, achieves this, starting with the core responsibility
including arrest, but that the concept of that the Police and Crime Commissioner must operational responsibility be developed and secure the maintenance of an effective and clarified in a memorandum of understanding efficient force in their area and that the force is between the Home Secretary, Chief Constables under the direction and control of the Chief and Police and Crime Commissioners. It is Constable. Like ACPO, we do not believe that a important that arrangements are made for statutory definition of operational independence parliamentary scrutiny of the terms of any such is needed, or that it would help in practice. We memorandum and subsequently its impact on agree with ACPO's submission to our recent police work. The police and not politicians must, consultation that the roles and responsibilities set as now, be solely responsible for individual out in the Police Act 1996 should be retained. We decisions with respect to arrest and are working with our partners to develop a investigation. (Paragraph 45) Memorandum of Understanding which will support the working relationships between Police and Crime Commissioners and Chief Constables. (page 5)
7. Bearing in mind the findings of our sister We agree that the Police and Crime Commissioner The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act reflects Committee, the Justice Committee, that most of must have constructive relationships with wider the substance of the Committee’s recommendation. the services that affect reoffending are outside Community Safety partners in order to cut crime. the ambit of the police and outside the scope of The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill the criminal justice system generally, we consider provides for Police and Crime Commissioners to that it will be important for each Police and bring together representatives of every
Crime Commissioner to understand, support and Community Safety Partnership in their area to 29 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness indeed drive the crime reduction work of local discuss issues, and also requires Police and Crime partnerships and to ensure that they have the Commissioners and other criminal justice and appropriate analytic capacity and are held to community safety agencies to co-operate. Police account for their effectiveness in reducing crime and Crime Commissioners will be empowered to in their area. (Paragraph 49) make Community Safety grants to aid in cutting crime and reducing antisocial behaviour.
As stated in Policing in the 21st Century the Government continues to see a potential future role for Police and Crime Commissioners in respect to the wider criminal justice system in order to deliver an efficient, effective service for victims, witnesses and the wider community. There is much to be done to improve what is a complex structure and we consider that Police and Crime
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 30 Effectiveness Commissioners will play a valuable role in these developments. (page 5)
8. Our witnesses agreed that there are some While there may be some issues that the Home Accepted in principle. We wait to see how the role of the aspects of policing in relation to which the Home Secretary will want to retain powers of Home Secretary will work in practice in the new Secretary would need to retain powers of intervention on, that will really be only as a landscape. intervention. Mr Hogan-Howe, the former Chief matter of 'last resort'. It is for Police and Crime Constable of Merseyside, outlined three distinct Commissioners, to take responsibility for holding areas. Firstly, he said that the Home Secretary forces to account, and the Police and Crime should have the power to intervene if there was Commissioner is also accountable to the public. “failing or dishonest leadership”. Secondly, he We are confident that the Police Reform and said that there was a need for an overview in Social Responsibility Bill includes sufficiently relation to “counter-terrorism and serious robust provisions covering all the eventualities organised crime”. Thirdly, he referred to the raised by the Committee. In the event of 'failing or need for a view from the centre on procurement dishonest leadership', it is more appropriate that and capital investment in order to achieve value in the first instance the Police and Crime Panel for money. We agree that the Home Secretary (PCP) and then the Independent Police Complaints should have the power to intervene in these Commission (IPCC), an independent professional circumstances. (Paragraph 51) body, should undertake the relevant enquiries and investigations, and under some circumstances the PCP will have the authority to suspend a Police and Crime Commissioner.
In respect of providing an 'overview in relation to counter-terrorism', the new Strategic Policing Requirement will focus on national level threats, providing clear decision-making guidance to Police and Crime Commissioners to ensure that the right capabilities are in the right places to protect the public from serious harm. Finally, we agree with the Committee that a view from the centre is needed in respect of procurement, and the Bill includes provisions covering priority areas at a national level for securing value for money. (page 6)
9. The Police and Crime Commissioner should The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill Accepted.
spearhead long overdue collaborative introduces provisions to enable a more strategic procurement reforms. We expect that Police and co-ordination on priority areas at the national Crime Commissioners will want to join together level. The Government said in Policing in the 21st to form a representative body. Such a body Century that its approach to police value for should be used by Commissioners to facilitate money will involve ending the practice of collaboration between forces. (Paragraph 54) procuring things in 43 different ways when it makes no sense to do so either operationally or financially. The Government has consulted separately on proposed regulations to drive the aggregations of police procurement of certain equipment and services and is considering the responses to that consultation. Collaboration has to be first and foremost the responsibility of Police and Crime Commissioners and their Chief Constables and we will place upon Police and Crime Commissioners a stronger duty to collaborate than police authorities are currently under. We are also responding to the call from the service to move from two kinds of agreement to one, encouraging greater consistency in collaboration partnerships and removing practical obstacles, for example making accountability arrangements more workable and allowing other organisations to be a party to collaboration 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness agreements. It will be down to Police and Crime Commissioners to decide what representative body they should have, if any. (page 6)
10. We see merit in the suggestion that there be We agree that there will be a need to co-ordinate The introduction of a Strategic Policing Requirement goes a set of national priorities to which Police and national response to certain issues. The Police some way towards meeting the Committee’s Crime Commissioners should have regard when Reform and Social Responsibility Bill will enable recommendation. We await the final draft of the setting local goals. (Paragraph 56) the Home Secretary to set out a 'Strategic Policing Strategic Policing Requirement. Requirement' setting out the expected response of the police service to national threats. It is not for the central government to tell locally elected Police and Crime Commissioners how to respond to local issues. (page 7)
31
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 32 Effectiveness 11. We see merit in using Police and Crime Panels In line with the Home Affairs Committee's Panels are appointed by local authorities, with some co- as a means of providing advice to Police and recommendations, Police and Crime Panels (PCP's) opted members. The Act allows for elected Crime Commissioners before final decisions are will be made up from locally elected representatives to serve on panels. made, as opposed to setting them up as a representatives from each local authority separate scrutiny body with a separate support (including district councils for the first time) in the staff, examining decisions after they are made, area and will be supplemented by two which we do not believe would be a good use of independent members that will help bring public money. We recommend that Police and particular skills to the table. We want the Crime Panels be comprised primarily of elected relationship between the Police and Crime representatives from county, unitary and district Commissioner and the PCP to be a constructive councils in the force area—in particular portfolio and transparent one, and therefore the Bill holders with appropriate responsibilities, and provides for the PCP to be consulted on a number having regard to the political balance—and of a of key decisions before they are made final and significantly smaller number of independent for dissenting views to be made public. The PCP members. Ultimately, the Police and Crime will have a constructive role in key decisions such Commissioner, as the elected representative, as the Police and Crime Plan, a power of veto over must be able to make what decisions he or she the precept level and the appointment of Chief sees fit, but decisions made against the advice of Constables. We agree that PCPs will need support Police and Crime Panels must be recorded as such in order to carry out their functions and there are and these records must be available to the provisions in the Bill providing funding for that. public. (Paragraph 65) Further details are set out in the Impact Assessment that accompanies the Bill. (page 7)
Third Report, Firearms control (HC 447), published 20 December 2010
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation
1. While it is heartening that official figures The Government is committed to tackling gun crime Accepted. show the use of firearms and the gang culture which is a known driver of it and in crime to be declining, these figures should not accepts there is no room for complacency. be allowed to fuel complacency. (Paragraph 12) The Home Office receives record level data from the 43 police forces of England and Wales on offences where a firearm has been used. Data are presently published in the Home Office Statistical Bulletin: Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence Supplementary Volume 2 to Crime in England and Wales. Home Office statistics on firearm offences focus on more serious and violent offences involving firearms. Firearms are taken to be involved in an incident if Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness they are fired, used as a blunt instrument against a person, or used in a threat. 2. We heard contrasting views about the extent Conclusion only—no action required. to which legally-held firearms are used in crime. It is difficult to form an accurate assessment, given the limitations of available data. Certainly licensed firearms do not appear to be used in the majority of cases. They are infrequently used in serious and organised crime, which is fed by illegal firearms, particularly converted and realistic imitation weapons. Mass shootings with licensed weapons, such as the terrible crimes perpetrated by Derrick Bird, also thankfully remain rare, but the fact that they were carried out by licensed gun owners should not be 33
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 34 Effectiveness overlooked in any further consideration of firearms legislation. Offences with low-powered air weapons, the possession of which is not illegal, comprise a substantial proportion of all gun crime. Moreover, legal firearms were used in at least 10% of firearms homicides in 2008/09, which, while it represents a tiny number of individual incidents, is not an insignificant proportion of these homicides. On the basis of data submitted to the Cullen Inquiry, and that collected more recently by Professor Squires and the Gun Control Network, we are concerned about the use of legal firearms in domestic incidents, often linked to domestic violence. (Paragraph 21)
3. There are 138,728 section 1 firearms certificate Conclusion only—no action required. holders and 574,946 shotgun certificate holders in England and Wales. The proportion of licence holders who use their guns in crime is tiny. Many representations were made to us by individual shooters and their representatives about their legitimate enjoyment of shooting sports, about the need for farmers in particular to have access to firearms in the course of their professional activities and about the wider benefits shooting brings to the UK economy. (Paragraph 26)
4. There is considerable evidence, although it is No action required. not clear-cut, that well-designed legislation to regulate and restrict the legal supply of firearms can reduce gun crime. The UK has strict gun laws and comparatively low levels of gun crime. The link should not be overstated—there is no direct correlation in recent UK history between levels of gun ownership and gun crime trends. However, it is fair to assume at least in part that this demonstrates the success of the licensing
regime, in place since 1968, which enables the authorities to satisfy themselves that those owning firearms are fit to do so. We do not believe that a total outright ban on ownership and use of section 1 firearms and shotguns would be a proportionate response to the risks posed by these weapons. There is, however, scope for further minimisation of risk through adjustments to the licensing process, which we consider in more detail in chapter three. We also believe that more effective measures could be put in place to tackle criminal use of those firearms which are not currently subject to a licensing regime; we consider this in chapter four. (Paragraph 35)
5. An onerous burden is placed on the police and The Government accepts that there have long been Rejected outright. on the public because of the difficulty of calls for a new, simplified Firearms Act although most understanding and applying the 34 relevant laws people have stopped short of saying that the existing which govern the control of firearms. It is law is not fit for purpose. There have generally been unreasonable to expect members of the public to few significant new ideas for how this might be know their responsibilities when the law is so achieved. An alternative approach would be to complex and confused. It is also unreasonable to consolidate existing legislation, which would at least 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness expect the police to apply the law accurately in pull all the controls together into one Act. This would all cases when it is so complex. This is unhelpful make the controls more accessible and help with to good relations between the police and the enforcement, but it would not provide much in the public. We recommend that, rather than adding way of simplification. In fact, new law might also new rules and greater confusion, the inadvertently create further uncertainty by adding the Government provides proposals for early opportunity for new legal arguments to be made. The consultation on how to codify and simplify the Government believes that the best way forward in the law. Along with the proposals themselves, we short term is to update and revise Home Office urge the Government to give careful guidance in a way which presents the legislation as consideration to how it will publicise the clearly and simply as possible. legislation in order to give greater clarity to the lay person. (Paragraph 36)
6. The supply of firearms is only part of the The Government published A New Approach to The strategy does not explicitly link to domestic violence 35
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 36 Effectiveness challenge of reducing gun violence. We Fighting Crime on 2nd March. This sets out how the but does discuss social factors. The Government is also understand that the Government is to publish Government intends to cut crime by giving the police considering changes to media regulation. details of its crime prevention strategy at the and their partners greater freedom to do their jobs; by end of the year. In order to tackle the drivers of giving the public more power to hold police and gun crime, we recommend that this strategy community safety partnerships to account and should explicitly link to long-term measures to empowering the public to reclaim their streets; and by reduce domestic violence, measures to tackle the a new and overdue focus on serious organised crime at social factors which foster extreme violence and national level. It specifically sets out how the measures to clamp down on illegal drug markets Government will support work at local level to tackle and other forms of serious and organised crime. youth crime and violence, and drugs misuse. In We are concerned about the potential for addition, the Government will also be publishing its sensationalist media coverage of shootings to new strategy to tackle organised crime later this year. encourage copycat killings. The ambition of the UK Government is to end violence In respect of this last point, we recommend that against women and girls (VAWG), including domestic the Government ask the media regulatory bodies violence, by seeking to prevent it from happening in to enforce a code of practice which both the first place. The Government takes the view that this prohibits overtly sensational media coverage of is not a short term task, but a long term goal and that shootings and offers greater protection to no level of VAWG is acceptable in the UK or anywhere victims and their families against intrusive else in the world. On 25th November 2010, on the reporting. (Paragraph 42) International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, the UK Government published Call to
End Violence Against Women and Girls outlining its guiding principles over the spending review period. On 8th March, to mark International Women’s Day, we published Call to End Violence Against Women and Girls: Action Plan setting 88 actions across a range of departments.
The potential for sensationalist media coverage of shootings to encourage copycat killings cannot be ruled out but it is also clear that sensational and intrusive media coverage of shootings can cause significant and long-lasting distress to the families of victims. While the media must be free to report on major incidents and there is certainly a public interest in having the views of people in the local area reported, that does not mean that the usual journalistic standards that the press and broadcasters must abide by may be ignored.
The press sign up to the Editors’ Code of Practice, overseen by the Press Complaints Commission (PCC). As the Committee already know, the PCC were extremely active – particularly in Cumbria – at the time of the dreadful events there. When their office became aware of the incident (on the day), they contacted local police and hospitals to make them aware of the PCC’s services. Over the course of the next few days they kept in touch with the police and, when requested, assisted individuals who did not wish to speak to the media by issuing editors with a notice instructing them not to approach those people. They were, as always, on hand to deal with a number of complaints about published articles.
The PCC’s Director subsequently visited Cumbria for meetings with the police, the local press and local community representatives. In Northumbria the PCC were immediately in touch with police and local community representatives and remained so throughout the incident.
The PCC have an ongoing programme of work 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness designed to raise the profile of the organisation and its work which includes the provision of a 24 hour helpline to help those who find themselves at the centre of media interest. The PCC overseen code does not, of course, cover broadcasters but in the case of a developing media scrum, the PCC can also act to forward a message to broadcasters. It seems to us that continued promotion and profile raising exercises are the best ways to meet the Committee’s concerns. However, the Committee is of course aware of the phone hacking scandal that has emerged and that the Government has set up an independent inquiry under Lord Justice Leveson. Assisted by an expert panel, Lord Justice Leveson will inquire into the culture, practices, and ethics of the press, including:
37
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 38 Effectiveness a. contacts and the relationships between national newspapers and politicians, and the conduct of each; b. contacts and the relationship between the press and the police, and the conduct of each; c. the extent to which the current policy and regulatory framework has failed including in relation to data protection; and d. the extent to which there was a failure to act on previous warnings about media misconduct.
He will then make recommendations: a. for a new more effective policy and regulatory regime which supports the integrity and freedom of the press, the plurality of the media, and its independence, including from Government, while encouraging the highest ethical and professional standards; b. for how future concerns about press behaviour, media policy, regulation and cross-media ownership should be dealt with by all the relevant authorities, including Parliament, Government, the prosecuting authorities and the police; c. the future conduct of relations between politicians and the press; and d. the future conduct of relations between the police and the press.
This wide-ranging inquiry and its recommendations will make an impact on every part of the press.
As part of its wider work the Government is currently reviewing the services that are available to victims and witnesses in order to improve their experience of the criminal justice system. The reporting of Criminal trials is one of a wide range of issues in this area.
In relation to broadcasting, the Communications Act 2003 places a statutory duty on Ofcom to apply standards objectives to television and radio services which provide adequate protection to members of the public and all other persons from unfair treatment and unwarranted infringements of privacy in programmes included in such services. Ofcom’s Broadcasting Code, therefore, sets out the rules in this area, which include the coverage of significant news events that may involve suffering and distress. As an example, these rules cover broadcasters’ use of footage/audio of people caught up in such events and when broadcasters seek interviews, either when such events are taking place or subsequently.
In addition, the Communications Act also requires Ofcom to apply standards objectives that news included in television and radio services is presented with due impartiality and that news is also reported with due accuracy. The BBC retains similar duties under its Charter and Agreement. The Ofcom Broadcasting Code does, however, also reflect that there may be a strong public interest in reporting on an ‘emergency’
situation as it occurs. Within this framework it is, 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness therefore, recognised that broadcasters must balance the need to offer accurate and timely information to their audiences with, for example, the need to ensure that unwarranted infringements of privacy do not occur, or that police operations and individual safety are not jeopardised.
We believe the Ofcom Broadcasting Code and associated guidance, in parallel with the BBC’s rules on due impartiality and due accuracy, set out a proportionate and appropriate framework for the broadcast coverage of such significant news events, which is able to provide suitable protection to victims and their families against unwarranted intrusive reporting. Furthermore, the Communications Act also
places a duty on Ofcom to review and revise their 39
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 40 Effectiveness Broadcasting Code to ensure the standards objectives set out in the Act are being met. The existing regulatory framework, therefore, allows for Ofcom to take appropriate action if they felt the current rules were failing to do this. As such, we believe that the current regulatory regime is able to address the Committee’s concerns in this area. 7. We note the evidence given to us about the The Government is committed to tackling violence and The Government accepts the need for early intervention need for a ‘public health’ approach to preventing gun crime as well as the gang culture which, in some and data sharing, key aspects of a public health and limiting violence. We also note that the instances, drives them. Combining early intervention approach. unique and imaginative approach to the work with tough enforcement and empowering local collection and analysis of data about violent communities to prevent the spread of violence will be incidents led by Professor Jon Shepherd in crucial to these efforts. Cardiff has delivered major improvements, measured by the significant drop in the number The Home Secretary has already committed more than of victims needing treatment at Accident and £18 million to tackle gang, gun and knife crime and Emergency. We recommend that a careful prevent youth crime. Following the disturbances analysis based on science and ‘engineering’ Government has started work on a cross-Government methodology should be applied to this field of approach to tackling gangs and gang violence. The prevention. (Paragraph 43) Home Secretary will report to Parliament on this issue in October.
The Coalition Programme for Government includes the commitment to “make hospitals share non-confidential information with the police so they know where gun and knife crime is happening and can target stop-and- search in gun and knife crime hotspots”. The Department of Health is the lead department, however Home Office officials continue to support the delivery of Emergency Department information sharing between Acute Hospital Trusts and their respective Community Safety Partnerships as a key activity toward crime prevention and the reduction of serious youth violence, including gun crime. 8. We welcome the recent agreement between The Government agrees that a compulsory medical The Government accepts the need for better guidance the Association of Chief Police Officers and the check with a specially appointed medical examiner is but is also minded to consider tagging, which the British Medical Association that the police alert unlikely to be an effective or proportionate means of Committee did not support. GPs to every new and renewal licence improving the licensing process. It is important,
application. We consider this to be an important however, to ensure that any medical concerns about an step in ensuring that the licensing authority applicant or certificate holder, particularly in relation to receives accurate medical information about their mental health, are quickly highlighted to the applicants, given the cases we have heard in police. which applicants have failed to provide this, some of which have resulted in murder. Applicants for firearm and shotgun certificates must Ultimately, police licensing officers must take give details of any relevant medical conditions and give responsibility for the decision as to whether or consent for the police to approach their GP if they have not to grant or revoke a licence. We note that any concerns about the applicant’s medical history there is already a duty on doctors to which might have a bearing on his suitability to possess communicate their concerns if they judge that a firearms. This is not limited by time and the police can patient poses a danger to themselves or to approach the GP at any point during the life of a others. Police guidance must make clear that GPs certificate. It is also open to the GP to approach the are not being asked to predict future behaviour, police at any time in order to pass information of as this is impossible, or to judge the fitness of an possible concerns. applicant to possess a weapon themselves. One means of dealing with this latter concern would However, as the Committee points out, there has been be to consider requiring applicants to undergo a some lack of clarity as to who is responsible for doing compulsory medical check with a specially- what and the Government also welcomes the recent appointed medical examiner, but we note that agreement between the Association of Chief Police this would be extremely resource intensive, that Officers (ACPO) and the British Medical Association that the police will put in place within six months new it might be regarded as disproportionate, and arrangements to notify a GP of the grant and renewal that we received no firm evidence that it would
of a firearms and/or shot gun certificate. As a next 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness achieve the desired level of certainty in the step, ACPO and the BMA will draw up more detailed licensing process. (Paragraph 67) guidance on how the arrangements will work and
explain why grant was chosen as the point of notification rather than when the application was received. The Government accepts the need to make it clear that GPs are not being asked to predict future behaviour and that ultimately it is for police firearms licensing officers to take responsibility for granting or revoking a licence.
ACPO have indicated that they wish to pursue the possibility of placing a permanent marker on NHS patient records although this may prove impractical if security and data protection issues cannot be resolved. The Committee drew attention to the various points of
concern which have been raised in this regard and 41
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 42 Effectiveness in its press release indicated that it was unconvinced by the arguments in favour of a “tagging” system. The Government will closely monitor the new arrangements. 9. We consider that there should be both tighter The Government agrees that full weight should be Government will give further consideration to the restrictions and clearer guidance on the granting given to any previous convictions and cautions and will Committee’s recommendations. of firearms and shotgun licences to individuals work with ACPO to ensure that guidance is clear on who have engaged in criminal activity. Firstly, assessing a person’s fitness to be entrusted with a the legislation should be amended to clarify that firearm. As regards extension of the prohibited person persons in receipt of wholly suspended provisions to include suspended sentences, the police sentences are subject to the same prohibitions are already able to take such disposals into account from obtaining a licence to hold section 1 when assessing someone’s fitness to possess firearms, firearms or shotguns as they would be if their and they can act in cases where serious concerns arise. sentence had not been suspended. We do not That said, the Government accepts that a person who believe it appropriate for those convicted of has had a certificate refused or revoked in these offences which are serious enough to warrant a circumstances is not a ‘prohibited’ person under the custodial sentence to retain their firearms. We Firearms Acts and can still avail themselves of the are also of the view that those who receive various exemptions which allow them to possess shorter custodial sentences should not be firearms without a certificate. We are therefore minded allowed to possess firearms and recommend to carry out further work to assess the practicalities for accordingly. (Paragraph 72) implementing such a change.
Furthermore, where a person is convicted of a crime for which he is sentenced to imprisonment for any period of time, it is already open to the sentencing court under section 52 of the Firearms Act 1968 to order the forfeiture and disposal of any firearm found in his possession and to cancel any certificate held by him. Given that the trial judge will have available the full facts of the case, the Government does not believe it is necessary to extend the prohibited person provisions of section 21 to those who receive shorter custodial sentence but, as indicated above, criminal antecedents will always be an important consideration when applications are received from persons who did not own firearms at the time of their offending. 10. We understand that police licensing officers The Government accepts this recommendation. are now encouraged to take into account
intelligence about criminal behaviour that does not result in convictions, as well as convictions resulting in non-custodial sentences, when considering whether or not to grant a licence: it must be made explicit in police guidance that officers are expected to take such behaviour extremely seriously, in particular cases of bindovers, arrests and police call-outs for domestic violence, and an accumulation of convictions for offences whose penalty falls short of that requiring prohibition. (Paragraph 73)
11. Given our particular concerns about the use The Government has some concerns that involving Government will give further consideration to of legal weapons in domestic firearms incidents, partners and recent ex-partners in signing applications Committee’s recommendations. we consider that the Canadian requirement for may put them in a position of vulnerability and partners and recent ex-partners to sign licence increased risk of renewed violence and abuse. Also, application forms merits further exploration. We consent from a current partner may mean that the recommend that the UK Government should hold partner signs the application to ensure their imminent a consultation on the proposal that police safety without consideration for future safety. licensing officers consult the current and recent domestic partners of applicants in assessing a However, we agree that the Canadian requirement merits further exploration and in seeking views we will licence application, and report back to us on the 43 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness responses received. (Paragraph 74) explore with the Canadian authorities what safeguards and support they provide for partners. As the Committee recognises, the claimed 40% reduction in the gun murder rate of women in Canada since their scheme was introduced would require further analysis to establish cause and effect and the Canadian authorities have already intimated this figure needs to be used with caution as there are many factors involved in firearms homicides.
12. We are not convinced by arguments put The Government agrees with the Committee that the Government accepts the Committee’s forward in favour of decreasing the licence licence renewal period should remain at five years and recommendation. renewal period from five to two years. We have that a reduction to two years would place a not seen any evidence to suggest that there has disproportionate burden on police resources. That been an increase in misuse of lethal firearms being so, it is important that full and proper
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 4 Effectiveness since the period was increased from three years consideration should be given to revoking a certificate in 1995, and the proposal would place if there is reason to believe that the holder is no longer considerable pressure on police resources. We fitted to be entrusted with a firearm or presents a are encouraged by early signs that police forces danger to public safety or to the peace. The existence may be taking a more proactive approach to of the National Firearms Licensing Management System licence revocations following the Derrick Bird (NFLMS) which enables forces to share information shootings and consider that such an approach, across force borders and the improved links with GPs facilitated by the National Firearms Licensing outlined above will greatly assist in this process. Management System, and greater emphasis on medical checks, is the most effective way forward. (Paragraph 78)
13. We advocate a change in the law to create a Some controls on firearms might usefully be applied to Government is giving further consideration to our single system for the licensing of section 1 shotguns, for example a common test of fitness to recommendation. firearms and shotguns. Such a system should be possess. Other issues, such as ‘good reason’, are more based upon the current process for granting complex – for example, unlike rifle target-shooters, licences for section 1 firearms. The benefits of shotgun owners do not always belong to clubs who such a system would be twofold: firstly, we could vouch that they had shot regularly. The consider that allowing guns to only those Government is not aware that the current individuals who have good reason to hold them arrangements are causing any difficulties which present strikes the appropriate balance between a risk to public safety, and there is no evidence of any personal freedoms and public safety, and we see significant level of misuse using lawfully-held shotguns. no reason why those applying for a shotgun This is not to ignore the tragic shootings in Cumbria licence should be exempt from proving ‘good but as ACC Whiting indicated in his report into the reason’. Secondly, it will render the process firearms licensing aspects of the incident, had Derrick considerably more straightforward and, we Bird been required to give a good reason to possess understand from the police, cheaper to each of his shot guns, then he would have been able to administer. We believe that this can be do so. He was also in possession of a rifle for which the undertaken in such a way as to avoid any undue test of good reason currently applies. The Government restrictions on the use of shotguns. (Paragraph will keep this issue under review but is not presently 81) minded to change the law bearing in mind that the large number of shot guns currently owned (over 1.3 million) would create a significant new workload for firearms licensing departments if they were to be licensed in the same way as section 1 firearms. A Home Office working group including representatives of the police and shooting interests is working to devise a single application form and that group will look into the feasibility of a single certificate.
14. Current police guidance on firearms The Government accepts this recommendation and Recommendation partially accepted. legislation is out-of-date. We recommend that much work has already been carried out to up-date the the guidance is urgently updated to take into guidance. We have been awaiting further progress on account recent changes to legislation to ensure the question of information-sharing between police that officers are properly equipped to take the and GPs and the agreement which has now been best decisions that they can. Furthermore, the reached means that the guidance can now be firmed Government should facilitate a change in the up in a number of important respects. Although recent status of the guidance to make it an Approved changes in the law, policy and procedure have already Code of Practice, to give police decisions greater been drawn to the attention of the police, either weight with the courts. While we have no wish through Home Office circulars or ACPO information to interfere with the judicial process, we are notes, we are now looking to consolidate all this into aware of at least one case where a magistrate revised guidance and to publish as soon as possible, has reinstated a firearm revoked by the police, with arrangements for it to be updated on-line and in only for the firearm to be subsequently used in real-time. crime. (Paragraph 84) Allowing for the need for it to be up-dated, the guidance has been well received by police and shooters alike. It successfully pulls together all the controls into one place and guides the reader through the key aspects. The guidance will be updated and the Home Office will look at how it might be improved but the Government is not attracted to making the guidance statutory. Firearms law provides the police with a good
deal of discretion, in recognition of the fact that each 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness application is different and needs to be considered on its merits. It could be problematic to attempt to prescribe how every possible situation ought to be approached. The current system of discretion, supported by guidance for consistency, generally works well and it is right that the courts should ultimately decide how the law should apply. 15. There is concern about the potential impact The reduction in central government funding for the Government will give further consideration to the of police spending cuts on the firearms licensing police is a fair but manageable settlement. It is for chief Committee’s recommendation. function. In particular, it is important to preserve constables to decide where to allocate police resources. recent improvements in the rigour of the Firearms licensing departments carry out statutory process, such as the increase in home visits functions which are crucial to public safety, and it will undertaken for renewal applications, which we be for chief constables to ensure they remain consider should be compulsory. One means of appropriately staffed and effectively deployed and that ensuring sufficient funds is to increase applicant the rigour of the licensing system is not jeopardised. 45
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 46 Effectiveness fees; given that the current fee structure was set in 2000, we consider that the Home Office should There is no reason, therefore, why the reductions in consider raising the current £50 fee to a level funding should impact on home visits, whether that covers the reasonable costs of licensing. We undertaken at the time of initial grant, at the point of also understand that substantial savings could be renewal, or at any other randomised stage during the made by extending the life of a proportion of life of a certificate. These visits provide the police with a certificates in order to remove the peaks and valuable opportunity to review the circumstances of troughs created when the renewal period was each case and the extent to which the provisions of the extended to five years. The Home Office should Act have been complied with by the holder of the implement this proposal and report back to us certificate and by persons supplying them with firearms within twelve months on the steps that it has and ammunition. The prime consideration when taken on this recommendation. (Paragraph 88) considering any application for the grant or renewal of a certificate must always be to ensure that the assessment of a person’s fitness to possess firearms is based upon a full assessment of risk having regard to any intelligence gathered around key factors such as violent, intemperate or erratic behaviour, alcohol or drug abuse, misuse of firearms or other criminal behaviour. The improved links between the police and GPs referred to in paragraph 6 will clearly be a critical part of this process.
The Government accepts that a review of fees will play an important part in ensuring the resources for firearms licensing departments. The Home Office has already sought and received data from ACPO on police costs in granting and renewing certificates. Subject to clarification of certain aspects, the data will be analysed and used to discuss with interested parties what the new fees levels should be. The question of extending the life of a proportion of certificates in order to remove the peaks and troughs created when the renewal period was extended to five years has been considered on a number of occasions by both the police and the shooting organisations. There have been divergent views on the benefits or otherwise of attempting to even-out the bulge in this way, which would require legislation, but further consideration will be given to the matter over the next 12 months and reported back to the Committee as requested.
16. It has been suggested that prohibiting Secure storage of firearms is crucial in preventing Government accepts the Committee’s ownership of firearms and ammunition together access by unauthorised persons. All firearm and recommendation. in the home would reduce both the risk of them shotgun certificates are conditioned to require the falling into the hands of criminals, through theft, holder to store their guns securely at all times and the and the ease at which they could be misused by police inspect these security arrangements at the time their legal owners in violent incidents. We were of grant and renewal. The Home Office has published inclined to agree with Mr Whiting’s assessment, guidance on the sort of security measures appropriate that the need to fetch a weapon, or ammunition, in the different circumstances likely to be encountered. from a storage facility would be unlikely to deter Bearing in mind that firearms are held for a variety of those intent on murder. We are not convinced legitimate purposes other than target shooting at a that holding weapons at central locations would club (for example, hunting and vermin control) the necessarily reduce the risk of theft; it could Government agrees that it would not be feasible to indeed increase the risk of theft. (Paragraph 94) require all firearms to be stored in central locations but will continue to monitor the statistics recording the misappropriation of firearms and any other reliable information on thefts in the UK. 17. A large number of young people enjoy The Government accepts that the acquisition and Government acknowledges the Committee’s concerns shooting in a safe and responsible manner. possession of firearms by minors is not altogether but has not committed to taking action. However, the legislation governing their use of straightforward and that the current age limits in firearms is extremely complex and confusing. We firearms law have evolved over a period of time with recommend that the Government brings forward different ages for different types of firearms and for proposals to simplify and clarify (a) the age at supervised and unsupervised use. The Government is which an individual is permitted to shoot under not opposed to young people participating in sports supervision in the controlled environment of a shooting, and we note that the Committee did not 47 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness shooting range; (b) the age at which an recommend for the age limit to be increased. The individual is permitted to shoot under Government will keep the current arrangements under supervision outside of such a controlled review, and explore further whether there is a environment; and (c) the age at which an consensus in favour of simplification along particular individual is permitted to shoot unsupervised. In lines before considering whether to bring forward formulating such proposals, the Government specific proposals as recommended by the Committee. should be informed by our beliefs that the risks involved in shooting are greatly mitigated under supervision; that the purpose of granting a licence should be to allow an individual to shoot unsupervised; and that we can see no good reason to maintain the current differences in age restrictions between section 1 firearms and shotguns, the origins of which are purely
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 48 Effectiveness historical. (Paragraph 101) 18. Replica, converted and deactivated firearms It is important that any prospective amendment of the Government considering taking action to address the have emerged as a major source of illegal guns, law or change in procedures is fully evidenced and the Committee’s recommendations. perhaps owing to the difficulties that criminals Government fully supports the Committee’s view that now experience in acquiring genuine lethal as much information as possible should be made firearms. In the past, policy-making to tackle available. Home Office officials work closely with the emerging threats has been hampered by the lack National Ballistics Intelligence Service (NABIS) and of an effective evidence base about criminal use attend regular meetings of the ACPO Criminal Use of of firearms. We are encouraged that the Firearms (CUF) Steering Group, which brings together formation of the National Ballistics Intelligence law enforcement professionals working in this area. Service has gone some way towards addressing NABIS is examining this recommendation of the Inquiry this deficiency. While clearly we would not be in and is looking to make more data available in a favour of any disclosure that would compromise controlled fashion to academics. We will work with police operations, or assist criminals in accessing NABIS and police forces to ensure that data relating to lethal weapons, we urge the National Ballistics gun crime and the illegal gun market is made widely Intelligence Service and the police to make available where this would not compromise law generalised data about the illegal gun market enforcement activity. available to academics and policy-makers more widely where this would not interfere with operational requirements, in recognition of the contribution that such individuals can make to crime reduction. (Paragraph 109) 19. Restricted intelligence from the National Historically there has been a paucity of reliable Government considering taking action to address the Ballistics Intelligence Service indicates that a information concerning the use of deactivated and Committee’s recommendations. significant number of pre-1995 standard reactivated firearms in crime and there has been some weapons have been reactivated into live confusion with other types of converted weapon. weapons within the UK, and subsequently used Official statistics show few offences involving in very serious crimes. We therefore recommend deactivated firearms but the police believe the true that the Government introduces a requirement picture is more worrying. This is because in many for firearms that were deactivated before 1995 firearms offences no shot is fired and the gun is not to be modified to the 1995 standard, in order to recovered which makes it difficult to identify the make it harder for criminals to gain access to weapon used. readily-reactivated weapons. We also recommend that deactivated guns are only sold The Government notes that the Committee received through Registered Firearms Dealers. (Paragraph restricted intelligence from NABIS regarding the 114) number of reactivated weapons used in very serious crime. The Government will discuss the nature of this intelligence with ACPO with a view to determining
whether it would be proportionate to require all old deactivated weapons to be brought up to the current tougher standards or whether the requirement might be restricted to particular types of weapon preferred by criminals. The feasibility of applying current standards to weapons which have already been subject to deactivation procedures will also need to be explored further.
The Government believes that the most important aspect of controlling deactivated firearms is to ensure that they cannot be reactivated and it is generally accepted that the current standards are effective in this regard. There remains the danger that criminals will seek to smuggle weapons into the UK from other countries where the standards are less rigorous and the Government is currently engaged in trying to secure a greater harmonisation of standards through the requirements of the European Weapons Directive. There is no requirement for realistic imitation firearms to be sold through registered firearms dealers. However, in looking at the standards to be applied to deactivated weapons the Government will also
consider whether there are any benefits from requiring 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness them to be sold through registered firearms dealers. 20. The previous Government introduced The Government accepts the need for an appropriate The Government accepts the Committee’s legislation enabling a more pro-active approach specification. The Home Office has been working with recommendation. to outlawing “readily-convertible” imitation experts to draw up a specification for the construction firearms via the Violent Crime Reduction Act of blank-firing imitation firearms to prevent their 2006, but did not take the necessary action to conversion and Regulations to this effect came into bring this into effect. Restricted intelligence from force on 11 August 2011. This was a technically the National Ballistics Intelligence Service reveals difficult exercise not least because of the need to the significant role that converted firearms play ensure that the construction standards devised are in facilitating serious criminality. We therefore generic and do not apply only to particular types of recommend that the Home Secretary make blank firer. Under section 39 of the Violent Crime regulations under Section 39 of the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006, it will be an offence to Reduction Act 2006 to require imitation firearms manufacture or import an imitation firearm which does to conform to a specification that makes it more not conform to this specification. difficult for them to be converted into firing 49
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 50 Effectiveness weapons, and that a process of type approval be The legislation provides for an approval system to introduced concurrently to limit the introduction check the new specification is followed. One option of non-compliant items into the market place. would be a type-approval scheme but bearing in mind (Paragraph 119) the problems associated with the discontinued model firearms examination scheme, the Government will want to consider all the options to ensure we have something which is both effective and proportionate. 21. The Government should introduce legislation The Government accepts that the definition of ‘tools’ in Government considering there is a need for further to amend section 1(6) of the Firearms Act 1982 to the 1982 Act no longer reflects the full range of tools action. ensure that the definition of a ‘readily- commonly available from DIY stores and the internet. convertible’ imitation firearm accurately reflects However, the new specification to be introduced under the abilities of contemporary criminals to carry section 39 of the Violent Crime Reduction Act referred out such conversions, and introduce new to above will address this by moving away from tools offences for supply and importation of firearms and instead prescribing constructions standards which to ensure that those guilty of such offences face make conversion much more difficult. This will address appropriate penalties. Closer working with the the future supply of potentially convertible imitation UK’s European partners is also key to tackling firearms. The 1982 Act will still be applicable to the illegal importation of firearms. (Paragraph imitations already in circulation and it was used 124) successfully earlier this year to deal with a readily- convertible blank-firing imitation, the Olympic .38 BBM.
Gun crime causes significant and lasting harm to our communities. The Government firmly supports the view that those who perpetrate firearms offences should face tough and appropriate penalties. The UK has some of the toughest firearms laws in the world, which send a clear message that society will not tolerate gun crime. Home Office officials will continue to work closely with the ACPO Criminal Use of Firearms (CUF) Steering Group, National Ballistics Intelligence Service (NABIS) and other law enforcement partners to protect the public from gun crime. This will include undertaking further scoping work with the Ministry of Justice to establish whether it is necessary and proportionate to introduce changes to legislation in respect of criminal supply and importation of firearms.
The Home Office and law enforcement partners work
closely with European and international partners to tackle the illegal importation of firearms. Together with all other Member States the UK is represented in the Law Enforcement Working Party (LEWP) of the Council of the European Union, which addresses Justice and Home Affairs issues on law enforcement cooperation, including those relating to firearms trafficking. The UK is also a key participant in the European Firearms Experts group. We will continue to work closely with our European partners on these issues and consider international cooperation crucial to preventing the illegal importation of firearms into the UK. 22. Reported air weapon offences have been The Government accepts this recommendation and has Government accepts the Committee’s falling since 2003/04, possibly in response to recently implemented section 46 of the Crime & recommendation. legislation, although we appreciate that such Security Act 2010, which relates to the safe storage of offences are likely to be underrepresented in air weapons. This was accompanied by an awareness official figures. We were encouraged by the campaign to make people aware of the dangers of air number of successful prosecutions for possession weapons and the importance of storing them securely. of air weapons in public or by underage individuals, and improper firing of air weapons, The Government has no plans to ban or licence air that have been undertaken since 2008. Greater weapons, the vast majority of which are used safely enforcement of air weapon offences, such as and responsibly, and prefers to tackle the minority who criminal damage, should form part of the more misuse air weapons. The Government agrees that Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness general police undertaking to be tougher on enforcement of the wide range of existing controls anti-social behaviour. Before considering referred to in the Committee’s report and which whether or not to incorporate low-powered air appear to have secured significant reductions in air weapons into the firearms licensing regime, the weapon misuse since 2003-4, might usefully form part Government should continue to monitor closely of police activity to deal with anti-social behaviour. the impact of recent legislation, including the Crime and Security Act 2010 on reducing air The Government will continue to monitor the misuse of weapon offences. (Paragraph 133) air weapons and will not hesitate to take further action should this prove necessary.
51
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 52 Effectiveness
Fourth Report, The work of the UK Border Agency (HC 587), published 11 January 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation Foreign National Prisoners Accepted. 1. The difficulty in tracing and then deporting The UK Border Agency has continued to improve the released prisoners highlights the need to ensure way it deals with the deportation of foreign national that all eligible foreign nationals currently prisoners. Since 1 August 2008, provisions within the serving sentences are removed from the UK UK Borders Act 2007 have meant that any non- expeditiously and, wherever possible, are not European Economic Area (EEA) national who receives a held for long periods in prison at the taxpayers’ custodial sentence of 12 months or more, or a expense when they could be deported. sentence of any length for drug or gun crimes, will (Paragraph 2) automatically be considered for deportation. EEA nationals who receive a custodial sentence of 12 months or more for drug, violent or sex crimes, or 24 months for other crimes, are also considered for deportation.
The UK Border Agency has removed or deported more than 21,000 foreign national prisoners from the UK since 2006, including a total of 5,235[1] in 2010. We continue to ensure that individuals are deported at the earliest opportunity. Where sentence length allows, consideration of deportation is commenced up to 18 months prior to the earliest point of release. Around a third of the foreign national prisoners removed in 2010 were removed before the end of their sentence under the terms of Early Removal Scheme.
Despite the best efforts of the UK Border Agency, deportation of foreign national prisoners is often delayed by the use of judicial challenges and by their failure to comply with the documentation process. This can lengthen the period of time an individual spends in immigration detention. A sampling exercise completed
in early 2010 of cases which had been detained under immigration powers for six months or longer, showed that non-compliance was an issue in around two thirds of those cases. We are working with the judiciary and other foreign governments to tackle these issues.
The Facilitated Return Scheme (FRS) continues to deliver significant numbers of removals, and accounted for around half of all foreign prisoner removals from the UK between January and September 2010. FRS offers individuals a financial package to help them build a new life back in their home country. It is a practical solution which saves the taxpayer money in the long run, and means foreign criminals can be removed at as early a point as possible, denying them the opportunity to re-offend or prolong the process with judicial challenges.
The Government is committed to exploring ways of removing foreign criminals even earlier. This will include working with the prisons, courts and the police to build upon our capacity to gather intelligence information on nationality at an earlier stage.
2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness Asylum cases - UKBA’s legacy cases
2. Lin Homer has stated that the longer a case is The UK Border Agency applies existing policy and Accepted. left uncompleted, the more likely it is that the legislation in dealing with older asylum cases. There are applicant’s circumstances will have altered, such no separate policy criteria for these older cases. All as marriage or the birth of children, leading to a decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis using greater probability that settlement will be those existing laws and policies. Those who qualify will allowed for family reasons. We understand this, be granted leave to remain; those who do not the UK but we are concerned that in the rush to clear Border Agency will seek to remove. the backlog—not least as the clear-up rate initially was fairly slow—principle may be being sacrificed to the timetable, and grants of Given the length of time that some of these individuals settlement may be made that would not be have been in the UK, we have always been clear that a allowed in other circumstances. In cases where significant proportion of the legacy cases would be severe delays in decision-making have been the likely to be eligible to remain in the UK. When we first 5 3
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 54 Effectiveness fault of the government and not the applicant, reported to the Committee, 37% of conclusions were and where the passage of time has made grants, although this reduced at one stage of the evidence harder to find or has led to the programme, this has now increased to 40% as at 31 applicant’s being better integrated into British January 2011. We have always been clear that the society, there is an argument in favour of proportion of different conclusion types would vary granting the applicant leave to remain. throughout the life of the programme, and this rate is (Paragraph 6.) considered appropriate given the nature of these cases.
3. A minimum of 61,000 of the 400–450,000 Inevitably there will be legacy cases which are more Conclusion and statement of fact, not a cases—about one in seven—will eventually be difficult to trace, for example, because people have left recommendation concluded on the basis that the UK Border the country. Agency has been completely unable to trace what has happened to the applicant. (Paragraph The Committee will be aware from Jonathan 7) Sedgwick's recent written update that the Agency has now concluded 40,500 controlled archive[2] cases, therefore currently one in ten conclusions represents an individual that the agency has not been able to locate. We do expect this proportion to increase in light of the 34,000 cases commissioned to the archive that will mature into conclusions in the coming months, but these will be balanced against other conclusion types.
The UK Border Agency makes every effort to trace individuals, writing to them at their last known address and checking a number of internal and external databases. It has also worked with representative groups to ensure that individuals update us with their current addresses. As the public expects, the Agency undertakes the greatest number of checks on those who represent the greatest potential risk to the public.
When it has not been possible to find an individual the UK Border Agency continues to pursue the case as part of its controlled archive which is checked against watchlists and also against the Police National Computer on a regular basis. If this returns any details, the UK Border Agency will follow up on those cases. Alternatively, if an applicant or their representatives
make contact with us we will take their case out of the controlled archive.
Once the Case Resolution programme comes to an end later this year, the UK Border Agency's new Case Audit and Assurance Unit will continue to monitor the controlled archive pool and will take forward strategic targeting of potentially traceable cases.
In addition, the Government also supports e-Borders and is committed to reintroducing exit checks, so in time it will be much clearer who has left the country.
We are mindful of the historic issues and processes which led to the accumulation of a backlog of legacy asylum cases before 2006. This is why, in parallel to making a concerted effort to conclude these cases, we have put in place practical measures, through the introduction of the New Asylum Model (NAM), to ensure that new asylum claims are dealt with in an efficient and expeditious way, right through to the granting of refugee status to those who genuinely need the UK's protection, and the removal from the UK
of those who it is concluded do not. We do accept that 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness there is still more that can be done and have launched an Asylum Improvement Project to explore new ways of improving the system.
4. While we agree that the UK Border Agency Through close working with the UNHCR, the UK Border Accepted, though the recommendation is not very should not spend unlimited time trying Agency has developed a world class audit process to specific. to track down missing applicants, we are assure the quality of initial decisions and interviews. concerned about the high proportion of cases The Quality Audit Team was established and staff which will be left, in effect, in limbo. Again, this members travel across all regions to sample case points to the vital need to deal with owners' work. The Quality Audit Team has further cases as expeditiously as possible and not to let developed its portfolio to include consideration of the backlogs grow. (Paragraph 8) appeals process. Quality Auditors produce individual reports, which feed into monthly summaries, sharing best practice to all of our regions. Areas in need of improvement are also identified, and solutions are 5
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 56 Effectiveness implemented via our senior caseworker network. The UK Border Agency continues to build on this work with the UNHCR and is sharing its approach to quality with EU and international partners.
In addition, we have developed a new set of performance indicators designed to show the overall health of the asylum system. We are moving away from an exclusive focus on the six month conclusion rate as defined by the old Public Service Agreement target which was the subject of criticism from our corporate partners, the National Audit Office and Independent Chief Inspector. We still believe that measuring our performance in terms of conclusions is the right thing to do but by also looking at the 'vital signs' we can ensure that the asylum system is kept in balance.
Our new approach to performance in the asylum system is in line with the Government's stated aims of increasing transparency and of speeding up the system. So, we will continue to focus on concluding cases— and not just deciding them. As we have outlined, our performance will be measured by a basket of indicators to ensure the asylum system is kept in balance.
The range of indicators includes- • Intake • Decisions taken within 30 days • Quality of decision • Grant rate • % decisions overturned at appeal • Conclusions at 6, 12, 18 and 36 months • Cases removed by 12 months • Number and age profile of the outstanding caseload • Asylum support costs • Productivity (conclusion per case owner FTE) • Unit cost.
Our system is more robust and more stable than it has been, but we know there is still a lot to do. We have therefore introduced the Asylum Improvement Project which is our vehicle for making further improvements in how we deal with applications.
New Asylum Cases Conclusion, reflecting recommendations made above. 5. We agree that quality should not be sacrificed to speed when it comes to decision making. From the cases we see as constituency members, much of the delay in concluding asylum and other immigration cases stems from poor quality decision making when the application is initially considered. We recognise the progress made over the last few years in relation to new procedures and approaches, but we consider that the UK Border Agency still has room for improvement. More consistent and rigorous scrutiny of applications would lead to fewer delays, fewer appeals, less uncertainty for the applicant, less pressure on the officials
themselves, and probably lower costs for the UK 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness taxpayer. This may well require greater investment in staff training. It is also likely to require more consistent and considered direction from those setting policy for the Agency than has sometimes been the case. (Paragraph 10) Other issues - Enforced removals from the UK
6. We are not at all convinced that the UK Border All Detention Custody Officers (DCOs) complete a Some commitment to review training practices in Agency is being effective in making sure that its comprehensive training course before they are allowed relation to detainees with health problems, but contractors provide adequate training and to work with detainees, the contents of which are otherwise a defence of the status quo. supervision of their employees in respect of the approved by the UK Border Agency. This encompasses use of force. This is a fundamental responsibility human rights, diversity, self-harm and suicide of the Agency and is not simply a matter of prevention, child protection, first aid and the use of clauses in contracts or formal procedural restraint. The training has a heavy emphasis on using requirements. (Paragraph 11) interpersonal skills to persuade detainees to comply 57
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 58 Effectiveness with what is required of them, and only to use restraint as a matter of last resort. It also emphasises the requirement to de-escalate any use of restraint as soon as it is safe to do so when the objective has been achieved or the detainee complies. DCOs receive regular refresher training and in the case of restraint, every twelve months.
Restraint training within the UK Border Agency's detention estate is delivered by professional trainers and uses techniques accredited by the National Offender Management Service.
The work of DCOs are overseen and monitored on a number of different levels by the UK Border Agency once they begin to work with detainees:
DCOs are monitored by a team of contract monitors, who use evidence to provide feedback on performance. Evidence includes both personal observations, but also a variety of different reports and CCTV. Although we do not routinely video every removal attempt, given the use of video equipment can itself antagonise detainees, the UK Border Agency does use hand-held devices for high risk removals or those where we anticipate particularly disruptive behaviour on the part of detainee.
DCOs are required to report any use of restraint or use of handcuffs, even if used as a precautionary measure. Such reports are reviewed by a senior manager and are then passed to the relevant contract monitor for review. It is open to the manager or contract monitor to commission an investigation if they feel there are questions as to whether the use of restraint was appropriate or justified.
All immigration removal centres and escorting vans are fitted with CCTV, and recordings are sampled by senior managers and contract monitors.
The UK Border Agency operates a comprehensive complaints system as part of our monitoring arrangements: detainees are told how to complain on arrival in a removal centre and upon escort, and forms are widely available in a range of different languages. Monitors review outcomes of complaint investigations and the UK Border Agency has a separate team which considers trends, both those substantiated and also those which are not substantiated. Complaints are also the subject of investigations by the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman, a copy of whose reports are sent to the Director of Detention Services. Any allegation of excessive use of force is passed automatically to the police for them to consider whether to conduct their own parallel investigation.
Furthermore, Independent Monitoring Boards work in all our Immigration Removal Centres and a number of short-term holding facilities, including Heathrow Airport, and report regularly to the contract monitors, and annually to the Home Secretary. Their reports are published on their website. The Chief Inspector of
Prisons also provides a programme of announced and 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness unannounced inspections, reporting to the Home Secretary.
Several thousand immigration detainees pass through the immigration detention estate each month or are removed from the UK, and the UK Border Agency is increasing the number of monitors by eight specifically to provide continued assurances in relation to the escorting service.
We have noted the Committee's concerns about the risk assessment process for detainees with medical conditions. The Person Escort Record (PER), a copy of which was presented during Lin Homer's oral evidence to the Committee in November 2010, and which is
being piloted by the UK Border Agency, has a 5 9
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 60 Effectiveness dedicated section for healthcare clinicians to complete to highlight medical and mental health issues, as well as suicide and self-harm risk factors. The form also provides the contact number of the person completing the assessment in case of questions or queries. The form is counter-signed by a senior officer and it is open to this individual or the escorts themselves if they do not understand an entry or wish to clarify a matter further. We are not aware of any particular concerns. Detainees who are being escorted and who are not part of the pilot are also carefully risk assessed, using information from a number of sources.
Detailed medical information is usually a matter of clinical confidentiality between the detainee patient and healthcare staff, but if deemed clinically appropriate, and with the patient's consent, information can be shared with escorting staff to assist the detainee's management during the removal process to ensure their health and well-being at all times. To share information without the detainee's consent would be a significant clinical event, which may be rarely necessary in the clinician's judgement, but every effort will always be made to obtain informed consent.
Where healthcare clinicians feel that a medical escort is required, we provide one. A medical escort will have full access to the individual's medical record, which accompanies them. A medical escort was provided for 990 removals in 2010.
The UK Border Agency is working with the Department of Health to consider how the existing measures can be strengthened further.
7. We also note that the risk assessment which has to accompany the person being removed (a copy of which was provided to the Committee) is concerned principally with the possible risks of the deportee absconding or offering violence to the accompanying officials, rather than risks of harm to the deportee him/herself. It is not clear whether the very short section on the deportee’s medical condition, which has to be filled in by a qualified medical practitioner, would be completed in such a way as to be understood by a layman, such as an escorting officer: would it, for example, be obvious that the deportee’s underlying heart condition or other complaint might make some types of physical restraint potentially lethal? We look forward to the Government’s responses to our concerns. (Paragraph 12) Treatment of detainees with special medical needs
8. We requested a copy of the audit. We are Further analysis of some of the data in the original Information provided eventually.
disappointed that, as of the last sitting date in evaluation has now been completed and a report was 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 2010, this has not been forthcoming. (Paragraph published on 1 March 2011—a copy of which was 14) provided to the Committee.
61
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 62 Effectiveness Members’ correspondence
9. We again raised with Lin Homer the issue of The UK Border Agency, in recent years, has received Agency has taken some steps to improve handling of both the level and the quality of the UK Border the highest volume of letters from Members and Peers: MP correspondence but disagreement remains about Agency’s responses to Members’ correspondence of the 66,320 intake for 2009 (latest figures available) who should sign off letters from MPs to Ministers. on behalf of their constituents. We understand approximately 30% were where Members wrote to that Ms Homer will shortly move to a new job Ministers. In line with Cabinet Office guidelines, where leaving this unsatisfactory situation unresolved. an MP has written to a Minister about the day to day We trust that her successor will take our operations of the Agency the Minister has authorised concerns seriously. When Members write to the Chief Executive, or their deputy, to reply. We Ministers it is expected that the reply will at least encourage MPs to write direct to UK Border Agency be signed by the Minister. It is therefore officials in such instances. unacceptable that the head of an agency should delegate this task to more junior officials. We have been working with MPs to help them (paragraph 15) understand the best way to communicate with the Agency. We have put in place a range of channels that can be used as an alternative to letters that will provide quicker and more tailored responses. This included introducing named Account Managers for all MPs, a dedicated telephone enquiry line, an on-line correspondence tracker and improved handling of email enquiries. As a result of this we have received a significant reduction in letters from MPs over the past year.
Salaries
10. We consider that in the current situation of The Chief Executive of the UK Border Agency post will Chief Executive post was advertised at a lower salary, wage constraints and reductions in posts in the be filled following a fair and open competition. All civil within the Permanent Secretary range. public sector, it would be appropriate to offer a service salaries are competitive and designed to ensure significantly lower level of salary than the the tax payer gets value for money, whilst also 50% cut in staff bonuses. £208,000 currently paid—the appointee should attracting the most talented individuals to challenging be paid no more than the Permanent Secretary and high profile roles. of the Home Office. In addition, we think that no bonuses should be paid to senior staff in the The Home Office follows Government policy in current financial climate. (Paragraph 16) awarding non-consolidated performance bonuses to its Senior Civil Servants (SCS). The Prime Minister has stated that bonus awards for the SCS will be restricted to the top 25% only.
To take account of current financial pressures, the Permanent Secretary of the Home Office decided that less than half of the available provision should be spent for the 2009/10 SCS Performance and Reward Review. Arrangements for performance-related payments for 2010/11 have not yet been finalised.
Bogus Colleges
11. We therefore request the Government to Since April 2010 at least 50% of post licence visits Acknowledgement of the problem and some adoption implement our predecessor committee’s undertaken by UK Border Agency visiting officers have of unannounced inspections, but no response on recommendations in full, and specifically those been unannounced. Additionally, visits commissioned restricting the use of the term “college”. regarding the need for unannounced inspection by the Agency's sponsor investigations team are all visits to educational establishments, a statutory unannounced. Where appropriate information about restriction on the use of the term ‘college’ institutions about which the UK Border Agency has limiting it to accredited institutions, and an concerns is shared with other government departments account of how the relevant authorities ensure such as the Department for Business, Innovation and that they investigate the intelligence provided Skills. by legitimate colleges and others about potential bogus institutions. (Paragraph 17) Since the introduction of Tier 4 of the Points Based System on 31 March 2009, a total of 60 education providers have had their sponsor licences revoked and the UK Border Agency is revoking more each year. In 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness the period between 1 April 2010 and 20 January 2011 a total of 32 education providers had their sponsor licences revoked. This is an increase of 19% on the 27 revocations of sponsor licences between 31 March 2009 and 31 March 2010.
As proposed in our consultation about the reform of the student immigration system, we are working closely with all departments responsible for education across the UK to review the work of the currently approved accreditation bodies, to establish what more can be done to ensure the quality of education provision within the private sector. Early findings from the consultation indicate widespread support for the review of the current system in order to improve quality 63
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 64 Effectiveness standards across the private, further and higher education sector. We are analysing the responses received to the consultation and will publish our findings and final policy proposals, including on the future of the accreditation system, in due course.
Restricting the use of the term 'college' and closing down bogus colleges as a result of intelligence gathered are matters for the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills.
Immigration statistics
12. We consider that it would help both those Home Office Statistics are looking at ways of Undertaking to present data in a more accessible way. engaged in the formation of immigration policy presenting the data in a more comprehensive way; by Worth monitoring. and the general public seeking to understand it if clearly setting out the criteria used in the measurement the Government—and indeed others—were to of each statistic and the relationships and differences adopt a clear set of criteria for the measurement between the various statistics. This will allow users, of inflows to and outflows from the UK whether the general public or those engaged in policy (whether, for example, they include UK citizens, formation, to continue to have access to the data that whether they relate to those settling in the UK they require for various purposes and to gain a better and, if so, for how long, and so on) and to use understanding of the data. This work is being only figures that meet these criteria when undertaken in conjunction with a forum of discussing migration, asylum and related policies. representatives from a range of external statistical users (Paragraph 18) and the Office for National Statistics which is responsible for official estimates of UK migration.
Data are provided to suit a wide range of needs, including making internationally and historically consistent comparisons. This requires publishing data to internationally recognised definitions, such as the UN definition of `net migration', and asylum, but also data which allows the public to be informed about the performance of the UK Border Agency. In some cases these do not use the same definitions. In addition data supplied to the EU by the UK Border Agency is required to meet definitions that may differ from those used nationally. Wherever possible we try to align these different definitions and make clear to statistics users
where these differences occur and the meaning of each particular set of data.
As part of the development of plans within the e- borders project to re-introduce exit checks, Home Office Statistics and Office for National Statistics are considering the data that might in due course be provided on outflows; these will be notified in the Control of Immigration publication.
13. We also note that unless and until the UK has See above. records of all those entering the country and leaving the country, many of the uncertainties highlighted in this Report will continue into the future. (Paragraph 19)
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 65
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 66 Effectiveness
Fifth Report, Police use of tasers (HC 646), published 7 March 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation The reasons for the revocation of the Section 5 authority
We were concerned by the confusion of the The Home Office notes the Committee’s observations Accepted witness as to the parameters of the Section 5 around the section 5 authority issued to Pro-Tect authority and the fact that the National Policing systems. (paragraph 10) Improvement Agency, a police agency, had purchased what was considered to be an The authority for the new supplier, Tactical Safety ‘unauthorised’ weapon. We recommend that the Responses Limited (TSR), is explicit as to what the parameters of the Section 5 authority be clarified company can and cannot supply, and to whom it can by the Home Office for all police forces, related supply Tasers and associated equipment. All police agencies and the new authority-holder, Tactical forces have been made aware of the terms of the new Safety Responses Ltd (TSR). We seek license, through correspondence to the Association of confirmation from the Home Office that the Chief Police Officers (ACPO) Armed Policing Secretariat, National Policing Improvement Agency are now which has been circulated to all forces and placed on fully familiar with the relevant legal framework the ACPO Intranet. Related agencies including the regarding the supply of weapons and that its National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) have also successor body will be appropriately conversant been closely consulted and informed about the terms with the restrictions. However, we note that the of the license which are also on the NPIA POLKA Home Office has taken steps to ensure System. The Government notes that the Committee is compliance with the section 5 authority and are pleased the Home Office is monitoring the situation of the new licence holder carefully. pleased to note that the relevant Home Office directorate will be monitoring the situation closely. (paragraph 9)
The link between Pro-Tect Systems Ltd and Tactical Safety Responses Ltd
We are perturbed by a turn of events which has We refer the Committee to the Memorandum sent by Not really accepted, but the contract has now been led to the new supplier of Tasers to police forces the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Crime awarded. Re-visit when it comes up for renewal. in England and Wales being so closely involved Prevention in December 2010 which is annexed to your with the previous supplier that it leases premises Report, in which it was made clear that the decision to from it and is staffed exclusively by former revoke Pro-Tect’s license was not taken lightly, and that employees of that previous supplier. The the Home Office considered very carefully all the circumstances surrounding TSR’s selection as the information supplied to us by the police and sole supplier of Taser weaponry to police forces representations made by the company’s solicitors. The in England and Wales leads us to conclude— memorandum also summarises the breaches of Pro- either 1) the Home Office has been forced, Tect Systems’ licence. (paragraph 12) through the business model of a foreign national company, into authorising a new supplier whose Subsequent correspondence from Graham links to the previous supplier ought to have Widdecombe, the Home Office’s Head of Firearms, also precluded it from consideration; or 2) the affixed to the Home Affairs Committee Report, details transgressions made by Mr Boatman can be the information sought from TSR as to its links with regarded as his alone and therefore not the Pro-Tect Systems, and Northamptonshire Police’s responsibility of Pro-Tect Systems, bringing into further enquires into TSR on our behalf. Mr question the decision to revoke the authority of Widdecombe’s letter also outlines the conditions on the TSR’s section 5 authority, which address the links Pro-Tect Systems to supply this equipment. The with the previous company, and summarises the close only other possibility is that the Home Office
monitoring and examination of TSR for the six month 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness was simply not aware of the extent of the links period of its license. between the two firms which would imply a serious failure of due diligence in the As the supplementary Memorandum to the Committee authorisation process. This would also call into from the Parliamentary Under Secretary for Crime question the decision of the Home Office to Prevention makes clear (also annexed to the Home accept the wish of the supplier to use only one Affairs Committee Report), TSR is not a supplier to the UK distributor. (paragraph 12) Home Office, and the Home Office role in considering whether to grant TSR a section 5 authority was based on their fitness and suitability to provide prohibited items to the police. The Memorandum goes on to explain that it would not be appropriate, and the Home Office would risk legal challenge, if it used the section 5 process for the purposes of shaping procurement or supply decisions. 67
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 68 Effectiveness Monopoly Supply
The monopoly supplier business model preferred The Report refers to ACPO concerns on the sole Not really accepted, but the contract has now been by Taser International is unacceptable—we supplier model, and its suggestion that a national awarded. Re-visit when it comes up for renewal. consider that such a model is partially contract is organised to ensure that all forces benefit responsible for the unsatisfactory procurement from logistic and procurement savings. We can confirm situation and may have caused the Home Office that NPIA has put in place a national framework for the to act precipitously when granting a section 5 purchase of Taser from TSR. (paragraph 15) authority to the new supplier, TSR. We intend to examine police procurement in a forthcoming The Government understands the concerns of the inquiry but in the interim would strongly urge Committee about a sole supplier but rejects any the Home Office to examine options to require a suggestion that this caused the Home Office to act competitive bidding process to ensure that any precipitously when granting a section 5 authority to police procurement process is subject to TSR. Again, that decision was taken solely on the competition. (paragraph 15) fitness and suitability of TSR to provide prohibited items to the police. Contingency arrangements for the supply chain had been developed (including direct supply to the Home Office for a temporary period) to ensure that the sole supplier arrangements preferred by Taser International could not inappropriately impact on the Home Office’s decision.
As the Memorandum of the Parliamentary Under Secretary for Crime Prevention to the Committee, dated January 2011, sets out, the Home Office Scientific Development Branch (now the Centre for Applied Science and Technology) has looked at various conducted energy devices from around the world, but the Taser X26 is the device that most closely meets the police’s stringent operational requirement. Public and police officer safety are paramount, and there is accordingly no scope to introduce a competitive bidding process which includes other Conducted Energy Devices which we know are not operationally effective and whose medical implications are not known.
The Home Office does however continue to work with Taser International both to ensure they understand the risks involved under their preferred model should there be a problem with the sole agent, and to identify contingency arrangements for the supply chain.
Sixth Report, Police finances (HC 695), published 23 February 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. The current confusion about what constitutes We agree with the Committee’s recommendation. In As the Government response notes, Her Majesty’s the front line in the police service is unhelpful, response to questions in Parliament, including the one Inspectorate of Constabulary has produced a report especially given the frequency with which this quoted in the Committee’s report, the Government setting out a definition of the front line. The definition term is used by those involved in the debate said that it was considering with the Police Service the is: “The police front line comprises those who are in about the service’s future. Police forces are being establishment of a common definition. everyday contact with the public and who directly asked to prioritise the front line; it is only intervene to keep people safe and enforce the law.” reasonable that the Home Office specifies what We asked Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary HMIC estimates that “a total of around 68% of the it means by this term. We urge the Home Office (HMIC) to develop a definition and the result of this total police workforce across England and Wales is to work with the police service to produce an work was published [on 30 March 2011] in the report front line: the 61% in visible and specialist roles, plus agreed definition of front line, middle office and Demanding Times 7% in middle office roles.” back office police roles as soon as possible. http://www.hmic.gov.uk/sitecollectiondo (Paragraph 11) cuments/thematics/THM_20110330.pdf
The approach taken is to develop a workforce model, mapping out officers, PCSOs and police staff according 69 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness to their role and then grouping these roles into four categories1. The roles identified by HMIC and the kind of work carried out are summarised below: • Visible – responding to 999 calls, attending traffic accidents, patrolling neighbourhoods; • Specialist – investigating crime, bringing criminals to justice, crime scene examinations; • Middle office – roles that manage or support those in visible and specialist roles, running police specific processes such as answering emergency calls from the public, holding prisoners in custody and processing intelligence; • Back office – support services such as finance, information technology, human resources
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 70 Effectiveness Full details of the workforce model and categorisation of workforce roles are provided in the report. 1 The roles are based on categorisations provided in data submitted to the Home Office in the Annual Data Requirement.
In developing the definition of frontline policing, HMIC consulted police representatives and undertook a small public survey. The conclusion is that around two-thirds of the total police workforce is frontline and one third is not. It also found that approximately 20% of officers and PCSOs are in the back and middle office.
The limitations of the definition are set out in the report. For example, although it provides detail around the proportions of the police workforce deployed in particular roles, the definition does not shed light on the issue of workforce productivity. That is, for example, how much time is wasted by bureaucracy, how effective officers and staff are in their jobs, and whether they are deployed in appropriate numbers at the right times and in the right places. Nor does it take account of duties taking individuals away from the frontline, such as training or other abstractions.
Taken together with the analysis of officer visibility and availability in the remainder of Demanding Times, the conclusions show there is more Forces can do to improve frontline services whilst at the same time making savings. A survey of all Police Forces in England and Wales at three key times of the week and included in the report shows that, on average, 12% of the total number of officers and PCSOs are visible and available to the public at these times. As HMIC point out, the nature of policing as a 24/7 emergency service means that it generally takes between five and six officers to cover a 24 hour period (because of shift working, leave, training and time in court) so there could never be 100% availability. Nonetheless, the report finds significant variations between Forces in terms of visible
and available officers and staff, ranging from 9% to 17%. Together with the finding that more officers and PCSOs are available on a Monday morning than on much busier Friday and Saturday nights, this suggests there is scope for Forces to make the frontline service more efficient and productive at the same time as the workforce is reduced. (page 4)
2. Although data collection from all 43 police We agree with the points made by the Committee and The Committee discusses bureaucracy further in its forces in England and Wales is not yet complete remain committed to reducing unnecessary report on the New landscape of policing. and there is still uncertainty about the precise bureaucracy in policing as part of our broader objective figures involved, it is expected that there will be of freeing up the Police Service from central control, significantly fewer police officers, police building professional responsibility and returning community support officers and police staff as a accountability to the public. This is closely linked to the result of the savings being required of police need to achieve genuine cost savings by eliminating forces over the next four years. We accept that waste in policing. there is no simple relationship between numbers of police officers and levels of crime. The The Government’s plan for reducing bureaucracy was reduction in the police workforce need not set out in the Policing in the 21st Century consultation inevitably lead to a rise in crime. However, the paper, published in July 2010. It has three elements: loss of posts will have an impact on the range of ending Whitehall interference in policing; reducing services that the police provide and the way in bureaucracy and promoting judgement; and ensuring which they are provided. The primary mission of that the leaders of the Service take responsibility for Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness the police is to prevent crime and disorder. In keeping bureaucracy to a minimum. The Police Service order to fulfil this mission in the immediate must play its part in making sure that we get the best future, police forces will have to cut back on possible value from every pound that is spent. some of the activities that they currently undertake. In the context of reducing police In October 2010, we set up a Reducing Bureaucracy numbers, it will clearly be crucial that police Programme Board to drive work on reducing unnecessary police bureaucracy. This Board is chaired forces manage the time of police officers and by the Association of Chief Police Officers lead for police staff in the most efficient and effective bureaucracy and has a membership of key policing way possible. In particular, we would like to see partners, including Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of an end to unnecessary bureaucracy and Constabulary, the National Policing Improvement encourage the Government to continue taking Agency, and the Association of Police Authorities. This urgent steps to achieve this. (Paragraph 13) has provided a service-led approach to this issue that had been lacking previously, drawing on the knowledge and experience of officers and staff in individual Forces. 71
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 72 Effectiveness
We have already made progress on this programme of work. On ending Whitehall interference, we have scrapped the Policing Pledge and the central public confidence target, and we have removed excessive central performance management, such as the abolition of the Assessment of Policing and Community Safety. On reducing unnecessary bureaucracy, we have scrapped the national requirement for the Stop and Account form and reduced the burden of the Stop and Search procedures, which could save up to 800,000 man hours per year. On promoting judgement, we are currently rolling out the return of charging decisions to police officers for certain offences, which could save up to 50,000 man hours per year.
We are also streamlining processes elsewhere in the Criminal Justice System that generate bureaucracy for police officers; we are currently reviewing crime recording rules to minimise the burdens on Forces whilst ensuring that comparable data is available to the public; and we are reviewing health and safety rules to support officers that do the right things through a common sense application of the rules.
We will continue to take this work forward in all areas of policing, including legal powers, partnership engagement, and management of information. (page 6)
3. Given that the vast majority of the police We believe that £200 million of savings can be Non-IT procurement will become the responsibility of budget is spent on the workforce, the proportion achieved from better procurement of equipment and the Home Office. of savings that can be made through better services and a further £180 million by joining up police procurement will necessarily be relatively IT (some of which will be achieved by better IT procurement will be the responsibility of the new modest. However, even a modest contribution is procurement of IT). This will be a significant police-led IT company better than none and we remain interested in contribution to the savings the Police Service must the idea that more co-ordinated procurement make by 2014/15. The Government intends to end the offers scope for forces to save money. We are practice of the Police Service buying things in 43 disappointed that the National Policing different ways. Regulations that came into force on 4 Improvement Agency, which has as one of its March are an important step in that process. Through statutory objectives the provision of support to the use of national framework arrangements to buy forces on procurement, has not already got to certain body armour, IT and vehicles the Police Service grips with the issue of procurement, although can save up to £27 million per year by 2014/15 from we accept that in some important areas, such as the better prices available through the frameworks and the procurement of IT systems, it is as important from the reduction in wastefully duplicated to achieve integration of systems and procurement activity. The new regulations will ensure consistency of approach as it is to cut the direct that all Forces move to these national frameworks. costs of equipment. We will return to this in detail when we look at the new landscape of Planning is now under way for the transfer to the policing. As the National Policing Improvement Home Office Commercial Directorate of the non-IT Agency is due to be phased out by spring 2012, related procurement work presently carried out for the Police Service by the National Policing Improvement we urge the Home Office to clarify as soon as Agency. The Government is committed to maintaining possible who will be responsible for driving
the momentum of savings delivery during this transfer. 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness better procurement in its absence. (Paragraph 16) Consideration of the future arrangements for the procurement of police IT is being taken forward as part of wider work on the future management of police IT services. (page 7) 4. It is clear that some witnesses were concerned This Government inherited the largest peace time The Government response sets out the information the that reductions in the police budget are being deficit in Britain’s history. We have had no option but Committee requested about the transition front-loaded in the first two years. The greatest to take urgent action and the Police Service cannot be arrangements. savings are being required when the transition exempt from the requirement to save public money. from Police Authorities to Police and Crime This urgency has been reflected in the profile of Commissioners is scheduled to take place and reductions agreed with Her Majesty’s Treasury as part when police forces nationwide will be under the of the Spending Review through higher levels of additional pressure of policing the Olympics. We savings being required over the first two years of the urge the Home Office to acknowledge that there period. This Government will work closely with Police are risks involved in this transition. Police and Forces to ensure that these savings are achieved. Crime Commissioners will have to deal with 73
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 74 Effectiveness budgetary decisions that they have inherited The Home Office is committed to managing well the rather than made. The Home Office should, as transition over the next year from Police Authorities to soon as possible, set out how the transition Police and Crime Commissioners. It has established the should be managed. (Paragraph 21) Police and Crime Commissioners transition programme to involve key partners in this process. The Minister of State for Policing and Criminal Justice chairs the Police and Crime Commissioners Transition Sponsorship Board. This Board has commissioned 12 projects that will deliver the transition programme at a practical level, and identify and mitigate the relevant risks. Within this we are working closely with individual Police Authorities and supporting them to meet their financial challenges. We will also be looking to support prospective incoming Police and Crime Commissioners in terms of their induction and capability.
As with Police Authorities, Police and Crime Commissioners will have the same powers and responsibilities as Police Authorities in financial and budgeting matters.
In terms of the Committee’s comments on the pressures of policing the Olympics, the provisional settlement announcement on 13 December 2010 also included details of funding for Olympic safety and security. The focus of the Government and everyone involved is to deliver a safe and secure Olympic and Paralympic Games that everyone can enjoy. We announced that total funding for the Olympic safety and security programme would be £475 million (though the original funding envelope of £600 million remains available, if required). This funding should be sufficient to deliver the programme in full and is in addition to core police funding. (page 7) 5. The complexity of the formula leads to The Police Allocation Formula funds Forces on the basis Accepts some of the Committee’s observations, fragility which in turn makes the outcome of their relative estimated workload. This estimation although not its assertion that successive unpredictable. Ministers in successive may be complex but this is the basis for the PAF’s administrations have tried and failed to improve the Administrations have sought to improve the accuracy and is therefore a strength rather than a Police Allocation Formula. formula, but with limited success. Each year weakness. The Formula is regarded by many policing
there are cries of pain from the losers while, partners as a robust and credible tool for allocating unsurprisingly, little is heard from the winners. funding. We have worked to make the formula clearer Police forces need a system that offers long-term to improve transparency and have written a Plain predictability in order to be able to plan more English Guide effectively, especially at a time of reduced http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/police/pe-guide-police- income. (Paragraph 25) alloc-formula
Furthermore, the Police Allocation Formula has been reviewed several times by independent consultancy firms and by the Police Allocation Formula Working Group, made up of a wide range of policing partners including representatives from Police Forces, the Association of Police Authorities and the Association of Chief Police Officers. Notwithstanding this, we will continue to consider suggestions on improvements to the Police Allocation Formula.
We do not accept the Committee’s assertion that successive administrations have tried and failed to improve the Police Allocation Formula. It is constantly under review and areas for improvement are frequently discussed with policing partners. The most recent review was undertaken from 2008-2010 by the Police
Allocation Formula Working Group. Recommendations 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness from this review formed the basis of the 2010 consultation after which three technical improvements were made to the Formula.
We are also of the view that long term predictability and stability is essential, especially in these tougher economic times. We ensure this through multi year settlements and the damping mechanism which smoothes funding between years. The Home Secretary’s decision to set damping at the level of the average cut in 2011/12 and 2012/13 has also helped to ensure predictability and continuity. On 13 December we provided as much funding clarity as possible over by publishing indicative and provisional force-level allocations over the four years of the Spending Review
period to help forces with their financial planning. 75
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 76 Effectiveness Allocations for 2011/12 were subsequently approved by Parliament on 9 February. (page 8)
Seventh Report, Student visas (HC 773), published 15 March 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation Safeguarding the UK knowledge economy The vast majority of UK business schools operate in Acknowledges concerns but does not carry out specific partnership with universities and will therefore be recommendation. 1. We seek assurances from the Government that protected under the changes announced on the 22 any proposed changes to the student visa regime March. I hope the Committee will be reassured to are examined for their impact on the viability know that in our meeting following the announcement and success of UK business schools. (Paragraph of the policy, representatives of the London Business 22) School commented very positively on our reforms. Safeguarding the UK knowledge economy This consideration was made very clear in the Announcement of changes made on 22 March were announcement and our reforms focus on protecting substantively different to the consultation document on 2. We urge the Government to safeguard the UK universities and the students they have told us are the which we based our report. knowledge economy when introducing any most valuable to them. proposed changes to the student immigration system. We hope that, in the near future, we will reach a point where we are able to recruit the majority of the required skills from the domestic Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness market but at present, we must rely on international students in order to ensure our international competitiveness. (Paragraph 24) International student market We are aware of the challenges we face. Announcement of changes made on 22 March were substantively different to the consultation document on 3. The international student market is estimated However, international comparisons with key which we based our report. We welcome the decision to be worth £40 billion to the UK economy. competitor markets have been examined throughout to exclude foreign graduates from the Tier 2 cap. Education is a growth market and the UK is the the reform process. I am confident that our offer second most popular destination in the world for remains competitive when set against key alternative international students. Some of the world’s markets, and in some ways our offer remains more leading institutions are based in the UK and we generous, for example in regard to maintenance have a history of hosting international students requirements for student dependents. who go on to promote Britain abroad. There is a highly competitive world market in attracting international students and as well as facing 77
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 78 Effectiveness competition from English-speaking countries, many non-Anglophone countries are now providing higher education courses in English. The past experiences of the USA and Australia in visa systems reforming their highlight the sensitivity of the international market in education to countries’ student visa regimes, and it would be wise for the UK to bear this very much in mind. (Paragraph 32) Government proposals I therefore hope you will welcome our decision to keep Announcement of changes on 22 March kept the our requirement to a B1 level for lower courses, minimum requirement of English ability at B1. Language level including pathway courses,
4. We strongly recommend that the Government does not increase the minimum language level for Highly Trusted Sponsors at any course level. However, if the Government does implement the proposal of increasing the minimum language requirement for the Tier 4 general student visa then it should work with pathway providers to ensure that the student visitor visa is suitable for their courses. We therefore recommend that the student visitor visa is extended to 18 months, that English language and pathway students are entitled to use the route and that the extension is made permanent to ensure certainty for providers in this very important part of the higher education sector. However, if the student visitor route is expanded to accommodate pathway courses, we accept the need for close monitoring of the route. (Paragraph 40)
Secure English language tests and publish the definition of the IELTS score Accepted. equivalents and the equivalents for each of the other 5. There thus appears to be scope for confusion approved test providers (both B1 and B2 levels). not only about which secure English language Moreover, we are allowing universities to use their own tests would be appropriate but also about the testing processes. standard required. The Government must clarify these issues before introducing any change to language requirements. (Paragraph 41) Academic progression I am pleased that the report welcomes our plans to Accepted. require academic progression and would like to 6. In many instances doctoral students are reassure the Committee that genuine students will be originally registered for a Masters degree and able to study at the same NQF level where sponsors formally transfer only late in the first year. We vouch for academic progression (e.g. for a second therefore recommend that academic progression Masters degree) be required but that an exception be made available for those who can provide good reasons for studying for a second Masters degree. (Paragraph 42) Requiring the student to return home to apply I hope the Committee will welcome our decision to Accepted. for a new visa replace this proposal with a limit on the time a student can say in the UK, with exceptions for those studying 7. We agree that students should not be allowed certain professional qualifications and PhDs. to accumulate visa after visa, merely to prolong 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness their stay in the UK and we therefore understand the rationale of requiring a student to return to their home country in order to apply for a visa for a new course. However, given the practicalities involved and the financial implications for both the student and the UK Border Agency we consider the Government’s proposal too onerous and likely to lead to a decline in the retention rate for the high quality students the UK’s research facilities most desire. We note that applicants for other visas do not necessarily have to return to their home country in order to apply for a new or extended visa. We are not convinced of the need to change the
status quo. However, if the Home Office is 79
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 80 Effectiveness determined to make a change, we suggest that it investigate the possibility of requiring that any new or extended visa be validated at a UK port of entry, although we regard this as an undesirable and bureaucratic approach. (Paragraph 48) The Post Study Work route A route which gives international graduates unlimited Although the Government has shortened the time that access to the labour market is hard to justify at a time a graduate has to look for employment, the path to UK 8. We understand the reasoning behind the when almost one in ten UK graduates is currently employment is still open to graduates via Tier 2. We proposal to close the Post Study Work route but unemployed. also welcome the introduction of the entrepreneur its importance in terms of attracting route. international students and its use as a method of So, as you will be aware, the Post Study Work route gaining work experience for certain degrees will be closed from April 2012. We will accept no should not be underestimated. We would ideally further applications, but I hope that the Committee will suggest that the system be maintained, in the be reassured that this will not affect those who have light of the use of post-study work options to already obtained a Post Study Work visa. attract the best students by our main competitors in the higher education sector. At the same time, it is important that the UK can retain However, if it is to be reformed, we recommend the best international graduates who make a valuable that the Government give careful consideration contribution to our economy. We will facilitate to either a) introducing a six month visa to look graduates from a UK university with a recognised for work with the possibility of an extension of degree, PGCE, or PGDE switching into Tier 2 (before 18 months if the applicant has received the offer their visa expires) by exempting them from both the of skilled work or is a director of a company Resident Labour Market Test and the Tier 2 limit. This which has two full-time equivalent employees; b) means that all talented graduates with the skills to get limiting the number of institutions whose a graduate job have the opportunity to stay on and qualifications entitle the holder to post study work in the UK after graduation. We will also develop a route for graduate students to stay in the UK as work; and c) given concerns about maintaining entrepreneurs. UK competitiveness in STEM research, exempt STEM graduates from new restrictions until the domestic market is sufficiently robust. (Paragraph 58)
The Post Study Work route as you will be aware, the Post Study Work route will be The Post Study Work route will close in April 2012 closed from April 2012. We will accept no further meaning that a number of students who applied to UK 9. We recommend that any changes to the Post- applications, but I hope that the Committee will be institutions on the understanding that they would Study Work route be implemented for students reassured that this will not affect those who have receive a Post Study Work visa will not obtain one. arriving in the new academic year, and do not already obtained a Post Study Work visa. However, these students do have the option of affect those students who already have visas; switching in to Tier 2 if they wish to work in the UK they had a legitimate expectation that the post- At the same time, it is important that the UK can retain study work route would be available to them the best international graduates who make a valuable after their studies. We also recommend that the contribution to our economy. We will facilitate route is examined for its impact on UK graduates from a UK university with a recognised employment rates by the Migration Advisory degree, PGCE, or PGDE switching into Tier 2 (before Committee on an annual basis. We further their visa expires) by exempting them from both the recommend an examination which includes Resident Labour Market Test and the Tier 2 limit. This scrutinising the number of institutions whose means that all talented graduates with the skills to get students are eligible to apply for a Post-Study a graduate job have the opportunity to stay on and Work visa. (Paragraph 59) work in the UK after graduation. We will also develop a route for graduate students to stay in the UK as entrepreneurs.
Term time work I would like to take this opportunity to remind the The Government did not implement their proposals as Committee that we have obtained our data from a they stood in the consultation document. However, it 10. As the Labour Force Survey is a snapshot and wide range of internal sources within the Home Office did limit the ability of some students to work. does not in itself prove endemic abuse of the (beyond the Labour Force Survey). Based on this system, we believe that reform of the system evidence, suggesting high levels of non-compliance in 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness should be based on clear evidence in order to the privately-funded further education sector, I hope ensure that changes will be effective and not the Committee will welcome our decision to allow give rise to unintended consequences. We students studying with publicly funded institutions to recommend that work is undertaken urgently to work, whilst prohibiting work for all other students. quantify and clarify the scale of any abuse and the extent to which overseas students simply work to support themselves during their course of study, as happens with UK students in the USA and other countries, for example. (Paragraph 62) 81
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 82 Effectiveness Term time work I would like to take this opportunity to remind the The Government accepted the difficulties in their Committee that we have obtained our data from a proposals as stated in the consultation document and 11. We agree that the system by which students wide range of internal sources within the Home Office amended their approach when they made the are allowed to undertake paid employment off- (beyond the Labour Force Survey). Based on this announcement of changes on 22 March. campus ought to be more closely regulated in evidence, suggesting high levels of non-compliance in order to prevent abuse. Nevertheless, while the privately-funded further education sector, I hope intended to be clear and prescriptive, in fact the the Committee will welcome our decision to allow proposal to limit the ability of international students studying with publicly funded institutions to students to work off-campus is likely to lead to work, whilst prohibiting work for all other students. anomalies and unintended consequences. We recommend that the UK Border Agency publish clearer definitions of both campus and term- time, and write to us before any change is implemented. Within these definitions, it would be better to replace the phrase ‘term-time’ with a maximum number of weeks per year, based on a realistic assessment of the needs of genuine students and generous enough to cater for different university requirements. We also recommend that students should not be restricted in undertaking work which relates to their degree. (Paragraph 65) Work placements With respect to the concerns outlined in the report Accepted. about changes to the study to work ratio for certain 12. We urge the UK Border Agency to ensure professions, I am pleased to reassure the Committee that if introduced, the proposal to increase the that this will be protected through a provision to retain study to work ratio will not affect the clinical this at 50:50 for university students placements necessary for healthcare professionals and those in related disciplines. We also suggest it undertakes a separate study to ensure that such a ratio will not adversely affect any other key professions. (Paragraph 67)
Dependants From summer 2011, only students who are either Not accepted. government sponsored or studying a post-graduate 13. Instead of prohibiting dependants based just course (NQF 7) and above at a university will be able to on the length of course, we recommend that the sponsor dependants (who will have unrestricted access level of the course be also taken into account. to the labour market). We have substantial evidence to We recommend that those doing courses of suggest that the student route has been misused at the under 12 months at Masters level or above be lower levels and have imposed the limit for this reason. allowed to be accompanied by dependants, and agree with the Government that those doing I disagree with the report's recommendation that courses over 12 months should be allowed to be Master's students on courses under 12 months be able accompanied by dependants. (Paragraph 69) to sponsor dependants and remind the Committee that dependants will still be able to apply for a six month visitor visa in their own right Dependants From summer 2011, only students who are either Accepted. government sponsored or studying a post-graduate 14. In light of the volume of evidence received course (NQF 7) and above at a university will be able to we ask the Government to clarify what a sponsor dependants (who will have unrestricted access dependant would and would not be able to do to the labour market). We have substantial evidence to under the new rules. For instance, could they suggest that the student route has been misused at the volunteer at a museum or in a school? We also lower levels and have imposed the limit for this reason. recommend that, if the Government allows the dependants of international students to work only if they qualify in their own right under Tier Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 1 or 2, it should undertake a review of the impact within a year of the proposed changes being implemented, although it would be better to delay implementation until the situation has been researched more carefully and more robust proposals subjected to proper scrutiny. (Paragraph 71)
High risk/low risk In the case of low risk nationalities where the sponsor Accepted. is Highly Trusted, we shall, in general, waive the 15. We note the assurances of the Minister that requirement to provide documents (other than the the introduction of differential requirements Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies and identity based on nationality will not harm diplomatic document) at the time of application. relations. However, given the fact that the Race Relations Act would need to be amended, we We have developed a robust evidence base considering 83
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 84 Effectiveness encourage the Government to take legal advice different elements of risk in order to support this to ensure that such a decision will not be subject proposal. The new policy is compliant with the Equality to legal or parliamentary challenge. The Act 2010 and will be set out clearly in the Immigration Government should work with relevant Rules. government authorities abroad to discourage fraud and with Highly Trusted Sponsors to make I agree with the report's recommendation to review the the system both simpler and more robust. current Highly Trusted Sponsor criteria to ensure this is (Paragraph 75) robust and this will be completed by summer 2011.
Accreditation I welcome the Committee's support for the Accepted introduction of stricter accreditation procedures. As 16. We fully support the Government’s intention you will be aware, from April 2012, all Tier 4 sponsors to introduce stricter accreditation procedures and will become subject to the inspection regimes applying welcome the desire to work with the to publicly-funded institutions and to independent departments responsible for education to schools (and need to become Highly Trusted Sponsors). introduce a comprehensive accreditation system. We believe it is important that accreditation ought to be equally reliant on the levels of compliance and the quality of education provided. We also recommend that this accreditation be provided by one body to avoid the current confusion. (Paragraph 77)
Accreditation I believe that the transitional arrangements put in place No accreditation body was “re-approved” but until April 2012, whereby sponsors not meeting the transitional measures were put in place. 17. It would—to put it mildly—be inconsistent to new requirements will be subject to an interim limit on introduce stricter accreditation procedures the number of students they can sponsor, are without re-approving at least one accreditation sufficient, without the need to re-approve a private body, be it an existing body or a newly-created accreditation body. The UK Border Agency's one. We are seeking urgent clarification on this arrangements with four of the five private accreditation issue and expect the Government to close any bodies for Tier 4 have now lapsed; the other will lapse gap in regulation immediately and to improve in May. These arrangements had not been renewed the efficiency of its accreditation systems. We pending a review of the system, and will now be also expect that, in future, approval will not be replaced by the new arrangements. allowed to lapse. (Paragraph 79) Further recommendations I feel that the re-introduction of much greater Not accepted. discretion could undermine the clear and objective
18. We believe that it is essential that enough criteria that underpins the Points Based System and flexibility is introduced to allow Entry Clearance return the system to one of inconsistent, subjective Managers discretion in exceptional cases where decision making. appropriate. This will also allow an Entry Clearance Manager to recommend refusal where a student is clearly bogus. Such changes would allow genuine students to come in and prevent the bogus students from entering, something the Points Based System does not allow for. (Paragraph 80)
Further recommendations In reference to your recommendation on options for Not accepted as being the responsibility of tightening up the system on educational agents, our Government. 19. Whilst we accept that the majority of position remains clear: that we expect educational educational agents are legitimate business institutions to recruit their students carefully and if they people, the importance of the role within use agents they should do so with care. student immigration means that UK Border Agency ought to investigate options for tightening up the system. These options do not necessarily have to include further regulation but instead publicising available schemes such as the Partner Agency Scheme to Tier 4 sponsors.
(Paragraph 83) 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness
Further recommendations I do not think that this is a necessary step at this stage, The Government does not feel such action is required given the other action we are taking to secure the at this stage. 20. We are not convinced that a substantial route. I believe the current 28 day maintenance is deposit ought to be requested of every sufficient for this purpose, but you will be aware that international student but recommend that the we will now require confirmation that these funds are UK Border Agency commission some research, genuinely available for the purpose of funding looking at the positives and negatives of having students' study and upkeep in the UK. such a requirement. We are concerned that the implementation of such a system would result in Should we detect continued abuse of the maintenance only the wealthy being able to study in the UK, requirements, we will consider alternative solutions although we note that the cost of studying here including escrow accounts. would already be prohibitive to poorer students. (Paragraph 84)
85
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 86 Effectiveness Impact assessment I agree with the report's recommendation that any Accepted. changes in student immigration policy ought to be 21. We believe that any changes in student accompanied by a publicly-available impact assessment immigration policy ought to be accompanied by and this will be available in due course. a publicly-available impact assessment. As we noted in our Report on the Immigration Cap: “There has been a consistent tendency, under both current and previous Governments, to rush through complex changes to the immigration system... Such unnecessary haste leads to poor decision-making”. We welcome the Minister’s commitment to the publication of an impact assessment when the policy is announced. We also recommend that the student immigration system be reviewed on a regular but infrequent basis—for instance, once a Parliament—in order to ensure that the system is suitable for requirements. (Paragraph 88)
The International Passenger Survey The International Passenger Survey (IPS) is the Not accepted. foundation for the Office for National Statistics (ONS) 22. Any policy which is based on flawed data has figures on net migration. These are the best measures the potential to create significant unintended we have available, have been based on a consistent consequences. We are broadly supportive of the definition since 1991, are produced in accordance with Government’s policy of reducing immigration, National Statistics codes of practice and are used but we believe that policy decisions ought to be widely across Government. I therefore do not agree based on the best possible information. We with the Committee's recommendation that therefore urge the Government, as a matter of Government investigate, as a matter of priority, "a priority, to investigate whether a more reliable more reliable system of data collection". However, system of data collection than the International where reliable supplementary data sources are Passenger Survey can be used upon which to available, they, of course, will form an element of the base immigration policy. (Paragraph 93) range of evidence that we draw on when formulating policy, and in due course eBorders will provide increased border crossing data.
Exit checks I reassure the Committee that they are currently in Accepted. the process of being put in place and will be fully 23. We suggest the Government make the operational in 2015. introduction of exit checks a priority. We recommend that the Government deliver a timetable for the reintroduction of exit checks as soon as possible. (Paragraph 94)
Future viability of Tier 4 Conclusion: no direct recommendation for Government action 24. We welcome the Government’s assurance that the UK Border Agency will be able to cope with the changes in the student immigration system. We regularly receive updates from the UK Border Agency as to their work and we will ensure that scrutiny of the student immigration system becomes a regular feature of our scrutiny of the agency. (Paragraph 97)
Future viability of Tier 4 In reference to the development of the Not accepted. consultation proposals I would like to remind the 25. The consultation proposals ought to have Committee that these were both developed with, been developed jointly by the Home Office, the and approved across, other Government 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness Department for Business, Innovation and Skills Departments including the Department for and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. If Business, Innovation and Skills and the Foreign this had been done, a number of the problems and Commonwealth Office with them that we have identified probably would have been avoided. (Paragraph 98) 87
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 88 Effectiveness Conclusions We will monitor the impact of our changes on the Accepted. student visa system, and if necessary make further 26. The review of the student immigration adjustments to eliminate abuse and ensure that system is part of a concerted effort by the Tier 4 provides a robust, secure route for Government to reduce net migration figures. The legitimate students to come to the UK to study Government has stated that it does not wish to with genuine education providers. target legitimate students but, at the same time, we would caution against measures which could be detrimental to a thriving, successful industry. The export of education is not only economically beneficial to this country but also vital to the UK’s international relations. (Paragraph 99) Conclusions I note that the Committee is "not persuaded that Not accepted. students are migrants". I disagree with this 27. Although the UN requires students to be assertion and remind the Committee that under included in migration figures, we are not longstanding international (UN) measures, persuaded that students are in fact migrants. students (and others) who come to the UK for Only if a student or former student seeks more than a year are counted as migrants. I agree settlement—or the length of time they have with the report that not all students remain spent in the country is excessive—should their permanently but significant numbers do. Of those status in the UK be regarded as that of a migrant migrants granted settlement in 2009—13% (over rather than a student visitor. This is not to soften 23,000) originally came to the UK as a student. the approach to reducing immigration numbers but to recognise that not all students remain permanently, that those who do make a significant contribution to the economy, and that students who come to this country benefit us economically—through the payment of fees and wider spending—as well as contributing significantly to strengthening and enhancing Britain’s place in the world. (Paragraph 100)
Conclusions The International Passenger Survey (IPS) is the Not accepted. foundation for the Office for National Statistics (ONS) 28. Government policy ought to be evidence- figures on net migration. These are the best measures based. We are concerned that a policy based on we have available, have been based on a consistent flawed evidence could damage the UK education definition since 1991, are produced in accordance with sector and could have wider implications. We National Statistics codes of practice and are used strongly urge the Government to examine the widely across Government. I therefore do not agree data which it currently uses to extrapolate with the Committee's recommendation that migration figures. Whilst we are aware that it Government investigate, as a matter of priority, "a cannot do so in time to coincide with this policy more reliable system of data collection". However, announcement, we are convinced that it ought where reliable supplementary data sources are to be a priority for the near-future. (Paragraph available, they, of course, will form an element of the 101) range of evidence that we draw on when formulating policy, and in due course eBorders will provide increased border crossing data.
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 89
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 90 Effectiveness
Eight Report, Forced marriage (HC 880), published 17 May 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. The increase in the number of cases handled We are pleased that the Committee has by the Forced Marriage Unit and the number of acknowledged the role of the Forced Marriage Unit Accepted. calls made to the Honour Network Helpline since (FMU), which has worked closely with a number of our predecessor Committee’s inquiry in 2007–08 other Non- Governmental Organisations (NGOs), to demonstrates that forced marriage remains a tackle the unacceptable practice of forced marriage. serious concern, affecting thousands of young However, it is clear that for all agencies to provide a people in the UK. The fact that more young more efficient service for victims and potential victims women and, increasingly, young men are coming of forced marriage, much more needs to be done to forward to seek help is encouraging but ensure our approach is consistent and joined-up. underlines the requirement for sufficient support In order to facilitate the principle of multi-agency mechanisms to be in place to meet their needs. working, we are currently looking at developing a (Paragraph 5) more efficient and streamlined service for victims and potential victims of forced marriage through improved partnership working. This will not only provide an increased understanding of the problem, but also enable the spread of best practice amongst all specialist services. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and the FMU have held seminars this year to highlight ways that practitioners could improve the way they engage with individuals in ‘hard to reach’ communities. Attendees were challenged on their current approaches and on how best practice was shared to encourage victims of forced marriage to seek further support, where this was unavailable through the more conventional channels. The FMU and MoJ are also working closely with Karma Nirvana on a series of road shows, which are specifically aimed at raising wider awareness of the provisions of the Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007.
The Home Office has been working with Southall Black Sisters to develop a leaflet to assist Black and Minority Ethnic victims to find support. The leaflet will be distributed across targeted embassies and consulates worldwide to victims entering the UK.
The FMU also undertakes an extensive outreach and training programme of around 100 events a year targeting both professionals and affected communities. This multi-agency approach to awareness raising, service provision and where possible, the introduction of information sharing protocols to enable the safeguarding of those at risk, will go a long way in tackling forced marriage in the UK.
2. We are pleased that victims and professionals We disagree that the current legislation is ineffective Not accepted. are utilising the provisions of the Forced in protecting individuals from forced marriage. Up to Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007, with 293 the end of 2010, 257 orders had been made since Forced Marriage Protection Orders made during the implementation of the Act in November 2008. the two years and four months following its Although the current civil legislation does not directly enactment. However, the evidence presented to punish those initiating the forced marriage, unless the us suggested inadequacies in the monitoring of order is breached, it does protect victims, which is the 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness compliance with an order after it is made and a main objective. A number of orders have been made lack of effective action in cases of breach, with preventing marriage taking place and to assist in only one person receiving a jail sentence for repatriating victims. 56 out of 116 applications were breach of an order thus far. We echo our made by a third party including the police and local predecessors in recommending that the authorities. Government undertake and publish a further While the Committee’s Report states that review of the operation of the Forced Marriage criminalisation would send out a ‘very clear and (Civil Protection) Act by the end of this calendar positive message’, it does not define how this would year, and then on an annual basis, in particular be achieved above and beyond what is already to investigate how orders are monitored, the achieved by the general criminal offences (assault, kidnap, people trafficking etc) that might apply in real level of breaches and the judicial response to circumstances of forced marriage. recorded breaches. It is not at all clear that the However, if the Committee can provide evidence that Act is wholly effective as a tool in protecting a criminal offence and sanction would be more individuals from forced marriage and from effective in encouraging the reporting of cases, or repercussions from family members. While the that it would deter perpetrators, we would be happy 91
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 92 Effectiveness measures in the Act should continue to be used, to consider it. we believe that it would send out a very clear The 2005 Home Office consultation on criminalisation and positive message to communities within the highlighted the difficulty of defining a criminal offence UK and internationally if it becomes a criminal of forced marriage that would encapsulate all the act to force—or to participate in forcing—an particular behaviours involved. The allegation would individual to enter into marriage against their also have to be proved to the criminal standard of will. The lack of a criminal sanction also sends a proof - ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ potentially message, and currently that is a weaker message reducing the number of cases that could be dealt with than we believe is needed. We urge the in the criminal courts. Government to take an early opportunity to We remain concerned that there could be a negative legislate on this matter. (Paragraph 12) impact on victims who might feel let down by the justice system, if charges could not be brought or the defendant were acquitted. While victims would still have the option to take the civil protection order route, repercussions from the failed criminal case in relation to family and community may mean they do not have the confidence to continue to pursue a civil remedy. Following publication of the Committee’s report, an independent consultation was reopened in June 2011 by Roehampton University Social Research Centre into the issue of whether a specific criminal offence of forced marriage should be created in England and Wales. Over half of the respondents felt, on balance, that the Government should not create a specific criminal offence of forcing someone into marriage, while 64% felt that the existing legislation was sufficient to tackle the issue. The results of this consultation will be published shortly. Forced marriages are a very serious matter and any decision to change our current policy would need to be based on evidence of any lack of effectiveness of existing civil measures, any evidence emerging from the implementation of criminal sanctions in other jurisdictions and taking account of the views of our stakeholders. We will of course carefully consider any evidence that the Home Affairs Select Committee may provide in this regard. We also accept that it would be timely to review some
particular aspects of the legislation again and we have already been looking into the issue of breaches. The Committee commented on the fact that there have only been 5 breaches recorded suggesting that this means the legislation is ineffective. The courts would only be aware of a breach if the applicant brought the matter back to the court for committal. We will also be following with interest the progress of the Scottish legislation, to be implemented later this year, which has criminalised breach of their equivalent of a forced marriage protection order. The Government will remain open to considering criminalising breach of a Forced Marriage Protection Order subject to the outcome of the evaluation of the Scottish legislation. In conclusion, we continue to believe that the current legislation protects victims and potential victims of forced marriage, but will give due consideration to any evidence put to the Government that a criminal offence or a criminal sanction for breach of a civil order might encourage increased reporting and deter perpetrators.
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 93
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 94 Effectiveness 3. We are also concerned at the level of The multi-agency statutory guidance on forced Government considering implementing both these awareness of the Act’s provisions amongst marriage applies to all persons and bodies in recommendations subject to review. frontline professionals. We look forward to England and Wales who exercise public functions in receiving a copy of the review currently being relation to safeguarding children and adults and to undertaken by the Forced Marriage Unit of the third parties who exercise public functions on behalf execution of the statutory guidance on forced of those persons or bodies. Our review of the marriage and recommend that this include implementation of the statutory guidance will evaluate consideration of measures to extend its how all agencies have applied the strategic principles implementation across all agencies in all parts of for dealing with forced marriage locally - as set out the country. We further recommend publication within the guidance - with a view to identifying of the Forced Marriage Designated Courts patterns, good practice and possible areas for Resource Manual so that it is available to all improvement. Scotland and Northern Ireland are professionals practising in this area. (Paragraph currently developing their own statutory guidance and 13) we will share the findings of our work with them to inform their work. Frontline staff who handle cases of forced marriage are also strongly advised to consult the multi-agency practice guidelines that were issued by the FMU. Part of the follow-up to the review findings will also look at how the multi-agency practice guidelines are being used, to consider their revision as part of them being a more effective tool. In relation to the Forced Marriage Designated Courts Resource Manual, we would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the staff at Newcastle County Court and Cris McCurley, who were responsible for the initial draft. The Manual was published on the intranet site of Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service and is currently being reviewed to assess its suitability for wider publication.
4. We have received mixed evidence about the The current minimum age requirement of 21 for No direct action required. impact of the change in the Immigration Rules in marriage visa applicants and sponsors is intended to 2008 to require sponsors of marriage visas and protect young people from being forced into their incoming spouses to be over the age of 21. marriage. It provides an opportunity for individuals to We recognise that the change may be seen as develop maturity and life skills, and to complete their discriminatory and has the potential for young education and training, which may enable them to people to be held in abusive situations for resist the pressure of being forced into marriage longer; however, it has undoubtedly helped a and/or into sponsoring a visa. number of young people to resist forced We welcome the comments from the Committee that marriage. (Paragraph 18) the change has undoubtedly helped a number of young people to resist forced marriage. In June 2011 the Supreme Court heard the Secretary of State’s appeal from the Court of Appeal judgment in the case of Quila & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2010] EWCA Civ 1482 (21 December 2010), which concerns this minimum age requirement. We await the judgment of the Court. We have seen no evidence that raising the marriage visa age has itself led young people to be held in abusive situations for longer. In fact the FMU’s evidence to the Supreme Court in the Quila case was that in their experience the majority of reluctant sponsors return to the UK soon after the marriage, although there are no statistics or data held in Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness relation to this. This is generally so that the sponsor can establish themselves in employment in the UK, so that they are in a position financially to support the visa application. 95
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 96 Effectiveness 5. We are extremely worried about the fact that The Department for Education recognises that Recommendation rejected outright. many schools continue to refuse to engage in teachers play an important part in ensuring preventative activity with children at risk of preventative measures are in place to protect forced marriage and have written to the children at risk of forced marriage, and need to be Secretary of State for Education to express this aware of their statutory responsibilities. view. We are disappointed by his response. On However, the Secretary of State for Education does the basis of the evidence we have received, we not believe that that it is the Department’s role to be do not accept his assurance that “schools will directive or prescriptive to schools on such issues. already be aware of the guidance available on The Department’s role is to signpost schools to forced marriage” or that, if they are, they are available resources and support in order to tackle acting on it. Teachers who are not trained to forced marriage issues effectively. respond properly to cases of forced marriage can The Department for Education intends to continue to inadvertently put pupils in greater danger by, for work closely with other Government departments and example, contacting their families. In the light of a number of identified NGOs, to consider other clear evidence that many schools are not measures through which teachers can be better fulfilling their statutory responsibilities with equipped to address the threat of forced marriage. regard to forced marriage, the Department for It is therefore the Government’s view that these arrangements are sufficient and that the provision of Education must provide more active support to an annual reminder to schools will not provide any teachers to enable them to carry out a role which additional value in terms of reminding schools of their may risk upsetting cultural sensibilities but is responsibilities. nonetheless vital for child protection. We therefore recommend the schools are reminded annually of their responsibilities in this matter by the Secretary of State. (Paragraph 27) 6. As noted above, the Forced Marriage Unit is The Government is committed to refocusing school Recommendation rejected outright. currently reviewing implementation of the inspection around the core areas of pupil statutory guidelines on forced marriage, and the achievement, teaching, leadership and behaviour Department for Education must act on the safety. findings in relation to schools. In addition, we The issue of forced marriage may be relevant to recommend that Ofsted inspectors pay particular inspectors’ evaluation of schools’ arrangements for attention to policies in place to deal with forced keeping pupils safe. If concerns are brought to the marriage in their assessments of the attention of inspectors they will be expected to satisfy safeguarding arrangements of schools where themselves that the school is doing everything it can pupils are likely to be at risk of forced marriage. to support pupils. (Paragraph 28) There are no plans to ask Ofsted to consider compliance with statutory guidance on forced marriage as part of every school inspection, or for forced marriage to be covered specifically as a discrete aspect of an inspection.
The Government is committed to ensuring that all Government agrees with the Committee that action is 7. We welcome the Secretary of State instances of children missing from education are needed and to report back as to progress made, as for Education’s intention to widen the range of adequately investigated. Following an informal requested. situations where schools must report pupil consultation we are reconsidering the implications of absence to the local authority, in particular widening the range of situations where schools must where a child has failed to return to school report to the local authority that a child is missing following an extended family holiday, and to from education and have decided not to go ahead respond to concerns raised by Ofsted about the with the change to regulations in September 2011. reasons for missing education and the lack of We are also considering a number of other ways to cooperation between councils and schools. We ensure children are not missing education and will ask him to report back to us in due course on the look again to make the change alongside any agreed action eventually taken to address these matters. proposals. (Paragraph 29) The Secretary of State for Education will inform the HAC of progress in due course. 8. The police have been leading the way in The FMU e-learning tool supports frontline Government has committed to implementing the pursuing Forced Marriage Protection Orders for practitioners to develop their awareness of forced Committee’s recommendation. victims and potential victims of forced marriage. marriage and harness their skills in safeguarding However, the response to victims varies greatly those at risk. The review of this tool will enable us to on a force-by-force basis. We were greatly evaluate its use across practitioner groups, determine disturbed by evidence from a victim of forced where improvements are required and then look at marriage that she was required to report her alternative methods to allow other organisations to situation to a succession of police officers, none host the site on local networks. of whom treated it sufficiently seriously. We are The Association of Chief Police Officers has been pleased to note that the Government recognises working with the National Police Improvement 97 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness the importance of training for frontline Agency to develop training packages on forced practitioners in its Call to End Violence Against marriage for front line practitioners, as well as more Women and Girls Action Plan and we request specialist packages for investigators. Both of these information about the outcome of the review of training packages are due to be rolled out later this the forced marriage e-learning tool. All year. appropriate police officers should receive training in recognising and responding to forced marriage and we recommend that the Government consider how best to ensure that this kind of learning is cascaded down to officers, as part of its current review of police training delivery. (Paragraph 33)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 98 Effectiveness 9. We are disappointed by the lack of progress The Government has considered this Government supports the aim of the recommendation made by the UK Border Agency to resolve the recommendation very carefully, but we have been but rejects the possibility of being able to achieve it. issue of reluctant sponsors being unable to deny unable to identify how it might be implemented in the foreign national whom they have been such a way as to provide additional protection to the forced to marry a visa because they are afraid reluctant sponsor and to avoid putting them at further that their intervention will become known to risk. their family, who might take action against The UK Border Agency is obliged to act in them. We therefore reiterate our predecessors’ accordance with the immigration rules throughout the call for a power of refusal without the need for visa application process. Visa refusals must be clear an evidential statement to be attached to visa and evidence based and, in line with general applications in cases of reluctant sponsors principles of fairness and transparency, a visa (Paragraph 38) applicant is entitled to know the reasons for the refusal of a visa. It would not be appropriate to refuse a visa without reasons, and even if it were possible to frame such a power on a proper legal basis, it would be self-evident that the refusal was on the basis of forced marriage. It is hard to conceive that the UK Border Agency could reasonably conclude that coercion was involved in the marriage without consulting the sponsor. Consequently, the reluctant sponsor would be exposed to exactly the same risk of family pressure or coercion that deters them from making an evidential statement. Furthermore, refusals of marriage visas attract a right of appeal, which provides independent scrutiny of the UK Border Agency’s decision. Immigration judges have a duty to disclose any information they hold to the rest of the court (which might include the victim’s family), so the UK Border Agency is unable to share a sponsor’s privately stated reluctance with the judge on a confidential basis. Despite consultation with immigration judges, we have been unable to devise a means of enabling an immigration judge to uphold a refusal on the grounds of forced marriage where the sponsor is unwilling to make a public statement, without compromising the fairness of the appeal system.
The FMU and the UK Border Agency work closely together to gather further evidence to refuse the visa where appropriate. However, if there is no public statement, the UK Border Agency may only refuse the visa if there is other sufficient evidence that the immigration rules are not met. The following measures will assist in forced marriage cases, including those where a public statement is not made: • The UK Border Agency may already refuse a visa without a statement if there are other means of showing that the immigration rules are not met, e.g. using information obtained from an interview or looking at documentary evidence which may reveal for example that the test of maintenance and accommodation under the immigration rules is not met. • All entry clearance staff, including those who work in South Asia, have training on recognising forced marriage cases and what to do when these applications are identified. • The minimum age for sponsoring or being sponsored for a marriage visa is 21, so applications where one or more of the parties are aged under 21 Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness are automatically refused without any need for a public statement. 99
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 100 Effectiveness 10. We are also surprised that estranged or The Data Protection Act 1998 (the DPA) sets out the Government commits to offering more guidance to abused spouses are routinely treated as ‘third criteria that govern the processing of personal data staff but does not go far enough. parties’ under the Data Protection Act by the UK relating to living individuals and also provides Border Agency in respect of their partner’s individuals with certain rights relating to the application for indefinite leave to remain. While processing of that data. we recognise that data protection issues must be The DPA recognises that it may also be appropriate taken into account, there are instances where to disclose personal data in circumstances which exemptions can be made and the Agency is would otherwise breach the Act. This would be where therefore permitted to disclose information to a there was an overriding reason to disclose the spouse. We were pleased to note the information. Information Commissioner’s assertion that the There is extensive UK Border Agency guidance on Data Protection Act recognises that sometimes it the general application of the DPA, and specifically is appropriate to disclose personal data in the potential disclosure of information to third parties. circumstances which would otherwise breach the This guidance makes it clear that where a request is Act. The UK Border Agency should acknowledge received from a person other than the data subject or this, and encourage its staff to make decisions another public body, the request must be considered about disclosure on a case–by–case basis, with on a case – by – case basis under, and handled in accordance with, the UK Border Agency’s powers to the aim of ensuring that British spouses have share data, the DPA, Human Rights Act 1998, the every opportunity to alert the immigration Freedom of Information Act 2000, and the common authorities in confidence to cases of marriage law duty of confidence. breakdown. Clamping down on these The guidance notes that, given these legal immigration abuses is essential first and obligations, such “third party” requests foremost in order to protect current and future would usually be refused in order to protect the victims of forced marriage, but also to form part privacy rights of the data subject, although there of a controlled immigration policy. (Paragraph would be circumstances in which disclosure would be 39) allowed. Where personal information about an applicant cannot be disclosed UK Border Agency staff are advised to always consider whether to provide any general information, which is relevant to the request.
UK Border Agency guidance already makes it clear that, in certain circumstances, specific personal information on a data subject can be provided to a third party. Such circumstances could include: • MPs acting for constituents; • Estranged/separated spouses or civil partners of applicants; • Victims (or the victim’s family) of foreign national offenders; • Sponsors. UK Border Agency staff are therefore encouraged to consider the merits of each request on a case - by - case basis with regard to the information requested and its associated sensitivity. This approach has recently been endorsed by the Information Commissioner who acknowledged the need for appropriate caution to avoid inappropriate disclosure. The UK Border Agency has now begun a review of the guidance to: • Clarify roles and responsibilities; • Clarify what specific information may (or may not) be provided; • Re-emphasise that such requests must be considered on a case – by – case basis. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness This updated guidance will be promulgated widely, as well as to UK Border Agency’s Data Protection Unit, which is responsible for processing all subject access requests. We will also ensure that the UK Border Agency’s MPs Liaison Unit and the Immigration Enquiry Bureau are updated accordingly. 101
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 102 Effectiveness 11. Specialist services run by the voluntary sector The Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Government commits to encouraging local authorities provide a vital means of support to individuals at Communities and Local Government have made to fund services and to funding some itself. risk of forced marriage, who are often failed by clear that Local Authorities must not see the statutory agencies or do not feel able to voluntary sector as an “easy cut” when making approach them; 63% of the thousands of callers difficult decisions about spending. to the Honour Network Helpline do not contact In April 2011, the Government announced a statutory agencies. We understand that a consultation on the proposed Best Value guidance number of such specialist services, including the (replacing nearly 80 pages of prescriptive statutory highly-respected organisation Southall Black guidance with a single page), which sets out clearly Sisters and the Honour Network Helpline run by the way that councils should work with the voluntary Karma Nirvana, are under threat of closure due sector when facing difficult funding decisions. The to potential withdrawal of funding from consultation has now closed and the Government Government or local authorities. It is our view plans to publish finalised guidance in the summer. that the Government should urge local The Home Office and MoJ have already made authorities to support these local services and available long term funding for specialist services for both Government and local authorities should victims of domestic and sexual violence and we have move quickly to make funding decisions strongly encouraged local areas to follow our lead. In 2010 the Government funded Southall Black affecting these services. The closure of these Sisters for its “Work Programme for Prevention services would materially damage the UK’s Project in Schools”. This project was funded for a ability to protect and support victims and year and ongoing funding is now the responsibility of potential victims of forced marriages, and the the local authority. Government should take steps to avoid this The Honour Network helpline was also funded by the outcome. (Paragraph 43) Government for a year in 2010, to support victims of forced marriage and honour-based abuse. Karma Nirvana has applied for three year funding from the Ministry of Justice’s Victim and Witness General Fund. The MoJ has made an offer to Karma Nirvana which will see the continuation of the helpline service for the next three years.
Ninth Report, The work of the UK Border Agency (HC 929), published 24 May 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation UK Border Agency’s legacy cases Given the length of time that some of these individuals Conclusion: no direct recommendation for Government have been in the UK, we have always been clear that a action. The Government accepts that the situation is far 1. …about 74,500 of the 400–450,000 cases— significant proportion of the legacy cases would be from ideal but maintain that they have taken every approximately one in six—the UK Border Agency likely to be eligible to remain in the UK. possible measure to track down individuals. has been completely unable to trace what has Inevitably there will be legacy cases which are more happened to the applicant. We consider this difficult to trace, for example, because people have left indefensible. Moreover, public confidence in the country. The UK Border Agency does make every immigration controls is severely undermined by effort to trace individuals, writing to them at their last such situations. A robust immigration system known address and checking up to 19 internal and requires those administering it to have an external databases. We also work with representative appropriate system in place that will mean groups to ensure that individuals update us with their applicants are not lost or untraceable. current addresses. We have also provided clear details (paragraph 4) on how to contact the legacy programme on the Home Office website. When it has not been possible to find an individual we continue to pursue the case as part of
our controlled archive which is checked against 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness watchlists and also against the Police National Computer on a regular basis. If this identifies a contact with an individual, we will follow up. Alternatively, if an applicant or their representatives make contact with us we will update our records and conclude their case. Following the closure of Case Resolution Directorate, the Case Assurance and Audit Unit (CAAU) will continue to monitor the controlled archive pool, reactivating and concluding any cases which may come to light. CAAU will undertake strategic targeted checks on controlled archive cases. The controlled archive increased as we reached the end of the overall programme. These were often the older cases which pre-dated our internal databases and included little contact information or the applicant had
absconded, which meant that they could not be fully 103
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 104 Effectiveness concluded at that time. We continue to monitor them.
UK Border Agency’s legacy cases The operational costs associated with legacy cases – not Conclusion: no direct recommendation for including enforcement costs, detention and removal escort Government action. 2. It appears likely that the programme to costs or asylum and immigration tribunal costs – remained clear the historic backlog of asylum cases will stable throughout the course of the programme, at in essence be completed within five years, as approximately £32 million per year. These operational costs originally intended. However, this will have are inclusive of an outsourced administrative function from been achieved as the result of a major 2009-2010. Support costs for applicants are accounted for redeployment of permanent staff and after separately, and the Committee will wish to note the the incurring of significant extra expenditure significant reduction in this area of expenditure which, in on temporary staff. When the UK Border FY06/07 stood at £360 million and were reduced to £72 Agency produces its next letter for us, which million in FY10/11 as a result of the UK Border Agency‟s should be the final report on this legacy, we commitment to focus on asylum support spend. expect the Agency to have made an estimate of the total cost of this programme. Moreover, fewer than one in ten of the cases will have resulted in the removal of the applicant from the UK. To a certain extent, this is not surprising: some of the cases date back nearly 20 years, and the longer a case is left uncompleted, the more likely it is that the applicant will have married or had children born in the UK, leading to a greater probability that settlement will be allowed for family reasons. We understand that 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness Ministers would have been unwilling to announce an amnesty for the applicants caught up in this backlog, not least because this might be interpreted as meaning that the UK was prepared more generally to relax its approach towards migration; but we consider that in practice an amnesty has taken place, at considerable cost to the taxpayer. (paragraph 5) New asylum cases No response given.
3. The Independent Chief Inspector of the UK Border Agency confirmed to us that there was 105
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 106 Effectiveness a new backlog, the size of which was not clear. He suggested we should ask the new head of the Agency, once appointed, for firm information about the size of the backlog. We shall, and we expect a full breakdown of these figures in the next tri-annual letter. (paragraph 6) New asylum cases The UK Border Agency‟s broader suite of performance Accepted. indicators has been designed to show the overall health of 4. As we pointed out in our last report on the the asylum system, covering speed, quality, productivity and Agency, the main aim of its managers should cost. A focus on the total number – and age profile – of the be to improve the quality of initial decision- outstanding caseload will ensure that every case is visible making as this would avoid the substantial and managed to conclusion. We do not believe this to be delays, financial costs and human suffering excessively bureaucratic as the indicators are complementary that occur now. We welcome the move away and will allow us to monitor the asylum system in the most from a single target for asylum caseworkers, effective manner and to take targeted action where as this carries the risk of distorting priorities. appropriate. We have also committed to publish this However, a ‘basket’ of eleven indicators may information so the Committee and the public can scrutinise lead to excessive bureaucracy and reporting and hold us to account for a system which is effective and requirements and/or a degree of confusion efficient overall. amongst staff as to how they are supposed to The Asylum Improvement Project, which was established by determine priorities. However output is the Government last summer, has been exploring new ways measured and accounted for, the key is to improve the asylum system to speed up the processing of quality control by those managing the applications, whilst improving the quality of decision caseworkers on a day-to-day basis. In a making. Progress to date has been good with improvements number of his reports the Independent Chief already seen in the speed of both first instance decision Inspector of the UK Border Agency has making, an increase to 60% in 30 days, but also the number praised the hard work and dedication of of removals within 12 months. caseworker staff, but has noted inconsistency Both staff and corporate partners continue to help shape the project and in particular NGOs are involved in work in the quality of decision-making and being taken forward on issues around vulnerable applicants administration between different offices. and improving our assessment of credibility. We are Ultimately, whether or not the ‘basket’ determined that our plans to transform the asylum system approach succeeds will depend on better will see further improvements across the board and that we training for line managers, in particular will realise our vision of an asylum system with swifter case improving their awareness of best practice, conclusions and no backlogs, delivered at significantly lower and then trusting them to exercise their cost to the taxpayer. discretion appropriately. (paragraph 8) We attach great importance to the issue of consistency. As part of the UK Border Agency‟s quality assurance process
we consistently measure success in delivering high quality casework against a framework agreed with United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The agency continues to work closely with corporate partners, particularly UNHCR, to drive improvements and is held to be an exemplar of high quality decisions in many countries. Whilst we would say that the quality of decisions is generally high we also recognise there is room for improvement and will be taking further steps to improve quality in all regions through the agency‟s Quality Implementation Plan. New asylum cases Conclusion: no direct recommendation for Government action. 5. We note that the UK Border Agency intends to publish information about every stage of the asylum process, from the number submitting applications for asylum through the speed and quality (as measured by robustness) of initial decisions to the outcome of appeals and tribunals. We look forward to receiving this information and we intend to keep the issues relating to the processing of asylum claims under review. (paragraph 9) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 107 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness Immigration Statistics As a result of the policies we are taking forward we Conclusion: no direct recommendation for anticipate net migration will reduce to the tens of Government action. 6. Given that this reduction in student thousands. To do this, we will need to address every route numbers is central to the Government’s of the immigration system. immigration policy, we will monitor progress in achieving it and the overall net immigration figure. At present it is unclear how the reduction will be made. (paragraph 10) Immigration Statistics Net migration is the difference between those entering the Not accepted. UK with an intention to remain for a year or more and those 7. We have already reported our view that it leaving on the same basis. Therefore only those people is a mistake to include students as ‘migrants’ coming to the UK to work or study for longer than 12 unless or until the student makes an months are considered to be long-term migrants rather than
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 108 Effectiveness application or demonstrates the intention to short-term migrants or visitors. We have followed the UN wish to settle. The official reason for definition which takes a stay of 12 months as the cut-off including students in migration numbers is point between the two. It does not matter that some that this is the way that numbers are migrants may only be intending to stay for say 2-3 years; measured by the United Nations. We during their stay they are part of the resident population. understand this reasoning, but regard it as flawed. The Government has indicated an intention to reduce migration numbers to tens of thousands rather than hundreds of thousands, and it is clear that their target in terms of that commitment relates to settlement rather than those who come to the UK to study and have every intention of leaving after the completion of their studies. Including student visas in the measurement places undue political pressure on the Government and its agencies, risks having a consequent and damaging impact on colleges, universities and local economies and is not part of a fair assessment of the Government's success or otherwise in meeting its stated intentions. The same applies to genuine cases in which people come to the UK to contribute to the work of specific companies, with no intention of permanent settlement. It is our contention that the government success in reducing migration numbers should be measured net of the figures of the genuine student and expert employment that are properly granted. Clarifying these issues will be helpful to Parliament in holding the Government to account, will be helpful to the Agency in improving its reporting systems and would be fairer to Government than a slavish adherence to the UN definition for the purposes of accounting. It is of course the case that the UN definition will have to be used in providing returns for the UN's own purposes of international comparison of
migration flows. (paragraph 11)
Enforcement of Points-based system: Tier 2 Tiers 2 and 5 of the Points Based System were introduced in Not accepted. (skilled employees) November 2008 and generally the arrangements were found to be working well. Tier 4 was introduced in March 8. The Chief Inspector was told that the 2009 and, during the first year of operation, it became Agency planned to carry out post-licensing evident that there was some systemic abuse occurring in visits on those sponsors when resources certain parts of the sector. All sponsors on the Tier 4 register allowed, and that it intended to prioritise were visited at least once by the summer of 2009 and all visits to those sponsors considered to pose colleges are now visited prior to a licence being issued. more of a risk than others. In practice, the The agency reviews the risks posed by sponsors in all Tiers main priority was to provide assurance on on a monthly basis allowing it to identify high risk sectors Tier 4 sponsors (educational institutions and sponsors. The agency will take further action against sponsoring students) as these were perceived any sector, or sponsor, where it has evidence of abuse. As to pose a much higher risk than Tier 2 an example, four national operations targeting Tier 2 sponsors, although no one had tested this sponsors have been commissioned since January 2011, one assumption. We find it unacceptable that the of which targeted high risk sponsors in the catering and care Agency can operate on untested assumptions sectors and resulted in over 150 visits. The agency is in this way. (paragraph 13) currently reviewing the visit reports and will take further action where there is evidence of immigration abuse and sponsor non-compliance. Action has already been taken to suspend and downgrade a number of sponsor licences as a result. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness Enforcement of Points-based system: Tier 2 In its response to the report published on 16 February 2011, Not accepted. (skilled employees) the UK Border Agency did not accept the Chief Inspector‟s recommendation that it should undertake checks and visits 9. The Chief Inspector, however, said he to ensure that all registered sponsors meet the criteria in the believed that the Agency should completely published guidance. Tier 2 sponsors are granted a licence review the database of sponsors, carry out only after the agency has completed all necessary checks. any necessary checks and ensure that the The agency looks at data available from all legacy and system was kept up-to-date as sponsors current immigration databases and also completes specific changed and as more information about checks on individuals. All prospective sponsors are required existing sponsors became available. He to submit authentic supporting documents as part of their acknowledged this would not be easy with application for a sponsor licence. This enables the agency‟s the current pressures on resources, but he sponsorship teams to check that the organisation is genuine thought it would be achievable if the Agency and operating/trading lawfully in the UK. ‘worked smarter’. We recommend that this is done. (paragraph 14) 109
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 110 Effectiveness Enforcement of Points-based system: Tier 2 All sponsor licence applications are assessed against risk Not accepted. (skilled employees) profiles. These risk profiles have been collated and updated over many years and are based on experience of risk and 10. The Points-Based System can function abuse from the (legacy) Work Permit system and Tier 2 of effectively only if there is confidence that the points-based system. The risk profiles are constantly sponsors will not abuse the system and that reviewed and amended as abuse is detected and risks are anyone who no longer qualifies for leave to identified through intelligence analysis. remain is compelled to leave the UK. While Mr Assessment against these risk profiles determines which Sedgwick affirmed the Agency’s belief in the prospective sponsors require a pre-licensing visit and enables integrity of all sponsors, we note that even visits to be targeted in an intelligent and robust manner. among the more rigorously inspected Tier 4 Pre-licensing visits are not necessary in every case and the sponsors, bogus institutions and failures in agency does not agree with the statement that they are not control continue to be discovered. The lighter carried out in all cases that require them. The Committee inspection regime for Tier 2 sponsors may be will wish to be aware that since 1 October 2010, UK Border justified, but, given that the Agency does not Agency visiting officers have conducted around 2,500 post- even know how many sponsors were not licence visits to Tier 2 sponsors. visited before registration and given the backlog of post-registration visits, we cannot share Mr Sedgwick’s confidence in the robustness of the system. (paragraph 17) Enforcement of Points-based system: Tier 2 The UK Border Agency accepted the Chief Inspector‟s The Government accepted the need to improve its (skilled employees) recommendation around the need to improve its performance regarding curtailment of visas following performance on curtailment. As the Independent Chief change in circumstance notice. However, it 11. We are also concerned about the lack of Inspector pointed out at the time of his inspection there maintained that its focus was deporting those who effective action to ensure the removal of were 150 cases currently awaiting curtailment action on Tier had the potential to cause harm rather than those those who no longer have a right to remain in 2. Most of these cases had been identified from routine who had overstayed their visas. the UK. Media discussion of illegal immigrants casework with a small proportion being identified within the often concentrates on those who enter the change of circumstances reports produced by the sponsor UK illegally—those smuggled in or who enter management system (SMS). Since the Chief Inspector‟s the UK clandestinely—but those who work report was published additional resources have been with such migrants consider it possible if not allocated to sifting the notifications to the SMS. Not all of probable that most illegal immigrants entered the cases identified will lead to curtailment action because a the country legally but then overstayed or „change of circumstances‟ can include a change in pay, a broke the terms of their visas. In this context, change in job title or a change in role. we note the recent work of the National The UK Border Agency must ensure that it uses its available Audit Office indicating that anything up to resources to best effect and prioritises its enforcement 181,000 people could have overstayed their activities on a risk basis that secures the removal of those visas (work, student or family reunion) in the that pose the greatest harm. We are committed to using the
last four years—though, given the lack of sponsorship system - that puts greater responsibility on checks leaving the UK, this is at best a rough those that benefit from migration - to place restrictions and estimate. We do not underestimate the then remove organisations that sponsor migrants who do difficulty of tracking down those who wish to not adhere to the rules. The agency also imposes high fines remain in this country illegally, but with some on any employers in the UK that are found to employ Tier 2 migrants the Agency has the advantage migrants who do not have any legitimate right to work. The of being alerted by the sponsor to the change strong message that the agency sends to employers creates in the migrant’s status. Of course, even if the an environment where it is not advantageous for migrants Agency does move to curtail leave to remain, to remain in the UK beyond their period of leave. it often takes no direct action to ensure that The roll out of the Immigration Casework Programme (ICW) the migrant leaves the UK; however, will make significant improvements to the ease and presumably none of the methods used to efficiency of taking curtailment action, including making an deter illegal migrants—checks on employers, automated link between notifications from sponsors and the scrutiny of the benefits and NHS databases— curtailment of leave. Future roll-outs of the programme will are engaged until the Agency records the fact first see student cases processed on the new ICW system that the Tier 2 permission has expired, and and later employment cases. the longer the delay in initiating these checks, the more likely it is that those wishing to stay illegally can ‘disappear’. (paragraph 18) Enforcement of Points-based system: Tier 2 Not accepted (skilled employees)
12. We are also very concerned about the 111 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness Chief Inspector’s findings that the Agency is inconsistent in the way it handles allegations from members of the public of illegal entry or overstaying and—in particular—about the confusion he found among the Agency’s own caseworkers about when and how to report suspicions about applicants to the Agency’s intelligence units. The concerns of the public and information given by them needs to be acted upon speedily and those who report these matters should be kept informed of what happens to this information. (paragraph 19)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 112 Effectiveness Enforcement of Points-based system: Tier 2 Not accepted (skilled employees)
13. In the Agency’s next update letter, we would like to be informed what action has been taken to close these gaps in the system of immigration controls. (paragraph 20) Enforcement of Points-Based System: Tier 4 Not accepted (students)
14. We expect the UK Border Agency to provide the following information in its triannual letter: • how many applications for Tier 4 (General) visas have been granted in that period; • how many applications for Tier 4 (General) visas have been refused and the reasons for these refusals in that period; • how many applications for Tier 4 (Student Visitor) visas have been granted in that period; • how many applications for Tier 4 (Student Visitor) visas have been refused and the reasons for these refusals in that period; • how many applications for Tier 4 visas have been refused on the basis of fraudulent evidence at UK-based processing centres in that period; • how many applications for Tier 4 visas have been refused on the basis of fraudulent evidence at overseas processing centres in that period; • a graph showing processing times for Tier 4 visas, differentiating between UK based and overseas processing posts in that period; • a graph showing the number of Tier 4 sponsors who are highly trusted sponsors, A
rated sponsors and B rated sponsors; • the number of first time visits to Tier 4 sponsors in that period; • the number of follow up visits to Tier 4 sponsors in that period; • the number of ‘gifted student’ exemptions from language requirements a) applied for and b) granted in that period; • the number of Post Study Work visas a) applied for and b) granted in that period; • the number of Student Entrepreneur visas a) applied for and b) granted in that period, and • the number of students required to leave and/or deported for breaking the terms of their visas in that period. (paragraph 22) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 113
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 114 Effectiveness Bogus Colleges Not accepted
15. In order to scrutinise the Agency’s management of the sponsor lists, we expect the UK Border Agency to provide the following information in its tri-annual letter: • how many bogus colleges have been closed in that period; • how many bogus colleges have been removed from the register in that period; • how many other sponsors have had their licences revoked in that period; • how many sponsors have had their licences suspended in that period; • how many sponsors have been fined for misuse of their licence in that period; • how many sponsors have been prosecuted for misuse of their licence in that period; • what other sanctions have been used against sponsors who misused their licence in that period, and • a list of the colleges suspended in that period, indicating which remain suspended, which have been reinstated and which have been permanently removed from the register. (paragraph 24)
Family Reunions The certificate of approval scheme was abolished on 9 May Accepted. 2011. 16. We wish to be informed what impact the The Government has already taken measures to combat Government expects the withdrawal of the sham marriages making it clear that this form of certificate of approval scheme to have, and immigration abuse will not be tolerated. We have worked what other measures, if any, the Government closely with the Church of England to strengthen their intends to take to deter sham marriages. ability to detect sham marriages. In April 2011 the Church (paragraph 25) of England published procedural guidance for members of the clergy on tackling sham marriages and we are currently in discussions to extend this guidance to the Church in Wales. We are also continuing to work with the Registration Services to further improve their ability to identify suspicious marriages through provision of guidance, training and awareness sessions. The UK Border Agency investigates reports of suspected sham marriages, and in the past year has conducted two periods of targeted enforcement action resulting in 155 arrests and several convictions against the facilitators and beneficiaries of sham marriage. Of particular note, is the successful joint operation between the British and Dutch immigration authorities which has already led to 9 arrests since August 2010. We will continue to review this. On 13 July 2011, the Government published a consultation
on family migration seeking views on reforms to the family 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness route to promote integration, reduce burdens on the taxpayer, and tackle abuse, in particular sham marriage. Those involved in sham marriages undermine our immigration system, and the consultation sets out how we are tackling this abuse and looks at possible new measures for identifying and disrupting sham marriages. The Government is also committed to tackling forced marriage and the proposals set out in the consultation build on existing cross-departmental working in this area. 115
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 116 Effectiveness Child Detention The Government’s plans for ending the detention of Accepted. children are set out in the “Review into Ending the 17. The next update letter from the Agency Detention of Children for Immigration purposes published should contain an account of how many on 16 December 201023. These included rolling out a new children have been detained for immigration family returns process nationally on 1 March 2011 and purposes, for how long, where and in what minimal use of Tinsley House Immigration Removal Centre circumstances since the 11 May deadline. pending the establishment of a completely new form of pre- (paragraph 26) departure accommodation in May 2011. We also said that after May we would cease to use Tinsley House for all but two categories of case: families held at the border while enquiries are made and/or a return flight is being arranged; and, pending their removal, families with individuals who may present a risk to the public. The family returns process, including the new independent Family Returns Panel, was rolled out as planned on 1 March. The new pre-departure accommodation is expected to be ready to accept families later this summer but we have already ceased to use Tinsley House for such families in line with the commitment given. Figures are published on a monthly basis for children held in immigration removal centres24. The most recent figures show that between 11 and 31 May 2 families were detained in Tinsley House: No in family No of Date of Date of children arrival in departure Tinsley from House Tinsley House
5 3 10/05/2011 12/05/2011
4 2 29/05/2011 29/05/2011
Both families were encountered at the border. The first was refused entry and held pending a return flight. The second family arrived in the middle of the night and was 23 http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/consultations/26-end-child-detention/child-detention-conclusions.pdf?view=Binary
held while further enquiries were made; they were released that afternoon. The published figures also show that one child was detained at Campsfield House in May, and we have also identified a second child who was detained in April and released in May; the latter case was not included in the April figures (because he was not considered to be a child at that point) but will be subject to inclusion in the revised quarterly figures when they are published in August. (The monthly release of numbers of children entering detention is provisional and it is expected that they will be superseded by the quarterly figures on children entering detention.) Both individuals had originally been considered to be adults but were released as soon as they were assessed to be under 18. They were detained for 9 and 18 days respectively. The figures for June 2011 will be published on 28 July 2011. We have since identified a further category of case where we may occasionally need to use Tinsley House to accommodate a prisoner accompanied by a child immediately prior to removal. These would be either: Mother and baby cases: where a mother who has been serving her sentence in a prison Mother and Baby Unit is being returned with her baby under the Early Removal
Scheme (i.e. before the end of her sentence) and the time of 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness the flight and the distance to the airport mean that they have to be accommodated near the airport for the night before the flight; or Contingency arrangements: where a single parent is being returned straight from prison custody or immigration detention and meeting her child(ren) at the airport for the return flight. We need some fallback in such cases in the event of the departure not taking place as planned, e.g. because of a flight delay or cancellation. We expect both types of cases to arise only rarely and for the period in Tinsley to be typically no more than a night.
24 http://homeoffice.gov.uk/science-research/research-statistics/migration/migration-statistics1/ 117
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 118 Effectiveness Immigration Tribunals In 2009-10, the Tribunals Service (Immigration and Asylum) Not accepted. disposed of 197,500 appeals. Of those 38% were allowed, 18. It appears that the Agency is more likely 54% dismissed and 8% withdrawn. to lose immigration than asylum appeals. The We are committed to embedding a right first time every Agency indicates that this is largely owing to time approach to decision making and to using the immigration applicants failing to provide information we learn from appeals heard to improve our information, but it is not clear whether the processes. applicants do so deliberately (in the hope that However, the primary reason for immigration allowed by slowing down the process they may appeals is further evidence submitted at appeal. For increase the chance of being allowed to example, analysis of a sample of 300 allowed in-country PBS remain in the UK) or because they were given appeal determinations (Tiers 1, 2 and 4) between May and insufficient or inaccurate information about December 2010 showed that 63% of PBS appeals allowed what was required when they first applied. by the Tribunal were due to submission of new evidence at (paragraph 29) appeal. Errors in initial decision-making accounted for 9% of allowed appeals, 6% were allowed on human rights grounds, and 4% concerned application of case law. It is for this reason that we have implemented changes like commencing section 19 of the UK Borders Act 2007, which restricts submission of further evidence at appeal in PBS cases. We are confident that the information and guidance provided to applicants about what is required in applications is clear and accurate. This is supported by the number of people who are able to follow that guidance properly and make successful applications in the first instance, and by our applicants‟ feedback. For example, customer satisfaction analysis on the PBS demonstrates a high level (around 80%) of satisfaction with the overall application process and high levels of understanding of evidence required (71-85%), and the majority (86%) of applicants agreeing the applications are easy to complete.25
25 http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/immigration-asylum-research/horr49a/?view=Standard&pubID=863063
Immigration Tribunals We are committed to increasing the UK Border Agency’s The Government maintains that non-appearance is national representation rate and to ensuring high quality not a signal that the Agency is withdrawing its 19. We note the actions the Agency is taking representation at the Tribunal, and the agency has already opposition. However, it concedes that there may be to improve both the quality of decision made great strides in this regard. The agency’s national some cases where it is unable to attend. making and the efficiency and effectiveness representation rate increased from 74% in September 2010 of its response to the appeals process. to 83% in March 2011, through a series of training However, it is unacceptable for applicants to programmes, by sharing regional best practice to increase arrive at a tribunal having waited years for a productivity and by seeking to reduce the flow of appeals decision only to find the Home Office is not into the system in areas such as out of time or invalid represented. We believe this undermines the appeals.26 credibility of the appeals system. If the The UK Border Agency remains committed to providing Agency does not intend to defend its decision representation at priority hearings, including those involving it should inform the other party in order to vulnerable appellants or those who may cause harm in the save court time and taxpayers’ money, and to UK, and consistently achieves 100% representation in fast ensure there is a fair, proper and track appeals and onward appeals to the Upper Tribunal. compassionate process. (paragraph 30) The agency may take pragmatic decisions not to attend in some cases, instead relying on written submissions to the court where a case is strong or the appellant has indicated they will not be in attendance, thus preventing cross examination, or where the witnesses‟ credibility is not in question. Where the agency plans not to be represented at a hearing, it makes every effort to notify the Tribunal in advance, and to request that the adjudicator deals with the
appeal on the basis of the contents of the letter of refusal 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness and any other written submissions which the agency makes when indicating it will not be represented. Non-attendance does not mean that the agency is withdrawing its decision; where the agency does withdraw the decision in an individual case it will notify the Tribunal in writing.
26 Figures extracted from local management information, and therefore are provisional and subject to change. These figures have not been provided under National Statistics protocols. 119
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 120 Effectiveness Immigration Tribunals The Government‟s consultation on family migration, The matter is subject to public consultation. published on 13 July, considers arrangements for the family 20. Media reports have referred to the visit visa, and invites views on the circumstances in which an Government considering abolishing the right appeal right should be retained and on how the application of appeal for those refused entry clearance to process can be made more user-friendly. visit family members. We trust there is no such intention, and it would not be appropriate for the authorities to be judge and jury when refusals occur, and the matter is pursued by solicitors or MPs making representations on behalf of the sponsors. It is far better to retain the present appeal system, be rigorous in deciding on applications and, moreover, have in place an effective control system to deal promptly, and we emphasise promptly, with anyone who stays any time at all beyond the authorisation given. (paragraph 31)
E-Borders Update occurred in following evidence session.
21. As we noted in our report on student visas, flawed evidence inhibits effective policymaking. Counting people in and out of the country is vital to understanding immigration and formulating sound, practical immigration policy; and the UK needs robust systems to protect its borders. When the Government decided to end Raytheon’s contract, after the payment of £188 million, it anticipated that a new contractor would be in place by November 2010. After a substantial delay, IBM and Serco have been issued with new contracts and taken over existing operations. We remain deeply concerned about the e- Borders programme, given its history, the lack of clarity about the final shape of the scheme and the high (but still unquantifiable) cost of the e-Borders programme both to the taxpayer and to carriers. We will expect rapid progress to be made in this programme by the time of the next tri-annual letter, in July 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 2011. (paragraph 36) 121
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 122 Effectiveness Asylum and immigration contracts The current suite of asylum accommodation contracts are Conclusion: no direct recommendation for being retendered during 2011, with mobilisation from April Government action. 22. The taxpayer expects value for money and 2012. for contracts to be awarded in a transparent The procurement is compliant with Cabinet Office guidelines and fair way. We seek reassurance that this is and the Public Contract Regulations (2006). This is one of in fact what happens and we intend to keep the largest procurements in the UK Border Agency, and as the area of procurement under review. such comes under the governance of the Home Office (paragraph 37) Group Investment Board, HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office Major Projects Authority. These bodies have provided assurance of the procurement strategy prior to the launch of the tendering process (April 2011) and will continue to do so at key milestones; contract award, contract mobilisation, and during the contract life to review the financial and strategic benefits that have been achieved. The key drivers for the current procurement exercise are to improve the quality of service provision while driving down costs. Over the life of these services the numbers of providers and contracts has reduced. In 2005 there were 19 accommodation providers managing 32 contracts, in 2011 this reduced to 21 contracts with 13 providers and in 2012 we expect national coverage to be delivered via 6 contracts. The continued consolidation of supply base reflects the maturity of the market and the Home Office focus on improving quality and cost through its commercial relationships.
Remuneration of Home Office and UK Border Following an open competition, Rob Whiteman has been Accepted. The salary has now been reduced to Agency officials appointed as the new Chief Executive of the UK Border £175,000 p.a. Agency. His start date will be announced shortly and 23. We welcome the fact that the Home Office Jonathan Sedgwick will continue to act as interim Chief has accepted our previous recommendation to Executive until this time. reduce the salary of the head of the UK Border Agency. However, we note that the reason given by the Home Office for the high salary paid to the previous head of the Agency was that it was necessary to ensure strong leadership and continuity. Both this Committee and the Independent Chief Inspector have stated on a number of occasions that many of the problems we have observed result from the Agency lacking continuity and good management. The sudden departure of the previous Chief Executive, and the fact that there is still no permanent successor nearly five months after she left, undermine the rationale for the high salary given by officials. We look forward to meeting the new head of the Agency, once appointed. (paragraph 38) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness Remuneration of Home Office and UK Border Any bonuses paid to senior civil servants (SCS) for the Not accepted. Agency officials 2010/11 performance year will be in line with the requirements of the Cabinet Office civil service - wide SCS 24. We reiterate our view that it would be reward arrangements. inappropriate for senior officials in the Home Office and its agencies to receive any bonuses this year, in light of the economic climate. (paragraph 39) 123
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 124 Effectiveness Correspondence with Members of Parliament The UK Border Agency continues to receive the largest Concerns acknowledged but no action taken. number of letters from Members and Peers across 25. In our last report on the UK Border Government. It has made significant improvements to its Agency we stated: “When Members write to service. In 2010 (latest figures available) more than 88% of Ministers, it is expected that the reply will at the 57,651 enquiries received were answered within the 20 least be signed by the Minister. It is therefore working day target. unacceptable that the head of an agency The agency follows Cabinet Office guidance on the should delegate this task to junior officials”. appropriate levels for signing replies to letters written to The Government’s response acknowledges Ministers. Where a letter from a Member or Peer is that “the Minister has authorised the Chief delegated to the head of the agency, it is not further Executive, or their (sic) deputy, to reply.” delegated to junior officials to reply. In all cases where a However, it does not acknowledge that letter has been written to a Minister, the reply will either be Members in doing so have the reasonable signed by a Minister, the Chief Executive or, in the Chief expectation of a reply from the Chief Executive‟s absence, his or her nominated deputy. Executive in normal circumstances and the Many letters from Members to the Chief Executive are Deputy only in the absence of the Chief routine enquiries that are best addressed by appropriate Executive. It also states that Members of officials in the agency. Delegating these to officials can Parliament are encouraged to write direct to provide a faster and more efficient service to Members. the Agency, but while this is adequate in The agency is committed to improving the way it engages some cases, sometimes the flow of with Members. Its staff meet MPs regularly, both through information becomes bogged down in the agency‟s regional Account Managers as well as via bureaucracy, which is normally when the events organised for MPs and their caseworkers. Members Member writes to the Chief Executive (or, in can raise enquiries with officials on the telephone via the dedicated MP Enquiry Line, by e-mail or via the Account frustration, to the Minister). We therefore Managers. There is also an on-line tracker for Members to reiterate that we expect a response signed by follow the progress of letters they have written. the head of the Agency when we write to More than 85% of enquiries received via the MP Enquiry him/her, and we give notice that we intend to Line have been resolved via a single call. The Enquiry Line seek views from other Members during the can also provide a written summary of the call for Members coming months to see whether concerns to pass to on to their constituents. remain or whether the Agency has When issues need to be escalated within the agency, the MP significantly improved the service given to Account Manager service provides Members with a direct MPs in representing their constituents. link to a senior official. We encourage Members to use their (paragraph 40) Account Manager as the first point of contact in these instances, as questions can often be dealt with more quickly and efficiently than is the case through formal written correspondence.
Tenth Report, Home Office— Implications for the Justice and Home Affairs area of the accession of Turkey to the European Union (HC 789), published 1 August 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. Relationships with UK police and diplomatic Turkey remains a priority partner for the UK, and in Conclusion: no direct recommendation for representatives are clearly based on joint action signing the UK-Turkey Strategic Agreement in July Government action. and mutual respect, and we were impressed with 2010, the Prime Minister demonstrated our mutual the ambitions of leading Turkish police officers in commitment to tackling shared threats to our security, terms of training and organisation. (Paragraph including organised crime, illegal migration and 21) terrorism.
We have already established an effective operational relationship with Turkish law enforcement agencies. As the Committee has observed, such cooperation has led to tangible criminal justice outcomes and significant drug seizures. The UK is keen to support the Turkish National Police where necessary in terms of training and capacity-building – especially where EU funding is available to help deliver sustainable reforms in priority areas. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 125
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 126 Effectiveness 2. Turkish organised crime groups pose a HMG recognises that Turkey’s geographical position Conclusion: no direct recommendation for substantial threat to the internal security of the makes it a key transit route for both migrants and illicit Government action. EU, largely owing to Turkey’s position along the drugs, predominantly heroin, into the EU. For instance, heroin trafficking route from Afghanistan to the 2011 Europol Organised Crime Threat Assessment Europe. It is estimated that 75–80% of the heroin noted that an increasing amount of cocaine is arriving trafficked from Afghanistan to Western and at ports on the Adriatic and Black Sea, with some Central Europe comes via Turkey, and Turkish evidence of maritime shipments of cocaine from Latin networks continue to account for around 70% of America being destined for Italian criminal groups. The the UK heroin market. The proportion of cocaine threat to the UK from cocaine trafficking via Turkey is bound for the EU that is seized in Turkey has significantly less than that arising from heroin increased over the last few years, although it is trafficking via Turkey. We are however on our guard by no means approaching the volume seized for any future increase in this threat. along the established cocaine trafficking route through the Iberian Peninsula. Turkey also As the Committee notes, the existing evidence strongly represents a “key nexus point” for the transit of indicates that Turkey remains a destination - rather illegal immigrants to the EU. Our evidence than a source - country for human trafficking at appeared to support findings published in 2006 present. Turkey signed the Council of Europe by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime that Turkey Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human is predominantly a destination rather than a Beings in March 2009, and the voluntary return of source country for human trafficking, with only victims continues to be provided for in cooperation one Turkish national amongst more than 1,000 with the International Organization for Migration (IOM), NGOs, law enforcement bodies and relevant victims offered support in the UK via the institutions in source countries. Nevertheless, we will National Referral Mechanism last year. However, continue to monitor developments in this area closely. the volume of irregular migrants being smuggled voluntarily into the EU via Turkey by criminal Complementing effective bilateral cooperation, the EU groups reached crisis levels at the end of 2010. remains committed to supporting continuing efforts by (Paragraph 37) the Turkish authorities to tackle illegal migration. In June, the EU Justice and Home Affairs Council (JHAC) agreed that Member States should continue working together to weaken the capacity of organised crime groups to facilitate illegal immigration to the EU, particularly via southern, south-eastern and eastern Europe, including at the Greek-Turkish border. It should be noted that the volume of irregular migration has dropped significantly since the early 2000s.
3. More open borders in an enlarged Union bring As it would need to meet the unanimously agreed Accepted. greater opportunities for organised crime and standards before membership was granted, Turkey facilitate the illegal smuggling of goods and will need to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of all people. We judge that Turkish accession would existing Member States, that its borders are secure be unlikely to lead to an increase of narcotics and managed effectively. As a result, the accession into the EU market, given that the major factors process will further strengthen the European influencing drug flows into the EU appear to be Union’s border security in that crucial region and, production levels in the source countries and as the Committee observes, create greater domestic demand in the EU Member States, opportunity for cooperation between law neither of which would be affected. enforcement agencies. Furthermore, accession will bring opportunities for greater cooperation between Turkish and EU law enforcement agencies, which could bring about a more robust response to drug trafficking. (Paragraph 38) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 127
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 128 Effectiveness 4. There is some disagreement about the impact Turkey will also need to demonstrate that it has Accepted. of accession on levels of human trafficking but put sufficient measures and resources in place to we are concerned by evidence highlighted by the tackle human trafficking as part of its accession Poppy Project of an increase in trafficking negotiations, and the Turkish authorities will be following previous enlargements of the EU, of strongly encouraged to make best use of available Romanian victims in particular. We also note that EU funding to support any necessary capacity- there may be some reluctance among Turkish building in this area. We are aware of existing and law enforcement authorities to recognise that new initiatives planned by the Turkish authorities human trafficking into and through Turkey is in this area including work with the International already a problem. An understanding of the Organisation for Migration and proposed nature of human trafficking will be critical to introduction of new legislation on trafficking. The preventing an increase in trafficking following UK would be happy to support further Turkish enlargement, as well as supporting victims of efforts as needed. trafficking in Turkey now. We therefore welcome the European Commission’s focus on closely Our new strategy on human trafficking monitoring Turkey’s progress in tackling human emphasises the importance of strengthening our trafficking and we expect the UK—as a fellow efforts to stop human trafficking in transit and destination and transit country—to provide source countries, and the UK is committed to advice and assistance to Turkey if required. working with its international partners (such as (Paragraph 39) Turkey) to address key challenges, raise awareness in-country and explore opportunities for joint operations where appropriate. Closely monitoring the threat of human trafficking to the UK on an ongoing basis, we direct resources and law enforcement activity to where they are needed most. 5. We consider the issue of people smuggling The accession process ensures that aspirant Accepted. with related issues concerning illegal migration Members States must meet agreed standards in the next chapter, but the likely impact of more across a wide range of policy areas – including open borders on this phenomenon is an area of border security – to the satisfaction of all existing major concern to us. (Paragraph 40) Member States.
Tackling illegal migration and people smuggling remains a top priority for the UK, and further details about our efforts in Turkey to address potential risks are set out in response to the Committee’s comments below.
6. A stringent law enforcement response will be As highlighted by the Committee, the Turkish Conclusion: no direct recommendation for required to minimise the impact of organised authorities continue to make impressive efforts in Government action. crime originating in Turkey in an enlarged the fight against drug trafficking, and we will Europe. We are encouraged by the evidence further reinforce the strong operational brought to our attention both in the UK and in relationships between our respective law Turkey of the efficiency and capability of the enforcement agencies. The National Crime Agency Turkish National Police, particularly in respect of (NCA) will look to build on existing law drug trafficking—with heroin seizures made by enforcement relationships between UK and the Turkish authorities dwarfing those made in international partners, working with them where South–East Europe—and their willingness to appropriate to tackle and disrupt criminals, cooperate with most EU counterparts. We are including drugs and people traffickers, who target particularly impressed by the close working the UK from overseas. relationship between UK and Turkish law enforcement agencies, which is clearly helping to reduce the supply of heroin to the EU, and we urge the Home Secretary to ensure that the resources which the UK brings to this partnership continue to be provided through the new National Crime Agency. (Paragraph 41) 7. We recognise the positive impact, albeit We would also welcome closer cooperation Accepted. variable, made by international institutions such between SECI and the relevant international as Europol, Frontex and Interpol in combating organisations, and forthcoming developments
cross–border crime in this region, but which will help strengthen such working 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness recommend that, as well as fostering ever–closer arrangements. linkages with each other, these bodies cooperate more closely with the SECI Center, which is Recent EU Council Conclusions recognised that responsible for facilitating information-sharing further efforts are required to improve regional and joint operations between the law cooperation in the Western Balkans whilst enforcement agencies of its member states in avoiding duplication of resources by promoting South–East Europe. (Paragraph 42) effective operational and strategic cooperation between Europol and SECI. Although SECI is primarily funded by its members, an ongoing €1.5 million EU-funded project aims to enhance its capacity to use EU tools (including the regional threat assessment) and to enhance coordination between SECI, Member States and the relevant EU bodies, especially Europol. 129
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 130 Effectiveness 8. We note that a substantial proportion of pre– As the Committee notes, there is significant EU Partially accepted. accession funding from the EU to Turkey is funding available to support priority reforms in currently directed towards law enforcement. those countries working towards EU membership, Two areas where this money could perhaps be and these resources should be utilised where it used to particular effect are building capacity for will make the most impact in the long-term. We greater intelligence sharing between agencies have previously worked in close partnership with both nationally and internationally, and tackling the Turkish authorities on building capacity for organised immigration crime. We urge the UK greater intelligence sharing and tackling Government to use its influence at European organised immigration crime, and will continue to level to direct available funding towards these seek future opportunities to work collaboratively areas, and to report back to us on the outcome with the Turkish authorities in support of their with a detailed breakdown of future pre– ambitious reform efforts. accession spending on programmes to tackle organised crime. (Paragraph 43) The UK has consistently supported efforts to strengthen the link between the justice and home affairs priorities established in the European Commission’s regular assessments of progress and the strategic programming of EU financial assistance. Where such details become available, we will endeavour to provide further information on relevant pre-accession spending in due course.
9. In the long–term, we believe that the risks that The UK remains Turkey’s strongest supporter in its Accepted. Turkish accession poses for organised crime in ambition to join the European Union, subject to the EU are considerably outweighed by the the rigorous application of the accession criteria. potential benefits—partly in terms of the We agree that Turkish accession would be to the standards the Turkish authorities will be required wider benefit of the UK and EU, contributing to to meet to bring their systems and capabilities in our mutual prosperity, security, and stability. We line with the rest of the EU but largely owing to welcome the Turkish Government’s continued the opportunities it will bring for increased commitment to accelerating domestic reforms, cooperation with EU law enforcement agencies including in the justice and home affairs field. and with Europol. We also fear there is a risk that, if Turkey is not permitted to join the EU, We strongly endorse the acknowledgement that the Turkish authorities may lose their incentive the Turkish authorities continue to make to prioritise tackling criminality which affects EU impressive efforts in tackling cross-border Member States to a far greater extent than their organised crime and illegal migration. Our own population (Turkey does not have a big Strategic Partnership commits the UK and Turkey domestic drug market and most immigrants to tackling all forms of organised crime (especially transiting the country do not intend to stay), and drug trafficking) and to stepping up our existing to cooperate with their EU counterparts. and fruitful cooperation to fight illegal migration. However, we recognise that ultimate decisions on membership of the EU will be based on a far It should also be noted that there is a good level wider variety of considerations than these. of cooperation between UK and Greek law Clearly these problems—and the ability of law enforcement agencies overall, with some notable enforcement agencies to deal with them—do not successes in both organised immigration crime and conveniently follow the boundaries of the drugs cases. 131 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness European Union. We need law enforcement agencies to work together effectively both inside and outside the EU borders. It is clear that the Turkish authorities are proving more effective than some of the authorities that lie within the EU border, such as Greece, and that bilateral arrangements—for example, between SOCA and the Turkish authorities—are maturing well. (Paragraph 44)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 132 Effectiveness 10. In the meantime, it is clear that building a UK law enforcement agencies and diplomatic Partially accepted. closer relationship between Turkey and EU law representatives have an extremely high level of enforcement agencies should not be deferred respect for their Turkish counterparts, and we until the membership negotiations are agree that closer working relationships should not completed. In the first instance, we encourage be deferred until accession negotiations are the new Turkish Parliament to continue the work completed. As suggested, there are obvious of its predecessor in bringing into effect a data benefits in bringing into effect a data protection protection law that will allow for a higher level law that would allow a higher level of of cooperation with Europol prior to accession, cooperation with Europol, and the UK stands and again encourage the UK Government to ready to provide any necessary assistance in this offer any assistance that will further this end. It area. is clear that our UK police and diplomatic representatives have a relatively high level of Europol’s mandate means full membership is only respect for their Turkish counterparts and spoke possible for EU Member States. However, the positively about the ambition, rate of progress Council decision of 27 March 2000 (amended by and strategic grasp of the Turkish police and the Council decision of 6 December 2001 and the associated authorities. In the medium–term, we Council decision of 13 June 2002) authorises the consider that the EU should consider making Director of Europol to enter into negotiations on special arrangements for Turkey to assume some cooperation agreements with third party states of the attributes of EU membership in areas and non-EU related bodies. As such, Turkey has an which would be feasible and mutually beneficial. existing cooperation agreement with Europol We strongly recommend that Turkey be allowed which promotes the exchange of strategic and full membership of Europol (or at the very least a technical information. In addition, we would special and enhanced level of associate strongly support the development of an membership) and of the European Monitoring operational cooperation agreement between Centre for Drugs and Addiction, prior to (and Europol and Turkey, subject to the necessary data irrespective of) full membership. It became clear protection measures being in place. Such an to us that the fact that Turkey is not a full agreement would benefit both parties and the member of Europol poses obstacles for our own wider EU by facilitating information exchange and diplomatic and policing work and makes it more providing greater opportunity for practical difficult to promote multilateral joint working cooperation with EU partners. This would also across the EU. Not to admit Turkey to improve the EU's intelligence picture of regional membership of those bodies would be to cut off organised crime threats. the European nose to spite our face and we hope that our Government will press for Turkey to be admitted formally to both bodies at the very least. We recommend that the UK Government discusses this approach with their European partners and reports back to us on the outcome. (Paragraph 45)
The governing regulation of the EMCDDA (Article 21) states that it shall be open to the participation of any third country that shares the interest of the Community and of its Member States in the Centre's objectives and work. Turkey has participated informally in the Centre's work for several years and the UK Focal Point previously hosted a study visit for the Turkish Focal Point. Formal membership by Turkey of the EMCDDA has been agreed by the EU and is only awaiting ratification by the Turkish Parliament before it can take effect. We will continue to press for Turkey’s membership of these bodies as long as the conditions for entry are met and will report back on the outcome in due course. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 133 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 134 Effectiveness 11. We gained the very clear impression that We take every opportunity to encourage our EU Accepted. Turkey has a genuine will to achieve agreement partners to recognise the benefits of cooperating and to improve co–operation and practice, but with the Turkish authorities in these crucial policy feels that EU decision–making is slow and areas. For example, the EU working group on JHA cumbersome. The UK Government should press external relations (JAIEX) held a timely discussion the EU—and other Member States—to recognise on EU-Turkey relations in April. The UK strongly the immediate benefits of cooperating with the emphasised the importance of working Turkish authorities on such issues as law collaboratively with the Turkish authorities, enforcement, border controls, people smuggling highlighting that the current Multi-annual and trafficking of drugs and people. This should Indicative Planning Document (MIPD) for Turkey be pressed in advance of a resolution of other rightly highlights that JHA is one of the priority accession issues or the overall rate of progress sectors during the 2011-13 spending period. We towards accession. (Paragraph 70) suggested that improving judicial efficiency, strengthening inter-agency cooperation in tackling OC and drugs trafficking, and increasing capacity to manage illegal migration should be among the specific priorities for future EU-funded project work – noting that aligning such expenditure with Turkish JHA strategies will help ensure national ownership and further improve the relevant institutions. We pressed for regular follow-up discussions within future JAIEX meetings given that implementation of tangible reforms across the full range of priority JHA areas is in the interests of Turkey and the EU.
12. The land border between Greece and Turkey We agree with the Committee’s assessment Accepted. now constitutes the main loophole for irregular regarding the challenges faced at the land border immigration to the EU: by the end of 2010, up to between Greece and Turkey, whilst noting that 350 migrants were attempting to cross it every establishing the true nationality of irregular day. While it is difficult to obtain accurate migrants is problematic. UKBA and SOCA have figures, the majority of these migrants originate deployed additional resources in Greece and are from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Central Asia and, developing joint Action Plans to support the more recently—because of a decision by the enhancement of high-level relationships with the Turkish Government to relax visa requirements Greek and Turkish authorities in the area of for the nationals of some Maghreb countries— border capacity building and intelligence sharing North Africa. Very few, if any, are Turkish to tackle the organised criminality behind people nationals. (Paragraph 75) smuggling in the region. This work includes specific UK support to the wider Greece Action Plan on asylum and close collaboration with Turkey at all levels to combat organised immigration crime under the Turkey/UK Strategic Partnership Agreement. In support of the latter, the UK and Turkey have successfully delivered a series of EU and bilateral-funded projects to improve border security and asylum processing, as well as establishing close working arrangements with the Turkish police to combat those travelling on forged or fraudulent travel documents. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 135
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 136 Effectiveness 13. There is little doubt that the subsequent A number of reasons contributed to the success of Partially accepted. presence of the Frontex operation at the border the Frontex operation at the Greece-Turkey since November 2010 was associated with a border between November 2010 and March 2011, reduction in the number of migrants crossing. A and the political messaging was only one factor number of reasons are suggested, including that affecting its positive outcome. it has had some form of deterrent effect, it has increased the surveillance capacity at the border, We welcome the committee’s recommendation and it has encouraged the Turkish authorities to that the European Council emphasise to Member put more resources into policing their side of the States the importance of providing Frontex with border. The numbers apprehended on the Greek adequate resources. Although we will continue to side dropped from 7,607 in October 2010 to 1,632 support its activities where our presence can in February 2011. We therefore recommend that deliver the most value, it is important to note that the European Council strongly communicates to the UK is not a full participant in Frontex. Member States the importance of meeting their Frontline positions at the Greece-Turkey border commitments to provide Frontex with adequate are better suited to border guards from the resources to combat irregular migration at the Schengen states who enjoy the necessary legal land border between Greece and Turkey. We powers and protections to carry out such duties believe that, to the extent that Frontex has effectively. succeeded, it is largely through the political message that it has sent Turkey that the whole Schengen area, and not just Greece, expects Turkey to act more strongly to combat illegal migration. We recommend that our Government bolsters the limited but cost–effective Serious Organised Crime Agency and UK Border Agency presence and visibility on the Greek–Turkish border to emphasise that the UK wholly concurs with this. (Paragraph 76)
14. However, Frontex is unable to turn back As the Committee states, engagement by Frontex Accepted. migrants and we question whether a more with the countries from which illegal migrants effective use of EU resources might not be for seek to cross into the EU is crucial to the effort to Frontex, with the permission of the Turkish reduce these flows. The Government notes that Government, to undertake preventative work in the measures proposed by the Committee are Turkey alongside the Turkish border authorities. likely to be adopted later this year and will be For this reason, we urge the European Council to encouraging their swift implementation. adopt provisions for the draft Frontex Regulation that will allow for increasing liaison with third countries and encourage Frontex to put them into effect swiftly. We urge the UK Government to press this specific point with the European Commission as a matter of urgency. (Paragraph 77) 15. In the long-term, substantially reducing the The Government agrees with the Accepted. flow of irregular migrants to the EU depends recommendation. UKBA have deployed resources significantly upon an improvement in the life to work with SOCA to develop relationships with chances of people in the developing world, Greek and Turkish Authorities to provide support which can be assisted by the effective targeting for capacity building and to share intelligence to of UK and EU aid budgets. In the shorter–term, tackle organised immigration crime. In Turkey, the we believe that a four–fold strategy is required UK Returns and Reintegration Fund supported the to address the situation in Greece and Turkey: introduction of a pilot Assisted Voluntary Return
resources for Assisted Voluntary Returns, project that is now being funded by other 137 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness effective readmission agreements, increased Member States. Proposals are being developed for cooperation between the Greek and Turkish securing resources for Assisted Voluntary Returns authorities, and a focused effort to tackle to support NGOs in Greece. We will continue to organised immigration crime. The proposed offer support to more effective cooperation border fence to be built in Evros may have a between Greece and Turkey, and to encourage limited deterrent effect, but all parties involved more effective readmission agreements. acknowledge that it is no solution in itself. (Paragraph 78)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 138 Effectiveness 16. We appreciate the commitment we were The Government agrees with the Committee that Partially accepted. given by the Greek authorities that they would support should be given to Greece to combat the continue to combat the issue of irregular issue of irregular migration and we support migration on behalf of Europe, despite Greece’s practical cooperation measures through the own acute domestic concerns. However, we are European Asylum Support Office. We disagree concerned that these domestic problems will with calls for greater burden sharing if they severely inhibit the capacity of the Greek include the relocation of beneficiaries of authorities to do this effectively and we heed international protection between Member States their call for greater burden-sharing amongst as this simply moves the problem around rather European partners. We understand that than solving it. We also have concerns that large- European funding for crucial migration scale relocation could become a pull factor. In our programmes, including Assisted Voluntary view, people who need protection should obtain it Returns, which allow those migrants who are in the first Member State they reach and not be stuck in Greece to return to their own countries, relocated routinely from one Member State to is being delayed because of Greece’s inability to another. We believe the best way for the EU to provide matched funding. The UK Government assist those Member States facing particular should put pressure on the European Union to pressures due to illegal immigration is through release emergency funding without the usual practical cooperation, sharing of expertise and requirement for matched funding while Greece is funding under the Solidarity Mechanism. experiencing acute economic difficulties. (Paragraph 79) On EU funding, we support quicker and more flexible funding where necessary to address migration pressures. However, matched funding is a necessary tool when allocating funding to Member States to ensure EU Funds do not substitute national spend. Emergency measures EU funding is allocated on a higher level of matched funding, meaning Member States are allocated 80% EU funds for 20% national spend. We support this higher level of matched funding in certain circumstances.
17. We also recognise the efforts made by the The Government recognises the significant efforts Accepted. Turkish authorities to stem the flow of migrants made by Turkish authorities to tackle the flow of into Greece, and were particularly encouraged by migrants into Greece. Greater co-operation indications of a greater willingness on the part between the Greek and Turkish authorities is of the Greek and Turkish authorities to essential to the effective tackling of illegal cooperate on migration issues. Small but positive migration through the shared border. steps have been taken by the Greek and Turkish Coastguards along the maritime border over the Effective sharing of intelligence remains key to last few years and we hope this can be built countering cross-border criminality. The UK has upon and replicated, with the aid of Frontex, bilateral mechanisms in place for the exchange of between agencies operating at the land border. intelligence on organised immigration crime on Intelligence–sharing across state boundaries is the ground in Turkey and Greece and we are key to disrupting networks facilitating organised seeking to further improve the quality of that immigration crime and Europol and Frontex must information and the outcomes delivered. take a stronger lead in developing effective ways of sharing and utilising intelligence captured by As the measures proposed by the Committee have themselves and the relevant national agencies in been included in proposed amendments to the Greece and Turkey. Once again, we urge the Frontex Regulation, we anticipate a marked European Council to pass provisions for the Draft acceleration of joint working between Frontex Frontex Regulation that would facilitate this. and other European law enforcement agencies. (Paragraph 80) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 139
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 140 Effectiveness 18. We are deeply concerned about the The Government is also deeply concerned about Accepted. conditions in which migrants are currently being the conditions in which migrants are being held in held in Greece as the authorities struggle to deal detention in Greece. We have continued to apply with the high level of migration. Currently political pressure on the Greek Government to migrants are able to be held in detention in treat this issue as a matter of urgency, particularly Greece for a maximum of six months only, and in the case of those migrants who seek the threat of detention, even in such conditions, international protection and are subject to appears not to have had a deterrent effect. Most prolonged detention without access to the asylum are subsequently released by the Greek procedure. It is imperative that Greece tackles this authorities because of a lack of enforcement of issue using measures available to them in order to the Greek–Turkish Readmission Agreement, provide adequate and humane facilities for which might allow the majority of third–country migrants that are detained. We have offered our nationals who have transited Turkey to be support to Greece through the European Asylum returned there. While Greece is unable to return Support Office and will be sending our own the vast majority of those whom it detains, we experts to assist the authorities on management question the value of holding migrants in these of detention centres and first reception centres. conditions. We add our voice to that of the UK We remain committed to providing practical co- Government in encouraging the prompt operation to Greece to help implement reforms conclusion of a Readmission Agreement between under the Greek Action Plan for Managed Turkey and the EU, which should facilitate the Migration and Asylum Reform. return to Turkey of greater numbers of irregular economic migrants. (Paragraph 81) The Government welcomes the Committee’s support for our position on the swift conclusion of the EU Readmission Agreement with Turkey. Given the high level of transit migration through Turkey and into the EU, co-operation on the return of illegal immigrants is important. Finalising the Readmission Agreement would be a further step towards tackling the flow of irregular migrants between Turkey and the EU, and we are pleased that Turkey would also like to conclude the agreement.
19. There are two positions taken by the Turkish The Government notes the Committee’s concerns. Partially accepted. Government which are currently contributing to These issues would need to be addressed by the flow of irregular migrants into Europe but Turkey as it works towards meeting the relevant which Turkey would be required to reverse in EU standards as part of the ongoing accession order to align itself with EU standards prior to process. For instance, Turkey would need to align accession. The first concerns the agreement of its visa policy with that of the EU more widely visa exemptions with a number of countries on before accession. Turkey has prepared a new draft the EU’s negative list—Turkey would be required law on asylum, which is expected to go to to align with the EU Visa Regulation on third Parliament during 2012. UNHCR have commended country nationals by requiring nationals of these this step, which will bring Turkey’s practice closer countries, such as Syria, to obtain a visa. The to the EU acquis, albeit without necessarily second concerns the application of geographical removing the limitation itself. An impact limitations to the 1951 Geneva Convention— assessment on the potential effect of removing Turkey would have to award full refugee status the limitation is already underway. In the to genuine refugees from outside Europe. This meantime, the UK continues to support activities might encourage more migrants to claim asylum that address the treatment of asylum seekers and in Turkey rather than the EU, although the refugees in Turkey. impact on overall numbers of migrants is difficult to assess. (Paragraph 87) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 141
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 142 Effectiveness 20. Nonetheless, were Turkey to join the EU, the The Government thanks the Committee for these Accepted. Union’s external borders would extend to recommendations. Turkey will be required to meet several countries which pose a considerable stringent conditions relating to its border security, security risk, including as a source of large and EU institutions and existing Member States numbers of irregular migrants, notably Syria, will continue to work closely with Turkey to Iran and Iraq. In our view, the ability of Turkey to enhance its capabilities prior to accession. control this border gives rise to the greatest cause for concern within the Justice and Home The UK has an especially strong bilateral Affairs area. The EU must apply a very stringent relationship with Turkey in building and set of conditions relating to border security, all maintaining an effective border management of which must be clearly and objectively system. It is right that we should do this due to the demonstrated to have been met by Turkey prior large number of irregular migrants the UK to accession. Careful consideration must also be receives via Turkey’s border. However, many other given within the accession negotiations as to the Member States are also working closely with desirability of eventually allowing Turkey to join Turkey and providing bilateral support, including the Schengen area. It is appropriate that part of Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the EU’s pre-accession aid package to Turkey is Sweden. Over the next financial period, the UK aimed at developing a modern and effective will continue to give bilateral support to the border management system. We have been told Turkish authorities but will also encourage the EU that the UK is also providing a considerable level to take a leading role in this area. of assistance to the Turkish authorities in this area. This is commendable, but we would like to In the period 2007-2010 the EU spent €373.46 receive assurances from our Government that million on aid to support Justice, Home Affairs and the UK is not shouldering too much of the Fundamental Rights in Turkey, including border burden and that the EU is meeting its management. In the period 2011-2013 this will be commitments in this area. We urge the increased by 17% to €439.77 million. This work is Government to make the case vigorously for the supported by international organisations and EU to be more engaged and forthcoming to NGOs, as well as bilateral support from numerous Turkey in advance of accession since we have a EU Member States. lot to gain and such an approach would be in the best interests of the UK and other members of Under the EU Treaties, all new Member States are the EU. (Paragraph 88) required to join the Schengen area after accession, but internal border controls are removed only when the country concerned has been evaluated and has fully demonstrated its ability to implement Schengen rules in practice. We support in principle current proposals to strengthen the Schengen evaluation mechanism so that weaknesses in border security are tackled quickly and effectively.
21. It is very difficult to estimate the number of As the Committee acknowledges, it is difficult to Partially accepted. Turkish nationals who would be likely to take estimate the additional number of Turkish advantage of free movement within the EU, nationals who would be likely to exercise their particularly given that the date of Turkish Free Movement rights within the EU over and accession is unclear; we heard very different above existing flows. There are a number of views accordingly. Available forecasts have put factors that make such estimations difficult, the figure at anywhere between 0.5 and 4.4 including uncertainty around the relative strength million arrivals between the date of accession of economies across Europe and elsewhere over and 2030. The scale of migration will depend time; uncertainty around what the relative stocks upon a combination of complex factors, of Turkish migrants in the UK and other EU including the relative economic conditions in EU countries will be in the future; uncertainty in Member States and in Turkey at the time of other key drivers of migration such as relative accession, and the terms of the accession treaty employment opportunities across Turkey and and how these are applied throughout the Europe; and most importantly, the uncertainty Union. The picture is complicated by conflicting around what type of transitional arrangements precedents from previous comparable other Member States might introduce for Turkish enlargements: increased migration from Spain accession. Therefore, we do not consider that it and Portugal was negligible following their would be useful to make such an estimate at accession in 1986, but at least 200,000 migrants present. arrived each year in the UK alone following the accession of the A8 countries between 2004 and However, it will be crucial to carry out timely 2007, despite official predictions of an annual assessments in the future, using the most robust, flow of between 5,000 and 13,000. (Paragraph up-to-date evidence possible to inform estimates 105) on the potential migration flows and impacts for 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 143
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 144 Effectiveness 22. We accept that both legal and clandestine all future EU accession countries. This evidence migration from Turkey to the EU have declined in base will also help determine the type of recent years to a combined annual figure of transitional controls to apply. below 50,000, and that there is also evidence of negative migration from the EU to Turkey, particularly from Germany. However, it is also the case that population trends and the gap in living standards could make easier migration to the EU an attractive option for Turkish nationals. In terms of destinations within the EU, it is perhaps likely that Turks would favour Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and France, who have the largest Turkish communities in the Union, but previous experience has shown that such assumptions may prove ill-founded. (Paragraph 106) 23. All of which leads us to be cautious about the prospect of allowing Turkish citizens full freedom of movement. We note the success of transitional arrangements in controlling levels of migration to many EU countries, in the case of the A8 Member States; and to the UK, in the case of Bulgarian and Romanian nationals following their accession in 2007. We therefore welcome and fully support the Government’s commitment to applying “effective transitional controls as a matter of course” for all new Member States. While we appreciate that a number of unknown factors make this analysis difficult, and that the Home Office is no doubt wary of attracting criticism for inaccurate estimates in the future, we are concerned that no impact analysis of Turkish accession for future migration trends has yet been carried out. Accordingly, we recommend that the Home Office undertakes this piece of work now and updates it as circumstances change. (Paragraph 107)
Eleventh Report, Student visas—follow up (HC 1445), published 26 July 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. We were disappointed that the impact Not accepted. assessment was so delayed in this instance and call on the Home Office to take measures to ensure that this situation does not recur. (Paragraph 6) 2. We note that this last in particular may be The Committee commented on the suspension of Not accepted. optimistic in light of the recent suspension of Glasgow Caledonian University’s sponsor licence. Highly-Trusted Sponsor status for Glasgow This was unrelated to the changes to the system. Caledonian University. (Paragraph 8) Where the UK Border Agency take action to suspend a sponsor licence, they make it clear what action is necessary for the licence to be re-instated and work with the sponsor to enable this. Glasgow Caledonian University took swift action to resolve the problems highlighted by the UK Border Agency, and as a result their licence was rapidly reinstated. At the same time it is important that all sponsors, including universities, have due 145 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness regard to their obligations and monitor closely the international students they are taking in and compliance with immigration rules. The Agency is committed to taking swift action to ensure high levels of compliance. 3. We question whether it will be as easy for Not accepted. institutions to fill student places and replace lost income as the Government’s Impact assessment suggests. (Paragraph 9)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 146 Effectiveness 4. The Home Secretary’s dismissal of the validity Not accepted. of the impact assessment seems to confirm our deep concerns that inadequate migration data sources, both historical and current, are thwarting both the Migration Advisory Committee and the Home Office from developing genuinely evidence-based immigration policy. Given the significance of the higher education sector to the UK economy and the need to boost international confidence if UK universities are to be able to continue to recruit the brightest and the best it is exceptionally important that policy in this area is seen to be carefully considered and evidence based. Policy decided in advance of the publication of the impact assessment does not send that message. We do, however, welcome the research being carried out by the Migration Advisory Committee to look into the impacts of migration on public services and we await their report with anticipation. (Paragraph 10)
5. We are concerned that the Home Office still The Committee was concerned about the quality Not accepted. does not take evidence-based policy as seriously of the evidence on which the policy was based, as it could. We urge them to adopt a more and made various comments about the Impact evidence-based approach to policy making rather Assessment. The Home Office is committed to than risk determining policies separately from making the best use of the available evidence. As examining the evidence. (Paragraph 11) the Minister of Immigration’s letter of 24 May stated, the International Passenger Survey (IPS) is the foundation for the Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures on net migration. These are the best measures we have available, have been based on a consistent definition since 1991, are produced in accordance with National Statistics codes of practice and are used widely across Government. However, where reliable supplementary data sources are available, they will form an element of the range of evidence that we draw on when formulating policy, and in due course e-Borders will provide increased border crossing data.
This is not just a question however of statistics. The Minister of Immigration’s speech of 1 February drew attention to a range of different kinds of abuse of the system, ranging from 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness outright deception by students and colleges to low standards in some parts of the sector who have been unregulated and often motivated primarily by financial rather than educational concerns. A proportion of the consistent rise in international student numbers over recent years has been due to a lax approach and the Home Office and UK Border Agency are determined to tighten policy and processes until we have confidence that student immigration is genuine, controlled and of a high quality.
147
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 148 Effectiveness We do not propose to comment further on the Impact Assessment at this stage as the Home Secretary has already given the detail of further evidence to the Committee about it. The majority of the costs in the Impact Assessment go to the issue of lost output to the economy as a result of jobs done by international students no longer being filled. As the Committee knows, we have asked the Migration Advisory Committee to review the assumptions made, in particular that no jobs previously done by international students will be replaced. But in any case, student visa policy is not driven by the economic contribution such students make through work carried out in addition to their studies.
We would also draw to the attention of the Committee the commentary on the website of Straight Statistics at http://www.straightstatistics.org/article/funny- money-and-student-visas, entitled “Funny Money and student Visas” which makes a number of pertinent points.
6. We take this opportunity once again to remind After the announcement of the measures to Not accepted. the Government of paragraph 110 in our first Parliament on 22 March, we published a more Report of this Parliament, on the Immigration detailed Statement of Intent on 31 March, setting Cap (HC 361) “There has been a consistent out the changes and the implementation tendency, under both the current and previous timetable in more detail so that education Governments, to rush through complex changes providers and students could plan for them. The to the immigration system. ... Such unnecessary measures are being implemented through a series haste leads to poor decision-making which is of staged changes to the Immigration Rules. The more likely to be challenged in the courts.” The first changes came into force on 21 April; the Government did not address this statement in its second set on 4 July; and we are planning the final response to our Report on the Immigration Cap set for April 2012. nor when we referenced it in our first Student Visas Report: we hope that this warning will be This autumn we shall consult with corporate observed in future. Whilst we realise the partners on various technical aspects of the April difficulty and cost involved in collecting the changes such as limiting the time that can be required data, we hope that the announcement spent in Tier 4 to five years at degree level study of the award of the e-Borders contract to and concerning the closure of Post Study Work. Raytheon and IBM represents the first step towards a migration policy based on actual The Home Secretary also said when making her migration figures, rather than placing reliance on announcement to Parliament on 22 March that incomplete data compiled from a range of she would ensure that innovative student surveys. (Paragraph 14) entrepreneurs who are creating wealth can stay in the UK to pursue their ideas and that she was pleased to be able to return some measure of 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness discretion to UK Border Agency officers to deal with people whom they have plainly seen were not coming here as bona fide students; we will consider ways in which we might expand on these.
Since March the Home Office and the UK Border Agency have also taken forward the establishment of a stricter regime for the educational oversight and licensing of Tier 4 sponsors, as announced in March.
149
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 150 Effectiveness On 13 June we announced that educational oversight of private sector providers would largely be carried out by the Quality Assurance Agency and the Independent Schools Inspectorate. Further details about that process were announced on 28 July. Both QAA and ISI have consulted corporate partners in the education sector on their proposed standards and processes, which are now finalised. The deadline for applications for inspection by them was 9 September.
The 28 July announcement also confirmed that the Bridge Schools Inspectorate would inspect faith- based private colleges in England and Wales, and that the School Inspection Service would inspect Steiner and Montessori colleges in England and Wales with providers required to apply by a deadline of 7 October. It also confirmed that Education Scotland would inspect privately funded providers in Scotland, with providers required to apply by 11 November. We will confirm the arrangements for educational oversight Northern Ireland on the UK Border Agency website shortly.
Also in July the UK Border Agency published proposals to amend the criteria for Highly Trusted Sponsor status, which all Tier 4 sponsors must in future meet. The Agency published revised guidance on 4 September, taking account of comments received. This is available on the UK Border Agency website at http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/d ocuments/employersandsponsors/pbsguidance/gui dancefrom31mar09/sponsor-guidance-t4- 050911.pdf?view=Binary. Sponsors who did not already hold Highly Trusted Sponsor status who were licensed for 12 months or more had to apply by 9 October.
The Government does not agree with the Committee that reform in this area has been rushed. A public consultation was followed by a staged and planned implementation, with further technical consultation during that implementation process. There was understandable pressure from the education sector to make an early announcement, so as to end the uncertainty which the sector regarded as damaging to its business and to allow it to plan ahead for the coming academic years. While it is far too early to draw any conclusions about the actual impact of the changes, not least because they will not be fully in place until next April, we believe that so far implementation has gone smoothly and there has been little disruption to the legitimate business of our high quality institutions.
Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 151
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 152 Effectiveness
Twelfth Report, Home Office—work of the Permanent Secretary (HC 928), published 18 July 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. We have previously expressed concern about In line with the Cabinet Office guidelines set for all Not accepted. the way in which bonuses are paid to senior staff government departments, the Home Office has paid in the Home Office. We are surprised that, in a the top 25% of senior civil servant performers time of acute financial stringency, when major (assessed against agreed objectives in 2010/11) a non- savings are being demanded from the police and consolidated bonus. The average amount paid to them elsewhere within the responsibilities of the was £5,250. The Department has spent no more than Home Office, it is still proposed to pay bonuses £300,000 on these payments compared with £779,000 to senior staff in the Department. We last year. Use of non-consolidated payments helps by understand that bonuses are to be paid to the targeting the limited resources available to reward “top-performing” 25% of staff in the Senior Civil good performance, while ensuring that an individual is Service ranks (that is officials whose salaries are not rewarded throughout their career for single year’s at least £60,000 a year). If paid at the same rate performance as it would be if it were a consolidated as bonuses in the year 2009-10 this would cost in payment. And of course, such payments do not add to the region of £300,000. We have seen nothing to future pay bill costs, notably pensions. demonstrate that this produces value for money, we have seen nothing to convince us that such additional payments are based on genuine performance measurements, and we do not believe that such bonuses should be paid at present.
2. We note the work that the Home Office is The Home Office Group Commercial Team, including Accepted. doing to improve the efficiency of procurement its Procurement Centre of Excellence, has generated and relations with suppliers. We expect to savings of £23m in quarter 1 of this financial year. This receive quarterly updates on the savings made includes savings on previous years expenditure by the Centre of Excellence. We were pleased to achieved through renegotiating price reductions on note that Dame Helen accepted clearly and existing contracts, grouping our needs to benefit from explicitly that the responsibility for ICT strategy volume discounts and stopping spend where and management was firmly on her desk as appropriate to do so. The £23m also includes savings Permanent Secretary. We shall keep a close on new goods and services requirements generated watch on this area, especially in relation to the through effective negotiations with suppliers. These procurement and management of large-scale IT savings are helping the Department achieve its CSR systems, which historically are among the most objectives. The Home Office will be able to provide the difficult contracts to control. We recommend that Committee with future updates within one month of the Home Office expands the remit of the Centre each quarter end. The Procurement Centre of of Excellence to cover all aspects of procurement. Excellence continues to expand the scope of its operation with the objective of procuring all common goods and services for the Home Office, including its Arms length Bodies through this function. The Government is supporting the police service to better work together when they deal with commercial suppliers, and therefore benefit from economies of scale. On 4 March, new Regulations came into force which, for the first time, require procurement of
particular equipment to be made through specified 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness national agreements. These regulations cover vehicles, body armour, commoditised IT hardware and commercial off-the-shelf software. From 1 October 2011, as part of phasing out the NPIA, most of the NPIA’s former responsibilities for non IT procurement have transferred to the Home Office. Home Office Commercial Directorate will work closely with the police service to realise the savings that can be made from better procurement of non IT goods and services.
153
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 154 Effectiveness
Thirteenth Report, Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile communications (HC 907), published 20 July 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. We have been frustrated by the confusion See response at committee paragraph number 52. Conclusion: no direct recommendation for which has arisen from the evidence given by Government action. the CPS to us and our sister Committee. It is difficult to understand what advice was given to whom, when. Only on the last day on which we took evidence did it become clear that there had been a significant conversation between the Director of Public Prosecutions and Assistant Commissioner Yates regarding the mention in the Mulcaire papers of the name Neville and whether this and Mr Mulcaire’s contract with News International were a sufficient basis on which to re-open the investigation. The fact that the CPS decided it was not, does not in any way exonerate the police from their actions during the inquiry. (Paragraph 34)
2. The lack of a regulatory authority under the The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) Partially accepted. Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act has a provides a regulatory framework for public authority use number of serious consequences. Although the of a range of investigatory techniques. Part 1 of RIPA Information Commissioner’s office provides concerns the interception of communications and the some advice, there is no formal mechanism for acquisition of communications data. The statutory either those who know they are in danger of oversight authority is the Interception of Communications breaking the law or those whose Commissioner. He is required to review the exercise of communications may be or have been powers and duties under sections one to eleven and intercepted to obtain information and advice. Chapter two of RIPA. He is also responsible for Moreover, the only avenue if anyone is administering a new civil sanction, which came into force suspected of unauthorised interception is to in June 2011, which can be imposed for unlawful prosecute a criminal offence, which, as the interception of electronic communications where the Information Commissioner noted, is a high interception does not meet the threshold of the existing hurdle in terms of standard of proof as well as criminal offence. penalty. Especially given the apparent increase of hacking in areas such as child custody battles Chapter one of RIPA includes a criminal offence of and matrimonial disputes, and the unlawful interception which is, quite rightly, for the police consequential danger of either the police being to investigate and enforce. swamped or the law becoming unenforceable, there is a strong argument for introducing a Interception is an area that requires a level of expertise and more flexible approach to the regime, with the detailed subject matter knowledge which more appropriately sits with the Interception Commissioner than intention of allowing victims easier recourse to the Information Commissioner. Where there are issues redress. We therefore recommend the
before the Interception Commissioner that he thinks 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness extension of the Information Commissioner’s would more properly be dealt with by the Information remit to cover the provision of advice and Commissioner, insofar as they relate to the Data Protection support in relation to chapter 1 of the Act 1998, then the Interception Commissioner will, as Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act. now, refer those issues to him. (Paragraph 39) However, following the Committee’s recommendation, we are exploring whether the Interception Commissioner could provide further guidance in relation to his statutory duties in this area. The guidance would assist those who might be in need of independent advice, by further clarifying who would be the appropriate Commissioner they should direct their enquiries to. 155
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 156 Effectiveness 3. We also strongly recommend that the There is already a comprehensive framework of legislation Not accepted. Government reviews how the Act must be to deal with the unlawful hacking of communications. As amended to allow for a greater variety of noted in the Committee’s report, there are a number of penalties for offences of unlawful interception, pieces of legislation which establish criminal offences, including the option of providing for civil including the criminal offences in s.1 of RIPA for unlawful redress, whilst retaining the current penalty as interception, s.1 of the Computer Misuse Act 1990 a deterrent for serious breaches. (Paragraph 40) relating to unauthorised access to computer material, and s.55 of the Data Protection Act 1998. A person found guilty of an offence of unlawful interception is liable on conviction in the Crown Court to imprisonment of up to two years, and on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum - £5000 in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and £10,000 in Scotland.
In addition to the criminal offences, the Government has introduced regulations to implement changes to RIPA, which came into force in June 2011. As a result, RIPA now provides a civil sanction for unlawful interception of electronic communications where the interception does not meet the threshold of the RIPA criminal offence. This is administered by the Interception Commissioner. The Committee will also be aware that there are other means to obtain civil redress, for example taking a civil action before the courts.
In addition, the Data Protection Act 1998 contains a number of regulatory powers and penalties for those instances where the requirements of that Act have been breached.
The Government will continue to keep this framework under review in light of changing technologies, but at present we are satisfied that the existing legislation provides a comprehensive set of criminal and civil sanctions for the unlawful hacking of mobile communications.
4. We note that most of our witnesses claimed The Government always carefully considers reports Accepted. to be unaware at the time of the Information produced by the Information Commissioner, particularly Commissioner’s two 2006 reports, What price where they make recommendations for legislative change privacy? and What price privacy now?. We are or touch on aspects of government policy. disappointed that they did not attract more attention among the police, the media and in In addition, the Ministry of Justice, the Home Office, the government, and hope that future such reports Department for Culture, Media and Sport and other will be better attended to. (Paragraph 41) departments work closely with the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) on policy and operational matters relating to, among other things, data protection, electronic marketing and surveillance. On data protection policy, which was the substantive subject of the Information Commissioner's 2006 report, Justice Ministers regularly meet the Information Commissioner to discuss his work. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 157
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 158 Effectiveness 5. We are concerned about the number of The Government believes the current spread of Not accepted. Commissioners, each responsible for different independent Commissioners ensures proper regulation of aspects of privacy. We recommend that the different aspects of privacy. The range of statutory government consider seriously appointing one functions carried out by each Commissioner varies overall Commissioner, with specialists leading significantly. It includes the provision of guidance, on each separate area. (Paragraph 42) investigation of public complaints, serving and enforcing monetary penalty notices, making decisions over the deployment of technical devices, authorisation of some forms of surveillance and property interference, and oversight and inspection across different specialisms and under different legislation. Each Commissioner and his staff work in specialist, technical areas that require extensive knowledge of relevant legislation, equipment and procedures. Although the work they do can be related, it is also quite distinct.
The Government believes that the benefits the Committee is seeking can be delivered through existing arrangements and those proposed in the Protection of Freedoms Bill. The existing Commissioners already co-ordinate their work to ensure the right expertise is utilised in the right context and that wherever possible there is consistency between them. However, while respecting their independence, the Government will take note of the Committee’s concerns in the way we develop and co-ordinate the roles and functions of the Commissioners.
6. We deplore the response of News The Prime Minister announced that there would be an Conclusion: no direct recommendation for International to the original investigation into independent judge-led Inquiry to Parliament on 13 July. Government action. hacking. It is almost impossible to escape the The Inquiry will be led by Lord Justice Leveson, assisted by conclusion voiced by Mr Clarke that they were a panel of senior independent figures with expertise in deliberately trying to thwart a criminal media, broadcasting, regulation, government and policing. investigation. We are astounded at the length It has broad-ranging terms of reference and will have of time it has taken for News International to powers to summon witnesses to give evidence under oath cooperate with the police but we are appalled before reporting jointly to the Home Secretary and the that this is advanced as a reason for failing to Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. mount a robust investigation. The failure of lawbreakers to cooperate with the police is a The Inquiry, which was launched on 28 July, will be in two common state of affairs. Indeed, it might be parts. Whilst the first part will focus mainly on the ethics argued that a failure to cooperate might offer and behaviours of the press, the second part will examine good reason to intensify the investigations the extent of unlawful or improper conduct at the News of rather than being a reason for abandoning the World and other newspapers, the way in which them. None of the evidence given to us management failures have allowed it to happen, and also suggests that these problems were escalated crucially the original police investigations and their failings. for consideration by the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police or by Ministers. The difficulties were offered to us as justifying a failure to investigate further and we saw nothing that suggested there was a real will to tackle and overcome those obstacles. We note that neither of these carefully-crafted 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness responses is a categorical denial: Ms Brooks’s denial of knowledge of hacking is limited to her time as editor of News of the World; and on payments to police, she did not say that she had no knowledge of specific payments but that she had not intended to give the impression that she had knowledge of specific cases. (Paragraph 52) 159
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 160 Effectiveness 7. The consequences of the decision to focus Conclusion: no direct recommendation for within the Mulcaire papers on the areas vital to Government action. the prosecution of Mulcaire and Goodman were extremely significant. A huge amount of material that could have identified other perpetrators and victims was in effect set to one side. Mr Clarke explained to us the reasons for taking this approach, starting with the context at the time. By the middle of 2006 the Anti-Terrorist Branch had more than 70 live operations relating to terrorist plots but some of these were not being investigated because there were not enough officers to do so. In this context, he had to decide on priorities, and the priority of protecting life by preventing terrorist attacks was higher than that of dealing with a criminal course of conduct that involved gross breaches of privacy but no apparent threat of physical harm to the public. Nevertheless we cannot overlook the fact that the decision taken not to properly investigate led to serious wrongdoing which the Commissioner himself now accepts was disreputable. (Paragraph 55)
8. When challenged on whether he stood by his The report poses serious questions both for, and about, Accepted. decision to limit the investigation in 2006, Mr police leaders. The Government recognises there is a need Clarke said that, despite all that had been to look again at police culture and leadership and there is revealed since, he believed the decision to have now a greater need for openness and stronger corporate been correct, given the limited resources at his governance in the service. The Government is already disposal and the absolute priority of dealing working to make the police more accountable – through with threats to public safety. We note this the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners – but position. However, its consequences have been we believe we need to look more widely at how openness serious and we are not convinced that the and accountability can be strengthened. For example, the former Commissioner’s decision to merge anti- Home Secretary has already asked Tom Winsor to look at terrorist and royal protection functions on the entry routes to the service and, as the Prime Minister said basis that both involved firearms, or the in his statement to the House on 20th July, the decision to pursue this investigation within the Government wants to see radical proposals as to how command, were justified. It is also revealing entry could support improved openness in the service. about the nature of management within the Metropolitan Police Service that this issue does The Government had already begun to look at some of not appear to have been escalated to the these areas in its work on leadership, training and Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner, or even development following the consultation on Peter the Assistant Commissioner, as an issue about Neyroud’s review. We now think the events of recent which they ought to be aware and to which a months should also be brought into consideration in solution needed to be found. (Paragraph 61) deciding how best to proceed. 9. Whilst it is true that mobile phone companies Conclusion: no direct recommendation for have now acted to provide much greater Government action. 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness security for their customers’ communications, and whilst the 2005–07 inquiry succeeded on its own terms, we cannot say that inquiry was a success given the extent of the intrusion now becoming apparent and the fact that even now not all the victims of interception have been identified let alone contacted. Nor are we convinced that no hacking takes places or that it cannot take place. We do not have the technical competence to make such a judgement, and nor did we receive detailed evidence on that point. (Paragraph 62) 161
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 162 Effectiveness Mr Hayman claims to have had little knowledge See response at committee recommendation number 61. Conclusion: no direct recommendation for of the detail of the 2006 operation, Government action. and to have taken no part in scoping it or reviewing it; his role seems to have been merely to rubber-stamp what more junior officers did. Whilst we have no reason to question the ability and diligence of the officers on the investigation team, we do wonder what ‘oversight’, ‘responsibility’ and ‘accountability’—all of which words were used by Mr Hayman to describe his role— mean in this context. (Paragraph 66)
10. Leaving aside the fact that his approach to Ensuring the integrity of the police is vital for their work Partially accepted. our evidence session failed to demonstrate any and any allegation of corruption undermines public sense of the public outrage at the role of the confidence. police in this scandal, we were very concerned about Mr Hayman’s apparently lackadaisical That is why the Leveson Inquiry will, amongst other things, attitude towards contacts with those under look at relations between the police and the press. The investigation. Even if all his social contacts with Home Secretary also announced in her statement to News International personnel were entirely Parliament on 18 July, that she has asked for: above board, no information was exchanged • a report from the Independent Police Complaints and no obligations considered to have been Commission on its experience of investigating incurred, it seems to us extraordinary that he corruption in the police service and any lessons that did not realise what the public perception of can be learned for the police service; and such contacts would be—or, if he did realise, he • a report, with recommendations, from Her Majesty’s did not care that confidence in the impartiality Inspectorate of Constabulary considering instances of the police could be seriously undermined. of undue influence, inappropriate contractual We do not expressly accuse Mr Hayman of lying arrangements and other abuses of power in police to us in his evidence, but it is difficult to escape relationships with the media and other parties. the suspicion that he deliberately prevaricated in order to mislead us. This is very serious. Both reports are due to be received by the Home Secretary (Paragraph 67) this year. The HMIC report will be wide ranging, covering all police forces in England and Wales. It will include: existing governance arrangements and control measures; the relationship between the police and the media;
existing guidance on information disclosure; instances of 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness abuses of power in relation to procurement, contracting, recruitment and vetting; gratuities and hospitality in relation to police officers and staff; additional employment; the police’s own ability to investigate and prevent corruption in forces; and public perceptions of police behaviour in relation to police integrity issues.
In the meantime, the MPS is also taking steps to increase the transparency and ethical underpinning of its relationship with the media. This includes commissioning advice from Elizabeth Filkin, the former Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, on ensuring maximum transparency and public confidence, and agreeing to record meetings and hospitality, and publishing them on the internet. 163
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 164 Effectiveness 11. Mr Hayman’s conduct during the At present, a serving police officer is able to take outside Accepted. investigation and during our evidence session employment or pursue business interests, but must was both unprofessional and inappropriate. disclose these to the relevant chief officer. It is then for The fact that even in hindsight Mr Hayman did chief officers to determine whether the employment or not acknowledge this points to, at the very business interest is compatible with the individual’s status least, an attitude of complacency. We are very as a police officer. Once an individual leaves the police concerned that such an individual was placed in service there are no specific restrictions on their charge of anti-terrorism policing in the first employment or business interests. place. We deplore the fact that Mr Hayman took a job with News International within two The Government does not believe this position is months of his resignation and less than two satisfactory. For example, by comparison, in the case of years after he was—purportedly—responsible civil servants and other Crown servants there are for an investigation into employees of that procedures in place to scrutinise appointments taken in company. It has been suggested that police the first two years after leaving. This is done in order to officers should not be able to take employment maintain public trust and to avoid the risk or suspicion of with a company that they have been corruption or of the misuse of information gained in the investigating, at least for a period of time. We course of official duties. recommend that Lord Justice Leveson explore this in his inquiry. (Paragraph 69) As the Home Secretary mentioned in her letter to the Chair of the Home Affairs Committee, on 22 July, the Government agrees with the Committee’s recommendations that this issue could be explored in the Leveson Inquiry. In the meantime, the Home Secretary has asked Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) to include this issue in their report to her on police corruption.
The Government also draws the Committee’s attention to Part 1 of Tom Winsor’s Report of his Independent Review of Police Officer and Staff Remuneration and Conditions of Service, in which he made two recommendations relating to serving officers’ business interests. The first called for improved guidance on the types of outside jobs and business interests likely to be rejected as incompatible with the officer’s status, while the second related to the appeals process. The Government is currently considering the response of the Police Advisory Board (PAB) for England and Wales in relation to these recommendations alongside other reports that have been commissioned from HMIC and the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).
12. In short, the exercises conducted by the See response at committee recommendation number 52. Conclusion: no direct recommendation for police and the CPS in July 2009 appear to have Government action. been limited to the consideration of whether or not, in the light of recent reports in the media, the 2005–07 investigation had been carried out thoroughly and correctly. Critically, because the 2005–07 investigation had focused only on the joint roles of Messrs Mulcaire and Goodman, there was no progress in 2009 to consideration of the relationships that Mr Mulcaire might have had with other journalists, even though the Gordon Taylor story implied that such relationships had existed. (Paragraph 73) 13. We understand that, when Sir Paul See response at committee recommendation number 52. Conclusion: no direct recommendation for announced in July 2009 that he was asking Mr Government action. Yates to look into any new information, this was an unprepared remark made as he was going into the ACPO conference rather than a carefully prepared statement. Unfortunately it left the public—and indeed Parliament—with the impression that a more detailed examination was to be held than was in fact
the case. (Paragraph 80) 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 165
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 166 Effectiveness 14. We assume that Sir Paul left Mr Yates with See response at committee recommendation number 52. Conclusion: no direct recommendation for a large amount of discretion as to how he Government action. should consider the evidence. Mr Yates has subsequently expressed his view that his reconsideration in 2009 of the material available from the earlier investigation was very poor. We agree. Although what Mr Yates was tasked to do was not a review in the proper police use of the term, the public was allowed to form the impression that the material seized from Mr Mulcaire in 2006 was being re-examined to identify any other possible victims and perpetrators. Instead, the process was more in the nature of a check as to whether a narrowly-defined inquiry had been done properly and whether any new information was sufficient to lead to that inquiry being re-opened or a new one instigated. It is clear that the officers consulted about the earlier investigation were not asked the right questions, otherwise we assume it would have been obvious that there was the potential to identify far more possible perpetrators in the material seized from Mr Mulcaire. Whether or not this would have enabled the police to put more pressure on News International to release information, by making it clear that police inquiries were not merely a ‘fishing expedition’ but targeted at certain people, is an issue that may be addressed by the forthcoming public inquiry. (Paragraph 81)
15. Mr Yates has apologised to the victims of See response at committee recommendation number 52. Conclusion: no direct recommendation for hacking who may have been let down by his Government action. not delving more deeply into the material already held by the police. We welcomed that and agree that his decision not to conduct an effective assessment of the evidence in police possession was a serious misjudgement. (Paragraph 82) 16. We are appalled at what we have learnt See response at committee recommendation number 67. Conclusion: no direct recommendation for about the letting of the media support contract Government action. to Mr Wallis. We are particularly shocked by the approach taken by Mr Fedorcio: he said he could not remember who had suggested seeking a quote from Mr Wallis; he appears to have carried out no due diligence in any generally recognised sense of that term; he failed to answer when asked whether he knew that AC Yates was a friend of Mr Wallis; he entirely inappropriately asked Mr Yates to sound out Mr Wallis although he knew that Mr Yates had recently looked at the hacking investigation of 2005-06; and he attempted to
deflect all blame on to Mr Yates when he 167 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness himself was responsible for letting the contract. (Paragraph 86)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 168 Effectiveness 17. From the point of view of victim support Conclusion: no direct recommendation for and of reassurance to the public, DAC Akers’s Government action. decision to contact all those who can be identified as of interest to Mr Mulcaire is the correct one. However, this is not the same as saying all these people were victims of hacking, let alone that they could be proved to be victims. Only 18 months’ worth of phone data from the relevant period still exist: unless Mr Mulcaire provides a list, no one will ever know whose phone may have been hacked into outside that period. Within the 18-months data held, about 400 unique voicemail numbers were rung by Messrs Mulcaire or Goodman or from News of the World hub phones, and these are the voicemails likely to have been hacked into. The total number of people who may eventually be identified as victims of Mr Mulcaire’s hacking is therefore much lower than the number of names in his papers. (Paragraph 91) 18. DAC Akers gave us a guarantee that this Conclusion: no direct recommendation for further investigation would be carried out Government action. thoroughly. We were impressed by her determination to undertake a full and searching investigation. The Specialist Crime Directorate is clearly the correct place for an investigation of this sort, though we note that officers have had to be ‘borrowed’ from across the Metropolitan Police Service to meet the needs of this particularly labour-intensive inquiry. (Paragraph 92)
19. We note with some alarm the fact that only The resourcing of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Partially accepted. 170 people have as yet been informed that they operation is a matter for the MPS and the Metropolitan may have been victims of hacking. If one adds Police Authority (MPA) to consider. However, the Home together those identified by name, the number Office does make additional funding available to of landlines and the number of mobile phone authorities facing exceptional or unpredictable events or numbers identified (and we accept that there emergencies. These Special Grants are provided where may be some overlap in these), that means up there is clear evidence that the expenditure incurred to 12,800 people may have been affected all of creates a serious threat to the authority’s financial stability whom will have to be notified. We accept that and their capacity to deliver normal policing. Should they there are a number of reasons why progress consider it necessary, it is open to the MPS to make an may have been slow so far, but at this rate it application for additional support, which Ministers will would be at least a decade before everyone consider. was informed. This timeframe is clearly absurd, but it seems to us to underline the need for more resources to be made available to DAC Akers. We understand that in the current situation of significant budget and staff reductions, this is very difficult. However, we consider that the Government should consider making extra funds available specifically for this investigation, not least because any delay in completing it will seriously delay the start of the public inquiry announced by the Prime Minister. (Paragraph 93) 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 169
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 170 Effectiveness 20. We are seriously concerned about the Conclusion: no direct recommendation for allegations of payments being made to the Government action. police by the media, whether in cash, kind or the promise of future jobs. It is imperative that these are investigated as swiftly and thoroughly as possible, not only because this is the way that possible corruption should always be treated but also because of the suspicion that such payments may have had an impact on the way the Metropolitan Police may have approached the whole issue of hacking. The sooner it is established whether or not undue influence was brought to bear upon police investigations between December 2005 and January 2011, the better. (Paragraph 94) 21. We are concerned about the level of social Conclusion: no direct recommendation for interaction which took place between senior Government action. Metropolitan Police officers and executives at News International while investigations were or should have been being undertaken into the allegations of phone hacking carried out on behalf of the News of the World. Whilst we fully accept the necessity of interaction between officers and reporters, regardless of any ongoing police investigations senior officers ought to be mindful of how their behaviour will appear if placed under scrutiny. Recent events have damaged the reputation of the Metropolitan Police and led to the resignation of two senior police officers at a time when the security of London is paramount. (Paragraph 95)
22. We note that, despite these protections, Conclusion: no direct recommendation for each of the companies had identified about 40 Government action. customers whose voicemails appeared to have been accessed by Mr Mulcaire. We also note that all three companies have disciplined or dismissed employees for unauthorised disclosure of customer information in the last ten years, though there is no indication that any of these employees was linked to this case. (Paragraph 105) 23. We welcome the measures taken so far to The Government agrees that the mobile phone industry Accepted. increase the security of mobile communications. should take steps to increase the public’s awareness of the However, with hackers constantly developing security features available on mobile communication new techniques and approaches, companies devices and support designs that make those features must remain alert. In particular, it is inevitable easier to use. The Home Office works closely with the that companies will think it in their interest not mobile communications industry and will continue to do to make using technology too difficult or fiddly so in taking this recommendation forward. In addition, as for their customers, so do not give as much the Information Commissioner pointed out in his evidence prominence to the need to make full use of all to the Committee, he has a role in working with the safety features as they should do. We would mobile phone companies to help ensure personal data is like to see security advice given as great protected and with consumers in highlighting how they prominence as information about new and can protect their own information.
special features in the information provided 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness when customers purchase new mobile communication devices. (Paragraph 111) 171
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 172 Effectiveness 24. Clearly, Mr Clarke’s strategy for informing The Government agrees that phone companies should Accepted. victims broke down completely and very early take appropriate steps to ensure their customers' personal in the process. It seems impossible now to data cannot be accessed improperly. The Government is discover what went wrong in 2006. Some of pleased networks have improved security since this the mobile companies blamed police inaction: problem came to light and expects them to continue to both Vodafone and Orange UK/T-Mobile UK work to ensure personal data is not compromised, and to said that the police had not told them to follow appropriate procedures when it is. contact their customers until November 2010. AC Yates accepted that some of the The Government has introduced changes to the Privacy correspondence between the police and the and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003, as part companies had not been followed up properly. of the implementation of amendments to the European (Paragraph 117) Framework on Electronic Communications, including the e-Privacy Directive. These came into force on 26 May However, the companies cannot escape 2011. Changes include a new requirement on criticism completely. Neither Vodafone nor communication providers to notify all breaches of personal Orange UK/T-Mobile UK showed the initiative data to the Information Commissioner and, in certain of O2 in asking the police whether such contact circumstances, a duty to notify the data object as well. The would interfere with investigations (and O2 Information Commissioner’s Office is expected to issue told us that they were given clearance to guidance on the new requirements shortly. These changes contact their customers only ten days or so will help improve awareness and quality of the processing after being informed of the existence of the of personal data. investigation). Nor did either company check The Government has made clear its view that the whether the investigation had been completed requirement to notify breaches of personal data should be later. They handed over data to the police, proportionate and pragmatic, and tied to the harm and Vodafone at least sent out generalised distress caused, and to the size of the breach. reminders about security (Orange UK/T-Mobile UK may not even have done that), they tightened their procedures, but they made no effort to contact the customers affected. (Paragraph 117) 26. We find this failure of care to their Accepted. customers astonishing, not least because all the companies told us that they had good working relationships with the police on the many occasions on which the police have to seek information from them to help in their inquiries. (Paragraph 118)
27. We expect that this situation will be Accepted. improved by the coming into force of the new Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations, which provide that when companies discover a breach of data security, they have to notify not only the Information Commissioner but also their affected customers. (Paragraph 121) 28. This inquiry has changed significantly in its Conclusion: no direct recommendation for remit and relevance as it has progressed, and Government action. further developments are occurring on a regular basis. We expect that further discoveries will go beyond our present state of knowledge. Our Report is based on the information currently available, but we accept that we may have to return to this issue in the near future. This inquiry has changed significantly in its remit and relevance as it has progressed, and further developments are occurring on a regular basis. We expect that further discoveries will go beyond our present state of knowledge. Our Report is based on the
information currently available, but we accept 173 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness that we may have to return to this issue in the near future. (Paragraph 122)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 174 Effectiveness
Fourteenth Report, New landscape of policing (HC 939), published 23 September 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. We agree that police pay and conditions The office of constable is the bedrock of British Tom Winsor’s review is ongoing. need reforming in order to enable Chief policing – and this is something that Tom Winsor Constables to shape their workforces to recognised in the principle he set out in his Part 1 respond to the need for a more financially Report. We will consider his recommendations efficient police service that can continue carefully, including their legal implications. However, effectively to pursue its mission of it should be noted that the Home Secretary has reducing crime and disorder in the 21st referred the Winsor recommendations about police century. However, neither in his initial officers’ pay and conditions to the police negotiating report, nor in his evidence to us, did Tom machinery and that process is still ongoing. She will Winsor adequately resolve the issue of consider the outcome of that process carefully before how to give police chiefs greater powers any decisions are made as to the implementation of to manage without undermining the Tom Winsor’s recommendations. special role of police officers. We foresee a danger that, in the future, the courts may decide that police officers are employees. We note that Tom Winsor said that he does not see this happening because of the weight of law and history behind the office of constable, but we do not regard this as sufficient assurance. We therefore urge the Home Office to seek legal advice on this point, and in the light of that advice, to decide where the balance of changes to terms and conditions should lie. (paragraph 17)
2. Tom Winsor’s review of pay and We understand the concern of officers about the Partially accepted. conditions is having an inevitable impact potential changes to their pay and pensions. on morale in the police service but it is However, we are facing an unprecedented public possible to do more to mitigate this. sector deficit, and all public sector workers, including Therefore we recommend that the Home the police service, are being asked to take their share Office set up an interactive website to of the burden. It is important to provide answer questions from police officers and remuneration that is fair and reasonable for both the staff. Such a website would need to be police and the taxpayer. Tom Winsor’s review is very carefully designed and properly independent and it is for him to decide how to mediated and managed, and would require conduct his review. We note however that serious commitment from the Home Office. engagement with officers and staff took place Many websites which are intended to through seminars and meetings with staff improve communications with the public— associations and through visits to forces, and also both in the public and the private sector— through gathering information via a website prove frustrating and fail to provide good consultation to which many contributions were made interaction, and that can make matters by police officers, staff and special constables. The worse rather than better. Some officers Review website also has a ‘ready reckoner’ that felt that Tom Winsor did not take provides officers with an indication of how the Part 1 sufficient time to hear directly from them recommendations could affect them if they are and understand their work. We therefore implemented, based on their role and individual recommend that, before making any circumstances. Further information is available on the further recommendations, Tom Winsor Review’s website. However, it is of course important should spend more time visiting officers that officers and staff understand proposed reforms. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness and staff. When the second part of the Therefore, we will consider the best way of achieving review is published, the Home Office this in light of the Committee’s recommendations. should hold events in local police force areas to explain directly how any proposed fundamental changes will affect officers and staff. (Paragraph 18) 175
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 176 Effectiveness 3. In a tough economic context, when We are planning a methodical and careful wind The Government is providing greater clarity the budgets of many public sector bodies down of the NPIA in 2012, which has involved about the future of the functions currently are being reduced, it is not surprising that detailed consultation on those functions which provided by the National Policing Improvement there will be less money available to should be transferred, and consideration of Agency, but there are still some functions perform the functions currently carried out developments in the policing landscape which are without homes, and uncertainty about funding by the National Policing Improvement closely linked, such as Police and Crime sources. Agency in the period up to 2014-15. Some Commissioners. We have been planning for some money may be saved through efficiencies, time to close down NPIA in 2012; its functions will but it is not clear that these are currently cease to exist under its current auspices by December being delivered in an environment of very 2012. In particular, the Government has consulted on considerable uncertainty, and ultimately the future of some of the NPIA’s current functions this funding gap will have to be met either through Peter Neyroud’s Review of Police Leadership by stopping some functions altogether or and Training. This did not receive service wide by finding an alternative source of support initially and the Government has given funding. While we do not rule out the careful consideration to views on this over the possibility that police forces should have summer. The Government intends to create a new to pay for some of the functions that they inclusive police professional body. The first part of currently receive from the Agency at no the Government’s reform agenda focused on cost to themselves, we are concerned that structures. The second phase concentrates on people police forces are already under and the professional body will play a key role in this. considerable pressure to cut budgets. The This is a unique opportunity to professionalise pressure on budgets from this and other policing further, creating a body that reflects and sources may ultimately result in further works for all ranks, staff and officers alike. It will also reductions in the size of the police create an organisation that will give opportunities to workforce. As has been seen in the past, open up the closed system of leadership to harness this can fragment approaches across police greater diversity and experience at a senior level, and that can equip the service with the skills it needs to forces which need to be co-ordinated and deliver policing in a changing, leaner and more consistent. As we emphasise below, the accountable environment... (For rest of reply, please Home Office must urgently provide clarity see Government response) to police forces about the financial contribution that will be required of them, in order for them to manage any reductions in headcount as effectively as possible. (Paragraph 47)
4. It is unacceptable that, more than a Please see response to 3. Please see 3. year after the Government announced it was phasing out the National Policing Improvement Agency, it still has not announced any definite decisions about the future of the vast majority of the functions currently performed by the Agency, including vital functions such as Airwave, the DNA database, the Police National Database, and the Police National Missing Persons Bureau. We accept that consultation is important, but so is making and communicating decisions. The continuing uncertainty is damaging not only to the morale of the people who work for the Agency, but also to the efficiency and effectiveness of the police service as a whole: it is difficult for police forces and other policing bodies to plan for the future, both financially and logistically, if they do not know what is happening to the plethora of functions performed by the National Policing Improvement Agency, Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness whether the cost of providing any of these functions will fall on them, and whether anyone is making the savings and efficiencies in respect of these functions which police forces are having to make themselves. In particular, it is difficult for forces to plan effectively for the savings required of them under the Spending Review in these circumstances. If it is the view of the Home Office that some of these functions should be ended altogether—or left as a matter for the police without any ongoing Home Office support—this should be made clear so that chief officers can consider their future approach. (Paragraph 48) 177
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 178 Effectiveness 5. Spring 2012, when the National Please see response to 3. The Government has announced that the Policing Improvement Agency is due to be National Policing Improvement Agency will not phased out, is little more than six months be phased out until the end of 2012. away. We are not persuaded that the Government can now meet this timetable and recommend that it delay the phasing out of the Agency until the end of 2012. It should issue a revised timetable containing not only an ultimate deadline for the phasing out of the Agency, but also interim deadlines for announcements on the future of specific groups of functions and their funding. These should be deadlines that the Home Office is sure— barring events outside its control—it can meet. The police service needs certainty about when decisions will be made. It may be better to take slightly longer and provide this certainty, than to aim for very tight deadlines and fail to meet them. (Paragraph 49)
6. Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of The government agrees with the Committee that it is Accepted. Constabulary is one of the few relatively important to retain the clear role for the stable elements in the new landscape and inspectorate. HMIC will continue to monitor and at a time of change and upheaval it would inspect police performance and publish an annual be unwise to dilute its focus or burden it report on policing, shining a light on behalf of the with functions unrelated to its purpose. public so that local communities can better There may be some elements of the understand the effectiveness of local forces. There National Policing Improvement Agency are no plans to transfer existing NPIA functions to that could assist the work of the HMIC. Inspectorate, but we doubt it. If the Home Secretary is considering moving any functions to the Inspectorate, we urge her to make clear proposals and to give us adequate time to consider any such ideas before she reaches a conclusion. We understand the enthusiasm to reduce the number of different bodies that are involved in policing issues, but we also think that it is extremely important for the role of the Inspectorate to be very clear, specific and undiluted at a time of major changes within the landscape of policing. (Paragraph 52) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 7. Given the recent upheaval and There are no immediate plans to transfer additional Accepted. uncertainty at the Metropolitan Police, national functions to the Metropolitan Police Service. following the resignation of the The Metropolitan Police Service would only take on Commissioner, Paul Stephenson, and additional national functions if the Government and Assistant Commissioner John Yates, we do the Metropolitan Police were persuaded that doing not believe that it would be helpful, either so would not undermine its operational capabilities. for it or for the police service as a whole, for it to take on any additional national functions at this time. This does not necessarily apply with respect to other forces, although, given their smaller size, they would need to convince others that they have the necessary expertise and ability to take on a national role.
(Paragraph 53) 179
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 180 Effectiveness 8. We note also at this point that, Please see response to 3. Conclusion: no direct recommendation for from the little that is already known about Government action. the likely distribution of the National Policing Improvement Agency’s functions, phasing it out is unlikely to lead to fewer bodies in the national policing landscape, as Ministers had hoped. In this sense, the landscape will not be more streamlined as a result of its closure. However, there remains a possibility that the landscape— and thus, more importantly, the police service itself—may operate more effectively once those functions have been redistributed. We explore this possibility further in the rest of the report. (Paragraph 54)
9. The Government’s plan for the The Government strongly supports CEOP and the Accepted. National Crime Agency contains welcome work that it does to protect children. We want CEOP assurances about the future of the Child to lead law enforcement work to protect children at Exploitation and Online Protection Centre a national level, and we have therefore decided that in the new landscape, particularly in the best place for it to do this is in the National Crime relation to safeguarding its multi- Agency, in which the Centre will be able benefit from partnership approach to tackling the the intelligence, capabilities, expertise and assets of sexual abuse of children. In the light of the wider Agency. This will put CEOP as a central part these assurances, and the fact that they of the national policing picture, where it will be a key reflect the principles set out by the part of the mainstream of national law enforcement Centre’s current Chief Executive, we have arrangements. fewer reservations about the plan for the Centre to become one of the commands within the new National Crime Agency. Some 78% of respondents to our policing poll regarded child protection as a high priority for the police, although we do not suggest that the poll was necessarily representative. Given the vital work that the Centre for Child Exploitation and Online Protection carries out, we will return to this matter once the Agency is operational to assure ourselves that there Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness has been no diminution in the Centre’s effectiveness, independence, or ability to work as a partner with child protection agencies and charities in the UK and more widely. If in the future we judged that there had been such a diminution, we would argue for the Centre becoming a stand-alone organisation to ensure that it is in the best possible position to carry out its crucial work. (Paragraph 71) 181
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 182 Effectiveness 10. Given the concerns that some of The NCA’s ability to task and coordinate will come It is not yet finally clear how tasking will work in our witnesses raised about the Serious primarily from the strength of its intelligence picture, practice. Organised Crime Agency’s relationships the quality of its relationships and the maturity of its with local police forces and other law processes, all of which are early priorities for Keith enforcement bodies—it has had to depend Bristow. The Protocol and the Strategic Policing upon a coalition of the willing—the Requirement (SPR) will both provide an important National Crime Agency’s ability to task statutory underpinning to ensure that both Chief police forces and other relevant bodies is Constables and Police and Crime Commissioners welcome in principle and in the long-term (PCCs) cooperate effectively with these arrangements may result in the fight against organised in their respective functions. We have, on 21 crime becoming more effective. However, November, published a shadow SPR, which can be we still do not have sufficient detail about found at how this arrangement will work in www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/police/strategic- practice, particularly in relation to Police policing-requirement. Although this does not, at this and Crime Commissioners. We look stage, have statutory effect, it will form the basis for forward to receiving more information testing and consultation with police forces and before the publication of the Bill in spring authorities. We envisage that they will use it when 2012 and to commenting on a draft of the exercising their respective functions, particularly Strategic Policing Requirement. when developing their Policing Plans for 2012/13, and Ultimately, the success of the National we will work with partners to learn from their Crime Agency will depend on all the experiences as part of the consultation required to bodies involved in the fight against issue a statutory SPR ahead of the election of PCCs. organised crime building good The SPR will form an important basis for the NCA’s relationships with each other. The tasking and coordination remit in respect of the Strategic Policing Requirement can police. The SPR will support PCCs to hold their Chief contribute towards building those Constables to account for putting in place effective capabilities for tackling cross-boundary crime – in relationships, but it should not be many cases the policing capabilities on which the regarded as a substitute for them, or as an NCA will be dependent, either within forces or in easy fix. The recent riots in England collaborations between forces - and for ensuring they emphasise the need for the Strategic cooperate with the NCA. We expect all other law Policing Requirement to provide clarity enforcement agencies to act on the NCA’s and direction regarding the relationship intelligence and participate fully in operations given between local and national policing: for the obvious public interest. The wider law example, the extent to which each force enforcement community will benefit directly from its trains officers in public order and makes ability to draw on the expertise and intelligence of these available to deploy elsewhere. We the NCA, including the agency’s specialist capabilities. will revisit this again shortly in our inquiry We will also consider what, if any, additional into Policing large-scale disorder: lessons legislative powers are required to underpin tasking from the disturbances of August 2011. and coordination. (Paragraph 76)
11. We welcome the publication of the The Organised Crime Strategy was launched on 28 It is becoming clearer how the National Crime Organised Crime Strategy, although it July but work on its implementation was already Agency will work in practice. would have been more useful if it had underway, particularly in understanding how the been published before the plan for the creation of the National Crime Agency would help to National Crime Agency. Now that the bring about a step change in the fight against strategy has been published, we look organised crime. The strategy is founded on a multi- forward to further information about how agency – and multi-departmental – approach to the National Crime Agency will work fighting organised crime, and pending the launch of towards achieving the aims of the the NCA in 2013, it sets out how effort and resource strategy. In particular, in relation to raising will be brigaded and directed to best effect against awareness of the threat from, and organised crime. For the first time it will mean all the methods used by, organised criminals, we agencies involved in tackling organised crime are would like to see plans for how the working to common objectives and with a clear line National Crime Agency will interact with of accountability. The strategy also sets out the the public and businesses as well as other important implementation work that is already law enforcement bodies. (Paragraph 80) underway, not just to ensure that the NCA will have the right infrastructure from the outset, but to drive operational improvements to the approach to organised crime ahead of the commencement of the new Agency in 2013– in particular, to improve our intelligence gathering capability, analysis and exploitation at national and regional level. Key to this is the establishment of the new multi-agency Organised Crime Coordination Centre (OCCC), now 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness up and running, functioning as a national hub to collate, analyse and disseminate for action criminal intelligence relating to organised crime. This will both drive better national coordination of law enforcement efforts ahead of 2013 and be a key building block for the NCA’s intelligence hub. The NCA will work with a wide range of partners to help ensure that serious and organised criminality is tackled across the board. As part of the detailed design of the new Agency, we will seek to involve key partners from business, communities, charities and wider civil society to capture their expertise and develop strong relationships ahead of the NCA being established. The NCA will serve the public and, as a matter of principle, engage with them wherever 183 possible and appropriate... (For rest of reply, please see Government response.)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 184 Effectiveness 12. It is surprising that the plan the Work to establish the NCA has focused initially on the Conclusion: no direct recommendation for Government published on 8 June 2011, major, strategic tasks. As the Committee notes, only a Government action. nearly a year after the original proposals small number of NPIA functions were expected to for the National Crime Agency, does not transfer to the NCA, which is why the NCA Plan did contain any further information about not provide further detail. The Plan did set out its which National Policing Improvement criteria for which functions could transfer to the NCA Agency functions can or will be taken on from other bodies, including that they fit the by the new Agency. (Paragraph 82) operational crime-fighting focus of the Agency. We welcome the Committee’s endorsement of this approach. The Government is planning a methodical and careful phasing out of the NPIA in 2012. To achieve an ordered transfer we are taking careful decisions about the future of its functions, following thorough prioritisation and working closely with the police service. It is the Government’s intention that the NPIA will be phased out in 2012 with its functions ceasing to exist under its current auspices by December 2012. We have identified a small number of important NPIA functions which will transfer to the National Crime Agency. They will be placed in SOCA in the period during the NPIA’s phasing out and before the creation of the NCA in law to ensure that there is no gap in provision ahead of the establishment of the NCA. In line with the operational crime-fighting focus of the NCA, five functions that are confirmed to transfer are: Crime Operational Support, Specialist Operations Centre, Central Witness Bureau, Serious Crime Analysis and National Missing Persons Bureau. We are working closely with SOCA and the NPIA to ensure a smooth transition for these functions.
13. Only those National Policing Please see response to 12. Accepted. Improvement Agency functions that relate directly to the National Crime Agency’s focus on improving the operational response to organised crime and improving border security should be transferred to the new Agency. The task ahead of the National Crime Agency is sufficiently daunting without its focus being diverted by additional functions only tangentially related to its purpose. Although we expect that only a small number of functions will be transferred, we are concerned about the gap in time between the scheduled phasing out of the National Policing Improvement Agency in spring 2012 and the setting up of the National Crime Agency, which is due to become fully operational by December 2013. This adds further weight to our call to the Government to delay the phasing out of the National Policing Improvement Agency. (Paragraph 85) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 185
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 186 Effectiveness 14. Although London is a prime target As we have said in the NCA Plan, counter-terrorism Accepted. for terrorist attacks, the terrorist threat is policing already has effective national structures in a national problem and there would be place. All forces have responsibility within their areas advantages in placing responsibility for for counter-terrorism policing. This is complemented counter-terrorism in the National Crime by the network of regional counter-terrorism Agency. We recognise, however, that there investigative and intelligence hubs and the national is a danger that this would divert coordination arrangements formed through the resources and attention from the fight ACPO agreement under which responsibility for against organised crime, but this will be national functions and capabilities are held by a the case wherever counter-terrorism is number of lead forces, particularly the Metropolitan placed, and a national agency may be Police. The Government is considering how to ensure better placed to make such judgments. We the strengths of the present arrangements are agree with the Government that maintained and enhanced alongside the rest of its responsibility for counter-terrorism should new approach to fighting crime. This includes the remain with the Metropolitan Police until NCA building on the strong relationship and after the Olympics, not least because the intelligence links that SOCA has developed with the National Crime Agency will not be fully security services and counter-terrorism policing. We functional until the end of December 2013. welcome the Committee’s agreement that there However, we recommend that, after the should be no major changes to counter-terrorism Olympics, the Home Office consider policing structures ahead of the London 2012 Games making counter-terrorism a separate and the establishment of the NCA. At that point in command of the National Crime Agency: time it will be right to look at counter terrorism there should be full co-operation and policing and to decide where it is appropriate for interaction between the different that to sit in terms of national responsibility. commands. Such a change would also allow for greater clarity in the leadership and accountability of the Metropolitan Police through the Mayor of London, since there would be less justification for involvement by the Home Secretary: for example, in appointing the Metropolitan Police Commissioner. (Paragraph 90)
15. We seek an assurance from the We welcome the Committee’s views on the need to We are still awaiting further information on the Home Office that the National Crime ensure the National Crime Agency is appropriately governance arrangements. There is no Agency will be subject to at least the same governed, scrutinised and transparent. We are in commitment about the Freedom of Information level of scrutiny as the Serious Organised agreement in this respect. It is not our intention to Act. Crime Agency. We ask it to provide details reduce the level of scrutiny and we are clear that the of which bodies will undertake this governance model should be open, transparent and scrutiny. We also ask it to supply, as soon un-bureaucratic, with clear and direct accountability as possible, a more detailed indication of to the Home Secretary and to Parliament. The final the governance arrangements that will governance model will balance the need for clear apply to the new agency so that we have oversight of the activities of the NCA with ensuring time to consider these before the that operational decision-making rests with the publication of the Bill. We expect that Agency. In financial terms, the governance some elements of the National Crime arrangements will need to ensure: propriety and Agency’s work could not reasonably be regularity; prudent and economical administration; subject to the Freedom of Information Act, and value for money. We will also want to maintain but we ask the Government to ensure that the ability of CEOP to raise and hold funds from as much of it as possible is subject to the donors to continue its innovative partnerships with Act. (Paragraph 94) the public, private and third sectors. In transparency terms the arrangements for the new Agency will need to balance ease of public access to information with the risk of prejudicing criminal investigations and protecting national security. In scrutiny terms, where an external scrutiny body currently exists with a responsibility to examine functions that fall within 187 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness SOCA’s remit, it would be fair to presume that such a body would have a role in the scrutiny of the NCA where those functions form part of the new Agency. The precise governance arrangements are being finalised but there are a number of different models which exist in the law enforcement, criminal justice and intelligence arena which we will want to draw on, where appropriate. These include Non- Departmental Public Bodies, Non-Ministerial Departments and Executive Agencies. Existing organisations which fall within these different governance models include the Serious Organised Crime Agency, HM Revenue and Customs, the Crown Prosecution Service, the Serious Fraud Office, the UK Borders Agency and the National Fraud Authority... (For rest of reply, please see Government response.)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 188 Effectiveness 16. Not only will the new National We welcome the views of the Committee and Agreed in principle. Awaiting the publication of Crime Agency have to prove itself more recognise the scale of the challenge involved to further information. effective than the Serious Organised Crime provide a step change in performance and delivery at Agency at tackling organised crime, the a time when budgets are reducing as part of the constraints of the Spending Review mean Spending Review. Clearly identifying savings and that it will have to do so with what will be efficiencies will be a critical part of the NCA business in effect a smaller budget than that of its plan and a key challenge for Keith Bristow in his role predecessor. Although the need to make as Head of the NCA. Financial and affordability savings offers the opportunity to find considerations will play a key role in informing all more cost-effective ways of working, the elements of the programme to build the NCA. This magnitude of this challenge should not be work will follow a set of agreed finance principles to underestimated. Once the head of the new ensure opportunities to make efficiencies are fully Agency is in place, and the Agency’s remit exploited, for instance, by effective prioritisation of and responsibilities have been laid out in resources to meet key strategic objectives and more detail, a plan should be produced effective rationalisation of infrastructure. The Home setting out where the necessary savings Office is working with precursor bodies to ensure will be found. (Paragraph 97) potential costs such as transition and running costs are kept to an absolute minimum.
17. The National Crime Agency has the The Government welcomes the Committee’s Accepted. potential to be more effective than its comments and agrees with their assessment of the predecessor at preventing organised crime, importance of the role of the Head of the National particularly in the light of its ability to task Crime Agency. The post was re-advertised at the end police forces and other law enforcement of July with a salary equivalent to that of the Deputy bodies. However, much of the detail of Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police to attract a how the Agency will work in practice is wide field of high calibre candidates. The post was still unpublished. The position of Head of also advertised for a fixed term of three years to the National Crime Agency should be allow the successful candidate time to create and regarded as one of the key policing jobs in lead an organisation fully fit to deliver its national the UK. The delay already experienced in responsibilities. Keith Bristow has been appointed to appointing a permanent head is the post and took up the role earlier this month; he regrettable. We are disappointed that was consulted on important decisions ahead of this. there was very little interest in the post Keith has extensive experience of leading organised when it was originally announced. We crime investigations and developing and using urge the Government to appoint a head of criminal intelligence. As Chief Constable of the National Crime Agency as a matter of Warwickshire, he has transformed the force both urgency. The salary should be set at a operationally and organisationally and has already level appropriate to attract senior Chief worked at national and international level to build Constables of the highest calibre. When relationships between police services and law- the Home Secretary presented the enforcement agencies in many countries. The Government’s plan for the National Crime Committee should be reassured that the three year Agency she referred to “a transition for a appointment term means that Mr Bristow will both Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness permanent individual to be established as play a vital role in developing the new agency and the head of the National Crime Agency.” become its first operational head, ensuring a smooth We do not believe that it would be helpful transition to a fully functioning NCA. He will oversee the establishment of the NCA and lead the Agency to have one individual involved in setting once it becomes operational in 2013. He will have a up the Agency, with another individual central role in the governance of the NCA then taking over as head. The individual programme, providing strategic leadership for the who is appointed should be directly law enforcement community and preparing staff involved in setting up the new Agency and across precursor agencies and partners for working should go on to become its permanent with the Agency from 2013. During this period, he head. We trust that once a permanent will play a key role in galvanising the law head has been appointed, they will stay in enforcement response to serious and organised crime post for sufficient time to provide in line with the Government’s Organised Crime continuity and stability. Leadership in the Strategy. Specifically, he will be responsible over the police service suffers if people in senior next year for putting in place each of the four positions are continually moving jobs. shadow commands, designing the operating model 189 (Paragraph 100) for the Agency as a whole and starting to test the tasking and co-ordination arrangements.
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 190 Effectiveness 18. There is some support for a We agree with ACPO that a professional body is what Conclusion: no direct recommendation for Professional Body for policing from within is needed. The mission of the police professional Government action. the service itself, but there does not body will be to develop the body of knowledge, appear to be a strong demand for such a standards of conduct, ethical values, skills and body as yet. Peter Neyroud’s proposals leadership and professional standards required by seem to have been strongly influenced by police officers and police staff in England and Wales, the need to adjust to the phasing out of supporting them to more effectively fight crime. The the National Policing Improvement Agency professional body must work in the public interest. and redefine the role of the Association of The detailed proposition for the professional body Chief Police Officers, rather than the need will be worked up in close dialogue with Police to professionalise the police service per se. Service representatives and our current intentions are This does not mean that a Professional set out in response to Recommendations 3, 4, 5, 8 Body could not ultimately become a useful and 26 above. The Government recognises the part of the policing landscape, but it does importance of working with the police to establish mean that if the Government proceeds the Body. The professional body will exist for the with these proposals, it will need to win whole of the police service, not just chief officers. The hearts and minds and to convey coherently Board of the professional body will include a balance the nature and role of the new body. of Service and independent members, and will (Paragraph 106) provide a level of co-ordination and direction across the Service. The Board will be chaired by an independent person. This is consistent with modern best practice for the governance of "public interest” professions.
19. It is extremely unhelpful to talk of The Government agrees with the Committee, and has Accepted. ACPO as being the head and the heart of already been clear that the new professional body the new Professional Body, or to use must speak for the whole of policing, staff and similar expressions. ACPO represents and officers. To achieve this, and in line with modern best involves chief officers and the most senior practice for the governance of “public interest” managers in the police service, whereas a professions, the new body will be governed by a significant contribution is made by Board with an equal balance between Service superintendents. The Police representatives and independent members of the Superintendents’ Association has for years board, including Police and Crime Commissioner made a valuable contribution to members. The Board will have an independent chair. professional development and standards, as well as reflecting the practicalities of crime reduction work on the ground. The majority of police officers are represented by the Police Federation, which also makes an important contribution to training and development. All three elements of the police service, and all three bodies need to share and be engaged in developing a Professional Body. (Paragraph 116) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 191
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 192 Effectiveness 20. It is also unhelpful to suggest that The Government agrees with the Committee that the Accepted. the Professional Body could become professional body must be inclusive from the outset. inclusive in stages. If the Professional Body is to succeed, it must be inclusive from the outset. The police’s basic Peelian mission to prevent crime and disorder should be at the centre of the Professional Body. The Professional Body has the potential to change the police service for the better, particularly with regard to training—a point to which we return later—but only if it is emphatically not, and not perceived to be, a repositioned ACPO. Individual police officers and members of staff, whatever their rank, need to believe that this is their body: not least because, as we discuss below, they would be contributing a substantial element of its running costs. (Paragraph 117) 21. The new Professional Body should The detailed proposition for the professional body Under consideration. not be a policy-setting body for policing. will be worked up in close dialogue with Police National policy should be set by the Home Service representatives. Our current intentions are set Office and guidance and standards issued out in response to Recommendations 3, 4, 5, 8 and 26 by the Professional Body should be above. The Committee has raised an interesting point subordinate. In recognition of the fact which we will consider as this work develops. that guidance and standards sometimes shade into policy, the Home Office will need to review what is developed and refer it to Ministers as necessary. (Paragraph 120)
22. There should be a Chief Constables’ We are working with ACPO and other policing Work ongoing. Council, separate from the Professional partners/colleagues to determine the future location Body. Its purpose should purely be for of functions and remit of the Chiefs’ Council. The Chief Constables to discuss operational Home Secretary will keep Parliament and the matters. The Council should not be a Committee informed of the progress of this work. policy-making body, any more than the Professional Body should be. In addition, the Council should not have its own operational capacity or functions, and should not conduct for-profit activities. (Paragraph 122) 23. A properly resourced and The Government has set out the purpose of the Body Work ongoing. structured Professional Body could have in broad terms in the Home Secretary’s recent the potential to improve police training, statement to Parliament. The detailed proposition for particularly if it encourages practical the professional body will be worked up in close learning and places an onus on individuals dialogue with Police Service representatives. Our continually to update their knowledge. current intentions are set out in response to The emphasis on specialist training and Recommendations 3, 4, 5, 8 and 26 above. Further qualifications also harmonises well with decisions on precisely what functions will migrate to Tom Winsor’s proposals to reward those the new Body are still being considered by who do skilled jobs. However, it is not Government; the Home Secretary will keep clear which of the functions currently Parliament and the Committee informed. provided by the National Policing 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness Improvement Agency and listed in chapter 1 of this report will migrate to the Professional Body in the new landscape. We urge the Home Office to provide a list of exactly which functions will be transferred to the new Body. (Paragraph 128) 193
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 194 Effectiveness 24. As far as we can tell from the We agree with the Committee that the new Accepted. current evidence, the funding proposals professional body must be an inclusive body, for the Professional Body seem viable. speaking for the whole of policing, staff and officers. However, we reiterate that the fact that a To achieve this, and in line with modern best practice substantial element of the running costs of for the governance of “public interest” professions, the new body will be contributed by the new body will be governed by a Board with an individual police officers and staff makes it equal balance between Service representatives and all the more important that this truly is a independent members of the board, including Police body for everyone and not just for senior and Crime Commissioner members. The Board will members of the police service. For that have an independent chair. The professional body reason, it must neither be ‘owned by’, nor must be inclusive, and for the whole service. As the subsumed under or within ACPO. Committee suggests, it will not be owned by, nor (Paragraph 129) subsumed by, ACPO. We are working with ACPO to determine the future location of functions and remit of the Chiefs’ Council. 25. We are not convinced that there The Government believes that the decisions taken by Work ongoing. would need to be an Independent Scrutiny the professional body should be open and Board for the Professional Body. We transparent. The new body will be governed by a believe that the role of scrutinising the Board with an equal balance between Service Professional Body could be carried out by representatives and independent members of the Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of board, including Police and Crime Commissioner Constabulary. There should be a Police and members. The Board will have an independent chair. Crime Commissioner on the Board of the The Government is still considering the future role of new Professional Body in order to help the Council of Chief Constables, and will take the connect local policing with the national Committee’s views into account as it does so. policing landscape. We have already stated that we think that the Council of Chief Constables should be a separate body with a strictly operational focus. (Paragraph 132)
26. A Professional Body for policing Please see response to 3. The Government has announced that it will set that has Sir Robert Peel’s mission of up a Professional Body for Policing by the end of preventing crime and disorder at its core 2012. has the potential to become an effective part of the new landscape, but there are considerable obstacles to its success. The most important challenge will be winning the support of the rank and file of police officers and staff. We urge the Home Secretary to respond to Peter Neyroud’s review, setting out whether she plans to pursue the idea of a Professional Body and, if so, explaining how she would go about the task of making it inclusive right from the start. We urge her to ensure that the Professional Body is separate from the Council of Chief Constables and is a new body with a focus entirely on professional standards and training. The role of the new Professional Body should not be confused by giving it functions or responsibilities which do not relate to professional standards simply because Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 195 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness there are functions for which a home has to be found somewhere. A realistic timetable for setting up the Body is essential and given that it is unlikely to be fully functional before the phasing out of the National Policing Improvement Agency, the Home Office should specify what interim arrangements it will put in place for the functions it proposes to transfer from the Agency. If there is a decision to create a new Professional Body for policing, it would make sense for the development of this new body—which will involve consideration of the role and purpose of the police—to inform the development of the new landscape of
policing more widely. (Paragraph 133)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 196 Effectiveness 27. IT across the police service as a The Government agrees with the Committee’s Accepted. whole is not fit for purpose, to the assessment of the importance of radical reform of detriment of the police’s ability to fulfil police IT and has established a programme within the their basic mission of preventing crime and Home Office to oversee the establishment of an ICT disorder. The Home Office must make company. This company will be owned by police revolutionising police IT a top priority. authorities and subsequently police crime This is one area of policing where direction commissioners, with the police service as its customer, from the centre is not only desirable but so that the needs of local policing can be met vital in order to effect change. (Paragraph efficiently. The programme will design, build and 138) implement the new company and secure the long- term management arrangements of the current services delivered in-house by the NPIA. It is now clear that the best and quickest approach to improving police ICT does not involve a national grand plan specifying exactly what ICT all forces should buy. Instead, police forces need to identify the best way forward to get more efficiency from ICT – both directly and through improving the way the force functions. As part of this, they need to get better and more seamless ICT services for their officers and staff, for example avoiding timewasting re-keying of the same data into different systems. The new company, which will be legally separate from the Home Office, will ensure a more commercial and efficient approach to police ICT provision, using economies of scale and market forces to more efficiently manage the expenditure on ICT and to save public money whilst freeing up police officer time from having to manage the provision of ICT services. The service it provides will cover the procurement, implementation and management of complex contracts for information technology, related business change and outsourcing services.
28. Not only is the current state of The Government agrees that the current state of Accepted information and communications police ICT is unsatisfactory. That is why the Home technology in the police service Secretary announced the creation of a new police ICT unsatisfactory, the National Policing company. It is now clear that the best and quickest Improvement Agency is being phased out approach to improving police ICT does not involve a and a successor must be found for many of national grand plan specifying exactly what ICT all the information and communications forces should buy. Instead, police forces need to technology functions that it fulfils. This identify the best way forward to get more efficiency provides an additional urgency to the from ICT – both directly and through improving the imperative for a new approach to police way the force functions. As part of this, they need to information and communications get better and more seamless ICT services for their technology. However, in devising this new officers and staff, for example avoiding time-wasting approach the Home Office must not rekeying of the same data into different systems. The neglect those few elements of the existing new ICT company will be responsible for the landscape that are working well. In procurement, implementation and management of particular, the Home Office must secure complex IT contracts. It will ensure a more the future of ISIS and continue to support commercial and efficient approach to police ICT Project Athena. (Paragraph 143) provision, using economies of scale and market forces to save public money. The company will be ready to assist forces, where they identify its services as the best way of achieving savings and greater efficiency. It will be able to assist forces by negotiating better prices for IT services, providing information as a service and enabling forces to reduce the number of 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness procurement specialists and IT professionals they employ. Forces have already made substantial savings in ICT. We are seeing a deepening of voluntary collaboration on ICT – through wide partnerships of forces as exemplified by the Athena project, and through bilateral collaboration, for example as in Hampshire/Thames Valley and South Yorkshire/Humberside. Project Athena is being taken forward by the forces and Police Authorities involved. The Home Secretary has confirmed to the Authorities and forces that she supports the objectives of project Athena and has no objection to the size of this collaboration. Project Athena provides a good example for the service of the power of voluntary collaboration on ICT and business processes. We 197 agree that there is a role for the Police Service’s Information Systems Improvement Strategy (ISIS). their drive for interoperability... (For rest of reply, see Govt response.)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 198 Effectiveness 29. Both this and the previous The Home Secretary has written to the Chair of the Not accepted. Government have at times claimed that Committee explaining that decisions on the role and there is a convention whereby special remit of the company rest with her and her Ministers. advisers do not give evidence to Select Therefore, it should be Ministers who account for Committees. However, special advisers that work to Parliament and the Committee. have given evidence to Select Committees in the past. Considering the significant advice that Lord Wasserman has provided to the Government, we believe that it was an error of judgment to prevent us from hearing from him about his proposals for the future of police IT: this is a vital element of the new landscape and he is a key figure in determining its future. (Paragraph 146) 30. We note again that Lord The Home Secretary has written to the Chair of the Not accepted. Wasserman has had a long and Committee explaining that decisions on the role and distinguished career in public service, but remit of the company rest with her and her Ministers. we note again that it would have been Therefore, it should be Ministers who account for helpful if we could have spoken to him in that work to Parliament and the Committee. person as part of our inquiry, given his central role in shaping the new police IT company. We give notice that we intend to invite Lord Wasserman to give evidence to us in the autumn on these issues and on recent developments. (Paragraph 153)
31. We seek clarity from the Home As the Committee recognises, a new approach to Awaiting further information. Office on which police force or forces it has police ICT is vital. That is why the Government is in mind to take on responsibility for the carefully considering all elements of the existing existing IT systems provided directly by landscape, and is committed to ensuring the best the National Policing Improvement Agency future for each, in the interests of supporting the and an assurance that the force in question effectiveness of the police but it is likely that the will be given the necessary resources to management of the Airwave contract will transfer to take on this task. In addition, we seek the ICT Company at an appropriate time. The Home clarity on precisely which IT systems will Secretary will write to the Committee as further become the responsibility of a local force decisions are taken on the future of ICT functions. and which will go directly to the new police IT body. We expect that Airwave will become the responsibility of the new police IT body, but we would like this confirmed. (Paragraph 155) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 199
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 200 Effectiveness 32. There is so little detail currently The Government agrees that that there are Many details about the new company have yet to available about the police-led IT company considerable advantages to the creation of a single be announced. that we find it difficult to reach a body, as the Home Secretary set out in her speech to conclusion about its viability. There are ACPO this summer. We are carefully considering all advantages to creating a single body with aspects of the new body, including transparency and the sole purpose of overseeing governance arrangements and will take the information and communications Committee’s views into account in doing so. The technology in the police service, provided Home Secretary will update Parliament on progress in that it has the right degree of commercial January 2012 subject to other key decisions and technological expertise, a clear focus, concerning the structure of the company being clarity about resources, and a good agreed. relationship with the wider police service. However, it seems that a key reason for it being considered that a company is the best kind of body to perform this role is that it will not be subject to EU procurement rules. If the body is set up as a company, it is important that it is made subject to Freedom of Information legislation. The people setting up this body have a great deal of work to do in a short space of time, if it is to be up and running by spring 2012. We recommend that the Home Secretary updates Parliament no later than December 2011, by means of an oral statement in the House of Commons, on the progress that is being made. (Paragraph 162) 33. The new IT body should make A key objective of the ICT Company will be to Accepted. reducing procurement timescales a high improve the value for money that the police service priority. (Paragraph 165) receives from its spend on ICT services. This will include looking at how best to meet overall procurement timeline commitments, as defined by the Public Contract Regulations 2006.
34. We see merit in Intellect’s proposal We look forward to engaging with Intellect on the Accepted. that there should be a single national detail of their proposal and how such an approach register of approved suppliers to be could work in practice. We are also engaging with updated annually, so long as it is an the Cabinet Office on their new Pre-Qualification alternative to separate pre-qualification Questionnaire work and how this will help suppliers. processes rather than an additional requirement, and urge the Government to consider setting up such a list, covering both IT and non-IT suppliers to the police service. (Paragraph166) 35. The new IT body should consider at The ICT Company will work with its police customers Accepted. an early stage what processes should be to properly define the appropriate requirements for involved before deciding that awarding a any services that are required. The sourcing strategy major new contract is the best way of stages of any contracting process would normally meeting the business aim in question. It evaluate the different routes that are available should give particular consideration to toward meeting that requirement in the manner that how it will ensure that contracts that run provides the best value for money. We agree with over many years, such as Airwave, deliver the Committee’s observation that long term value value for money throughout this period. delivery is key in any contractual relationship. The ICT (Paragraph 167) Company will be active in ensuring professional contract management approaches and engagement with suppliers are such that value is delivered
throughout any contractual relationship period. 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 201
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 202 Effectiveness 36. We agree that, although the money We welcome the Committee’s recognition of the Conclusion: no direct recommendation for spent on procuring goods and services is a importance of more efficient and effective Government action. relatively small proportion of the overall procurement. The Collaborative Police Procurement police budget, it is still a substantial sum Programme (CPPP) was initiated in the NPIA, working of money in itself. The proportion of the closely with procurement leads from the police total savings required of police forces that service, on the 19th July 2010. Most of the non-IT can come from more efficient and effective elements of this programme transferred into the procurement will necessarily be relatively Home Office on the 1st October 2011. The modest, but, as we said in our previous programme is focussed on collaborative procurement report on Police Finances, even a modest of common goods and services across the police contribution is better than none at all and forces. Through a combination of voluntary police will help reduce the savings that have to participation and mandation where appropriate be found elsewhere. (Paragraph 171) frameworks are in place, this programme will save £200m over the CSR on commonly purchased police goods and services. 26 Since its inception, the CPPP Programme has already delivered £40m worth of savings to the police service last financial year, and in the first 6 months of this financial year has realised £29m cash releasing savings.
37. Compulsory national framework The Government agrees with the Committee that Accepted. agreements will enable savings to be compulsory national framework agreements will realised more quickly than a voluntary enable savings to be realised more quickly than a approach to collaboration on procurement. voluntary approach to collaboration on procurement. The Home Office should extend them to The first Regulations to specify particular frameworks other categories of procurement, and in to be used by the police service came into force in particular commodity items, as well as March 2011. The Government intends to consult soon goods and services where interoperability on further Regulations to specify frameworks to be is paramount. The Home Office should used by the police service for further categories of indicate in its response which categories it equipment and services. Categories likely to be part plans to make subject to such agreements of the consultation later this year include: vehicle next and when the relevant legislation is light bars, translators and Interpreters, utilities, likely to be passed. However, national customer surveys, some training services, consultancy framework agreements are not suitable for and the Police Procurement Hub. Subject to all types of procurement and there may be consultation, Regulations would be made early in instances in which local solutions are more 2012. The Government agrees that national suitable, either because they better meet framework agreement will not be suitable for all the needs of local forces, or because they types of procurement. The categories of non-IT offer better value for money, or both. procurement on which the Home Office supports the (Paragraph 179) police service are likely to change over time depending on the value for money assessment of taking a national approach in each case and reflecting analysis of the pattern of spending by the service. 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 203
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 204 Effectiveness 38. We recommend that the Protocol The Government appreciates the contributions made Partially accepted. should be amended to specify that Police by the Committee and hopes it recognises the and Crime Commissioners and Chief influence its recommendations have had in the Constables have an obligation to drafting of the Protocol. The Protocol that is currently collaborate with other forces on before Parliament for approval via the negative procurement to deliver value for money resolution process, clearly states the power and duty for the police service overall. However, we of PCCs to enter into collaboration agreements with emphasise that the protocol is being other PCCs, policing bodies and partners that improve drawn up by the Home Office and by ACPO, the efficiency or effectiveness of policing for one or which has a vested interest, and without more policing bodies or police forces in consultation the benefit of engagement by Police and with the Chief Constable. This power and/or duty to Crime Commissioners, who cannot be collaborate is mirrored in the responsibilities of the involved until the first elections have Chief Constable which are also outlined in the taken place. As the expressed purpose of Protocol. To keep the Protocol to a manageable the Government is to provide local length, it cannot set out all of the Police Reform and accountability in relation to the police in Social Responsibility Act provisions or refer to all of every part of the country, the protocol the duties placed on PCCs and Chief Constables. Our must be considered as provisional until intention is to demonstrate the need for PCCs to further discussions have taken place deliver value for money across the policing landscape following those elections. We urge and anyone who puts themselves forward as a Ministers to make it clear that this is their candidate will know that that is one of their key intention. (Paragraph185) responsibilities on which the public will expect them to deliver. The power taken to issue a Protocol also enables the Secretary of State to consult and reissue a Protocol as and when the Secretary of State sees fit. Therefore once PCCs are elected it may be necessary to consult on the then current version of the Protocol but as it is the case that London will go live in January, subject to Parliament approving the necessary secondary legislation, it is our view that the Protocol should take effect in order for the roles and responsibilities of the MOPC and Commissioner to be publicly clear and transparent. The Protocol also states that a further duty of the PCC is to provide the local link between the police and communities, working to translate the legitimate desires and aspirations of the public into action.
39. Central Government does not have As detailed in response 36 above, the CPPP Accepted. an encouraging record on achieving Programme has a proven track record in savings efficient and effective procurement. The delivery to the police service. With the transfer of the National Policing Improvement Agency function to the Home Office we are keen to maintain was beginning to make some progress in and accelerate this momentum. Part of our strategy achieving savings from procurement and it will be to explore synergies and savings opportunities is vital that this momentum is maintained for using the Home Office Procurement Centre of when responsibility for non-IT police Excellence both in terms of expertise and procurement is transferred to the Home aggregating requirements. We will also ensure that Office. We note that the Home Office we are linked into the wider pan-Government Procurement Centre of Excellence has collaboration agenda. We would expect to publish achieved some successes over the short statements of progress on savings either on a time it has existed and trust that it will quarterly or bi-annual basis. We recognise the now urgently build on these. This will importance of building and maintaining good involve building good relationships with working relationships with the police service. It is local forces and, in due course, with Police intended that we will use the regional procurement and Crime Commissioners. The Home engagement team transferred from NPIA and expand Office should publish yearly statements their role to include supporting wider police setting out the progress it is making in programmes which engage with the private sector. realising savings from non-IT police We will also ensure that we are linked into the wider procurement. (Paragraph 186) non-Government work on procurement and we will draw to the attention of the police service and encourage it to adopt the package of reforms to central Government procurement announced by the 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness minister for the Cabinet Office & Paymaster General on 21 November. 205
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 206 Effectiveness 40. In taking on responsibility for non- The positions in relation to non-IT and IT Accepted. IT police procurement, the Home Office procurement are distinct and separate. The NPIA should focus in particular on aligning the Non-IT procurement team transferred into the Home timings of contracts between forces and Office in October 2011. The Home Office will seek to on standardising products, where this is maximise the opportunities this brings to deliver the possible and not to the detriment of local principles defined in the Home Office procurement operational effectiveness. It should also strategy and to pursue all opportunities for improved take a holistic approach to procurement, value for money. The management of demand for focusing on demand management as well goods and services is primarily a responsibility for as price. Officials in the Home Office who Chief Constables, with the Home Office encouraging have responsibility for non-IT police them to consider value for money in the deployment procurement should liaise regularly with of resources. The role of the new police-led company their colleagues in the new police-led IT will be to respond to the police service as the primary company to ensure that there is a customer, where it identifies the company’s services collective purpose across police as the best way of achieving savings and greater procurement as a whole. (Paragraph efficiency. The company will be responsible for the 189) procurement, implementation and management of complex contracts for information technology, related business change and outsourcing services, supplying both national and local services for police. The demands of the customers will shape the service provision. 41. Finally, it would be helpful if the The service the New ICT Company will provide the Partially accepted. Home Office specified precisely which procurement, implementation and management of categories of goods and services in the complex contracts for information technology, police service will be its responsibility, related business change and outsourcing services. It which will fall within the discretion of would not be appropriate to suggest a rigid Police and Crime Commissioners, and demarcation between categories of non-IT goods and which will be the responsibility of the new services that will be procured nationally or locally. police-led IT company. In relation to The categories of non-IT procurement on which the communications in particular, there seems Home Office supports the police service are likely to scope for some confusion at present. change over time depending on the value for money (Paragraph 190) assessment of taking a national approach in each case and reflecting analysis of the pattern of spending by the service. However in all cases we will continue to engage with Police Authorities and from November 2012 Police and Crime Commissioners.
42. We commend Kent and Essex Police The Government welcomes the excellent Accepted. Forces and Authorities for their work in collaborative working taking place between the Kent setting up collaborative agreements. We and Essex police forces. They are a good example of find it curious that there was not more how collaboration can help improve the efficiency of interest in the project from the Home support services and the effectiveness of operational Office and the National Policing policing. There have been several Home Office visits Improvement Agency, although the to the forces to see their collaborative work and, in Agency itself was not formally established March 2011, the Policing Minister addressed the until April 2007 so was not in a position to Collaboration in Policing Conference arranged by provide assistance or advice in the early Kent and Essex. The Home Office has provided a stages of the collaboration. At the very considerable amount of support and advice to Kent least we would have expected the Home and Essex in respect of their collaboration Office to check regularly on how the programme. This included £160,000 funding support project was progressing to ascertain in 2010-11 for the forces’ joint Serious Crime whether there were lessons that could be Directorate. Officials monitored these and other learned for future collaborative projects projects closely and evaluation reports were between other forces. (Paragraph 196) produced. 43. The example of Kent and Essex The Government agrees with this observation. Accepted. provides some evidence that collaboration Collaboration should be seen as a means to an end between forces offers scope for modest, rather than an end in itself and existing examples of but clear, financial savings. As we have force collaboration such as that between the forces commented before, modest savings are of Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire better than none. Collaboration by itself has demonstrated the potential to achieve savings. 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness will not enable forces to make all the The HMIC report due to be published in February savings being required of them, but it 2012 will help to quantify the savings that can be could contribute towards them. (Paragraph derived from collaboration. The Home Office will 197) continue to support forces looking to identify good practice on collaboration arrangements, in particular through information sharing via the NPIA’s Police Online Knowledge Area (POLKA). 207
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 208 Effectiveness 44. The operational benefits of The Government agrees that collaboration can Accepted. collaboration, such as a greater critical significantly improve operational effectiveness, for mass and the sharing of best practice, are example in tackling crime that crosses force an equally powerful reason for boundaries. Police forces in England and Wales encouraging collaboration between forces collaborate to tackle organised crime through a as the need to make savings. The example network of regional units comprising Regional of Kent and Essex suggests that there is no Intelligence Units, Regional Asset Recovery Teams cause for undue alarm about collaboration and proactive operational enforcement capabilities. inappropriately undermining operational These units are becoming increasingly integrated into independence, although we note that this ‘Regional Organised Crime Units’, enabling a regional is just one example and the need to tasking model which is informed by a wide safeguard operational independence is intelligence picture and that can deploy specialist and certainly an important consideration to be highly skilled operational capabilities to disrupt and borne in mind by other forces considering prosecute organised criminals in ways which a single collaborative agreements. (Paragraph force acting alone could not achieve. Chief 200) Constables’ operational independence is clearly set out in the Protocol and will be a consideration when drawing up collaboration agreements. As noted in the Kent and Essex example, it need not be problematic, particularly where all parties enter into an arrangement in a truly collaborative way.
45. For collaboration between police The Government agrees that effective Accepted. forces to succeed, it must have the backing communication is an important part of securing of police officers and staff, and of the support for any form of business change – including public the forces serve. The key to collaboration – and PCCs will have a role to play in addressing this challenge is ensuring this. It is worth noting that forces are able communication. The senior officers and to share their experiences of engaging their staff who are involved in setting up the workforce and their local communities in the design collaboration must focus from the outset and implementation of change through the on communicating, both to more junior communities of practitioners on POLKA. officers and staff and to people in the local community, the benefits that collaboration offers. The public must also be told with clarity where ultimate accountability lies. Some initial wariness is to be expected, but the example of Kent and Essex suggests this can be overcome. We would expect Police and Crime Commissioners to have a central role in ensuring this. (Paragraph 204) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 209
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 210 Effectiveness 46. We recommend that the Home The Government reviewed the legislation only Accepted. Office review the legislative framework in recently, bringing forward measures in the Police which collaboration between police forces Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 to remove takes place with a view to ascertaining obstacles to effective collaboration. The Act whether it could remove any obstacles introduces a strong duty for chief constables and that are making collaboration more PCCs to keep collaboration opportunities under difficult. In particular, we recommend that review and to collaborate where it is in the interest it consider whether legislation could be of efficiency or effectiveness, • replaces the current changed to make procurement on behalf arrangement for two types of collaboration of multiple forces more efficient. agreement (one for chief constables and one for (Paragraph 207) police authorities) with a single type of agreement which PCCs and chiefs can sign-up to together, • repeals the current requirement to consult the Secretary of State before entering into collaboration agreements involving seven or more parties, and • introduces a new power for the Home Secretary to specify, by Order, particular policing functions on which all forces must collaborate. In its evidence to the Committee, Norfolk and Suffolk police highlighted a problem with the use of police staff in collaborations. The Government has addressed this point in the 2011 Act, which contains provisions to allow a member of police staff designated with police powers to exercise those powers in the area of a different police force that is engaged in a collaboration agreement with his or her own force. Police forces will continue to be separate legal entities. The Government’s approach to non- IT police procurement is to increasingly specify frameworks to be used across the service including through regulations to mandate such frameworks. In addition, the introduction of the police procurement hub will help to reduce the bureaucracy of the procurement process both for forces and for suppliers.
47. Police forces entering into The Government agrees with the Committee that Accepted. collaborative agreements should be aware police forces should consider differences in their that differences in the financial histories financial situations before entering into collaboration and circumstances of both forces will need agreements. A common barrier to collaboration is the to be taken into consideration. The Home ‘net donor’ syndrome. This describes the perception Office should explore whether it can offer that resources committed to collaboration will be any advice to forces on how to deal with deployed away from the home force and into a this area, but ultimately, collaboration partnering force’s area. It is important for all parties depends on a coalition of the willing and to a collaboration agreement to understand that a forces will have to be prepared to put collaboration may not provide equal benefits in all these differences aside, as far as is parts to all participants or in total but is sometimes possible, to achieve the benefits that necessary for the greater, collective good. Potential collaboration offers. (Paragraph 208) savings from collaboration will also vary between forces depending on the extent of any previous cost saving measures they have undertaken. The Home Office has published general advice to forces and authorities on funding issues, including the ‘net donor’ syndrome, to ensure they are properly considered before entering into collaboration agreements. Solutions, however, will depend on local circumstances and, as such, can only sensibly be addressed locally by the forces concerned. As the Committee notes, for collaboration to work effectively, all parties need to be willing to work 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness around their differences. 211
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 212 Effectiveness 48. The fact that Police and Crime The Government welcomes this recommendation. The Accepted. Commissioners will be directly elected by Policing Minister made the same points at the people in their local police force area does Collaboration in Policing Conference on 22 March not necessarily mean that they will be any 2011. The Government agrees that there is no reason less willing to enter into collaborative to believe that PCCs will be an obstacle to agreements than Police Authorities. collaboration. They are likely to be strongly Indeed, it almost certainly means that any motivated to drive out costs to maximise investment Police and Crime Commissioners who do in frontline policing. But to allay any fears, the Police enter into collaborative agreements will Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 will place be particularly keen on conveying the PCCs under a strong legal duty to collaborate. This benefits of the agreement to the public, duty is reflected in the Protocol, too. PCCs will also which could be an advantage, and Police need to collaborate to meet their responsibilities and Crime Commissioners may also have a under the Strategic Policing Requirement, which will greater incentive to make savings since the set out what capabilities forces must have to tackle level of the police precept will be one of national threats. the most visible indicators of their performance to their electorate. However, it does change the landscape in which future collaborative agreements will take place. We welcome the fact that the draft Protocol specifies that Commissioners have a wider duty to enter into collaboration agreements that benefit their force area and deliver better value for money and enhanced policing capabilities. (Paragraph 213)
49. Collaboration between forces The Government accepts that police forces and Accepted. offers clear benefits, both financial and authorities welcome support on how to approach operational. The Home Office should be collaboration. The Policing Minister chairs the High more active in encouraging and supporting Level Working Group on Value for Money in Policing, forces to collaborate with one another— which provides a forum for policing leaders to discuss for example, by bringing Police and Crime collaboration issues, and has established a Policing Commissioners and Chief Officers together Value for Money Unit, which brings together multi- to discuss collaboration. Certainly without agency resources to support forces to manage the such intervention collaboration between spending review settlement, including by promoting police authorities and forces outside Kent learning on new approaches to collaboration. The and Essex has taken place in a piecemeal Government provides funding to support regional fashion and at a slow pace. (Paragraph collaborations to tackle organised crime and, as 214) noted above, it has acted to remove obstacles to collaboration through the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011. The Home Office and the NPIA offer guidance on collaboration, and the NPIA provides further support through its POLKA, which includes a number of communities of practitioners working together to share experiences and learning on all kinds of organisational change. HMIC is also now conducting support and challenge visits to all police forces, looking at the extent and pace of their collaboration with other forces, and with wider public and private sector partners. The Government 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness will keep the need for further support under review. 213
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 214 Effectiveness 50. Collaboration between police The Government accepts that police forces and Accepted. forces and the private sector was one authorities welcome support on how to approach element of our much larger inquiry into collaboration. The Policing Minister chairs the High the new landscape of policing and we do Level Working Group on Value for Money in Policing, not feel that we received enough evidence which provides a forum for policing leaders to discuss to comment in detail on the potential it collaboration issues, and has established a Policing offers. However, the evidence that we did Value for Money Unit, which brings together multi- receive convinces us that there needs to be agency resources to support forces to manage the further research in this area. We spending review settlement, including by promoting recommend that the Home Office either learning on new approaches to collaboration. The carries out this research itself, or Government provides funding to support regional commissions another body, such as Her collaborations to tackle organised crime and, as Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, to noted above, it has acted to remove obstacles to carry it out, to assess whether large-scale collaboration through the Police Reform and Social collaboration with the private sector offers Responsibility Act 2011. The Home Office and the forces the scope to make savings, whilst NPIA offer guidance on collaboration, and the NPIA maintaining or enhancing operational provides further support through its POLKA, which effectiveness. The picture is far from clear includes a number of communities of practitioners at present. This is an emerging area and working together to share experiences and learning some research about the benefits and on all kinds of organisational change. HMIC is also disadvantages would be helpful to forces now conducting support and challenge visits to all who might be considering following police forces, looking at the extent and pace of their Cleveland’s example. The research should collaboration with other forces, and with wider include consideration of the evidence from public and private sector partners. The Government other countries. (Paragraph 225) will keep the need for further support under review.
51. We do not rule out the possibility A number of forces have already established Accepted. that in the future an increasing number of arrangements with private sector partners and have functions performed within a police force not reported significant legislative barriers to might be provided by the private sector, building and maintaining these relationships. The leaving warranted officers to focus on the High Level Working Group commissioned work to functions which they alone can provide. explore the potential value of business partnering, However, we remain cautious about including looking at barriers and constraints to advocating such an approach, given the establishing arrangements with the private sector lack of evidence about the advantages and which enable forces to maintain and improve services disadvantages of even the current level of to the public while reducing costs. collaboration with the private sector. We cannot therefore currently recommend the relaxing of the constraints on collaboration, although we certainly recommend that the Home Office should consider these constraints, including legislative constraints, as part of its research. (Paragraph 232) 52. Ultimately, decisions about The Government agrees that decisions about Accepted. whether to embark on large-scale embarking on large-scale collaboration projects collaboration projects with the private should be taken locally. The Home Office role in sector will, and should, be taken locally. supporting these decisions will be to make However, Government has a role to play information available to forces considering 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness too, in providing some initial research that alternative service delivery models (including business enables forces to take informed decisions. partnering), including via POLKA Transforming Questions such as “will it make the force Policing Community. Supplier engagement, led by the more operationally effective” and “will it Home Office, will continue to share learning and deliver better value for money for the market intelligence with the Service to enable them public” are the right ones to ask, but it to make robust decisions about which options to should not be left to individual forces to pursue. The Home Office will establish a commercial provide all the answers. Both police forces forum in which the Service can share information and and the private sector need more clarity determine how best to aggregate and shape locally about how this aspect of the landscape of driven demand with industry in order to get the best policing is likely to develop in the future possible value for the taxpayer. and it is for the Home Office to provide this clarity. (Paragraph 236) 215
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 216 Effectiveness 53. We reiterate the point that we The Government agrees that PCCs need to support Accepted. made in our report on Police and Crime and when necessary bring together the work of Commissioners. Our sister Committee, the Community Safety Partnerships, as provided for in Justice Committee, found that authorities the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act. We and agencies other than the police, and hope the Committee recognises the influence of their indeed outside the criminal justice system recommendations on both the initial draft Protocol altogether, have the ability to reduce both and the latest version which has been laid before the number of people entering the Parliament. The Protocol provides that the PCC has a criminal justice system in the first place specific responsibility for the delivery of community and the likelihood of reoffending. We safety and crime reduction and also goes on to therefore consider that it will be vital for specify that PCCs have the responsibility of bringing each Police and Crime Commissioner to together Community Safety Partnerships at force support and drive the work of Community level (except in Wales). Safety Partnerships. We are encouraged by the Government’s inclusion in the draft Protocol of a reference to Commissioner’s responsibility to bring together Community Safety Partnerships at the force level. (Paragraph 240)
54. Collaboration is a generic term for HMIC has followed their 'Adapting to Austerity' Accepted. a wide variety of different partnerships. report with support and challenge visits to all forces To take just one example, a police force focussing on the extent and pace of their looking to form a partnership to deliver collaboration with other forces, public sector partners back office functions such as finance could and the private sector and how these partnerships collaborate with another police force, with will contribute to their CSR savings requirement. A a local council or another public sector report, due to be published in February 2012, will body, or with a private sector provide a comprehensive picture of the types of organisation. Different types of collaboration that exist nationally, the barriers to collaboration are not necessarily mutually collaboration and equally those factors that enable exclusive: it would be possible, for progress to be made. The report will for the first time example, for the same police force to identify the savings that can be derived from collaborate with a neighbouring force on collaborating across a range of different functions. It IT provision, and the local fire and rescue is for Police Authorities and eventually PCCs, in service on community safety. However, consultation with forces, to decide the best option there does come a point when one type of for service delivery. The Policing Value for Money collaboration makes another type more Unit provides a range of information for forces to difficult. For example, Cleveland’s consider through POLKA and will continue to add to partnership with Steria would make it hard this knowledge bank. for Cleveland to collaborate with another force on, say, the provision of a joint serious and organised crime directorate. Decisions about which approach to adopt Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness should be taken locally, but they are strategic decisions, with long-term impacts and the Government should provide assistance in the form of research and advice to enable forces to assess the various merits of the different approaches. (Paragraph 243) 217
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 218 Effectiveness 55. We agree with Jan Berry, the The Home Secretary is grateful for the work that Jan Partially accepted. former Reducing Bureaucracy in Policing Berry did in assessing police bureaucracy. The Advocate, that reducing unnecessary Reducing Bureaucracy Programme Board, chaired by bureaucracy is not simply about reducing Chief Constable Chris Sims, is taking forward the paperwork, but about addressing the Government’s work to cut unnecessary police causes of that paperwork. We shall bureaucracy. This Board has taken into account the continue to monitor her recommendations recommendations from Jan Berry to inform their plan to see what progress is made. We know of work. The Board has a membership of key policing that the Minister for Policing and Criminal partners, including Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Justice has met Jan Berry, and we urge the Constabulary, the Association of Chief Police Officers, Home Secretary to do the same to discuss the Home Office and the Association of Police how the Home Office can take her work Authorities. The Home Secretary has announced a forward. (Paragraph 264) package of policies that will cut police red tape, saving up to 3.3 million police hours per year and the Programme Board is working with policing partners to ensure that the new measures the Home Secretary has announced are progressing in practice. 37 The Programme Board is also working closely with the Reducing Bureaucracy Practitioners Group, which was set up by Jan Berry, and consists of frontline officers from forces across the country.
56. We await the outcome of Sara This work is now well underway and a set of core Accepted. Thornton’s review of police guidance with practice documents is being developed which covers interest. We regard the review as a recurring activities common across policing. This positive step, but we re-emphasise Jan reduces duplication and therefore the volume of Berry’s point that it is important to look at guidance material, as the core is written once and causes as well as symptoms. Reducing 600 only crossreferenced in subsequent documents. Much pieces of guidance to 100 pieces of of the work will be completed by March 2012. In guidance is welcome but it must be addition, in a limited number of high risk areas, accompanied by a recognition of what specific practice will be brought together in order to caused the proliferation of guidance in the support consistency of the police response and first place. (Paragraph 266) interoperability. Reducing bureaucracy is not only about freeing up police time. We agree with the committee that there is a need to change the culture to reduce risk aversion and increase professional judgement. The Association of Chief Police Officers has now published ten risk principles to encourage a more positive approach to risk and support decision makers in building their confidence. The new National Decision Model will be embedded in all core police practice by the end of 2012 as part of Sara Thornton’s work. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 219
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 220 Effectiveness 57. In responding to, and taking The Government agrees with the importance of Accepted. forward, Peter Neyroud’s proposals for a reducing bureaucracy. Replacing bureaucracy by new Professional Body for Policing, the informed professional discretion unlocks both savings Government should consider the Body’s and improved service for the public. This not only potential to foster the kind of culture that requires a culture change at the heart of policing but is needed to reduce unnecessary also from Whitehall. This is about demonstrating our bureaucracy: a culture in which there is commitment to reducing police bureaucracy through continuing professional development and clear and tangible actions that will make a real officers are confident about making their difference to the service, and we are already doing own decisions where appropriate. this through national changes, such as the return of (Paragraph 269) certain charging decisions to the police. The professional body will play a key role in enabling officers and staff to be sufficiently skilled. This will, in turn, ensure procedures are followed correctly the first time and reduce forces’ need to employ people responsible for checking compliance. Strengthening the skills and abilities of individual officers and staff rather than ineffective bureaucratic doublechecking must be the way forward. 58. One of the most important aspects Ministers are clear that interoperability must be a Accepted. of reducing bureaucracy in the police priority in ensuring an effective and efficient police service will be integrated IT, not just across service. While the new company is not responsible for the police service itself, but across the national strategy or delivering government whole criminal justice system. The new commitments, it will facilitate interoperability and is police-led IT company needs to make this a likely to provide services that support national priority. (Paragraph 270) initiatives.
59. The impact that Police and Crime The Protocol has been laid before Parliament for Partially accepted. Commissioners have on bureaucracy is approval and provides Police and Crime likely to depend heavily on the individuals Commissioners (PCCs) with the power and duty to who are chosen to fill these roles. To improve the efficiency or effectiveness of police encourage all Police and Crime forces in consultation with the Chief Constable. Our Commissioners to realise the importance intention is to demonstrate the need for PCCs to of bearing down on unnecessary deliver value for money across the policing landscape bureaucracy, we recommend that the and anyone who puts themselves forward as a Protocol should specify that candidate will know that that is one of their key Commissioners should have regard to the responsibilities on which the public will expect them need to keep bureaucracy to a to deliver. This encompasses the importance of proportionate level when making decisions reducing unnecessary bureaucracy. about their local forces. (Paragraph 272) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 221
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 222 Effectiveness 60. Overall, it seems likely that the We welcome the Committee’s comments and agree Agreed. new landscape will contain more bodies with its interpretation of what effective reform to than the current landscape: for example, the policing landscape should seek to achieve. although the National Policing Improvement Agency is to be abolished, a Professional Body for policing and a police- led IT company seem likely to be created. On the other hand, it is possible that the changes will lead to a more logical and better functioning police landscape and ultimately make the police more successful at achieving their basic mission of reducing crime and disorder. In the end, it is our view that this is what the Home Secretary should be held to account for, not the number of bodies in the policing landscape. However, the scale of the change is unprecedented and the scope for mistakes accordingly large. We have reservations about the timetable for these changes, particularly regarding the transfer of functions from the National Policing Improvement Agency and the setting up of the National Crime Agency. (Paragraph 273)
61. There is a great deal to achieve in a We are planning a methodical and careful wind Partially accepted—still awaiting a detailed very short space of time. In its response to down of the NPIA, which has involved detailed timetable. our report, we urge the Government to consultation on those functions which should be provide a realistic, revised timetable for transferred. The Home Office engaged with NPIA and the phasing out of the National Policing senior police representatives as the work developed, Improvement Agency, which we taking their input on the consideration of existing recommend should not happen before the functions, and has sought to give Chief Officers end of 2012, the setting up of a fully clarity as early as possible. Decisions were functioning National Crime Agency, the communicated early about the creation of a new ICT setting up of a new Professional Body, and company and the transfer of some NPIA functions to the setting up of the police-led IT the NCA (via SOCA). As outlined in our response to company. This timetable should be broken recommendation 60, the Government intends to down into key stages, with specific dates. phase out the NPIA in 2012. Functions will be We will then keep track of the progress transferred from the NPIA in phases, with the first against this timetable. We also urge the transfers being those destined for the National Crime Home Secretary as a matter of urgency to Agency, which will be transferred to SOCA as the propose where each function of each of precursor body. This first transfer will be completed the existing bodies should land under the by Spring 2012. new arrangements. Clarity is becoming extremely urgent and in some cases it would be better for Ministers to make a proposal—even if that leads to discussion and debate—rather than to delay further. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness We would be happy to contribute to that process and would applaud Ministers if they are willing to lead an open process— even if that then leads to second thoughts—rather than to delay any longer. (Paragraph 274) 223
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 224 Effectiveness 62. The changes are certainly the most The Government welcomes the Committee’s Accepted. far-reaching that have been proposed to recognition of the scale and ambition of our reforms. the police service since the 1960s and are Through our organised crime strategy, the plan for among the most significant that have been the National Crime Agency, the Strategic Policing proposed since Sir Robert Peel laid the Requirement and the Protocol, we are providing the foundations for modern policing nearly strong national leadership needed to reform the 200 years ago. The Government aims to national policing landscape. We would be happy to reduce intervention from the centre in continue to provide the Committee with such policing in the long term, but this will evidence as it needs to review these important require more clarity from the centre in the reforms. short term. Change on this scale requires clear and strong leadership from the Home Office—of which effective communication is a key part—if it is to succeed. There will be a need to keep the development of the Government’s proposals under review, and we plan to return to this important subject before the next election. (Paragraph 278)
63. Finally, we welcome the fact that a The Government strongly agrees with the Committee Accepted. great deal of consensus does continue to that Sir Robert Peel’s principles should continue to exist in regard to the role of the police, inform the reform of policing in the 21st century. We even when there is controversy about have given the police one mission – to cut crime. We specific policies and structural changes. will support them in doing so by replacing We concur with the words of both the bureaucratic interference with democratic Home Secretary and the Minister for accountability and ensure a better national grip in Policing and Criminal Justice, who at the fight against serious crime. different times, were asked to indicate their view about the purpose of the police. Both of them quoted the words of Sir Robert Peel when the first police force was established in London in 1829 that the basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder. This, and the rest of the nine principles set out by Sir Robert Peel, remain key principles today and should continue to command the support of Ministers, parliamentarians and the public, as well as the police themselves. (Paragraph 279)
2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 225
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 226 Effectiveness
Fifteenth Report, The work of the UK Border Agency (April-July 2011) (HC 1497), published 4 November 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. We therefore welcome the appointment Conclusion: no direct recommendation for of Mr Whiteman on a lower salary of Government action. £175,000 and look forward to taking evidence from him in December.
2. The level of waste at the UK Border The Committee referred to the percentage of Accepted. Agency is unacceptable. We recommend illegal penalties collected in 2010/11, and to the that the Government undertake and publish amounts of bad debt write-off and staff and the results of a detailed investigation into asylum seekers overpayments in the same period, this and consider how the UK Border Agency as evidence of wasteful financial management. As can improve its financial and data we acknowledged in our report on the 2010/11 management. (paragraph 5) accounts, and in Jonathan Sedgwick’s reply to the Committee on 11 October, we recognise that we have more work to do, although the figures for 2010/11 showed an improvement on the previous financial year:
2010/11 Change 2009/10
Overpayments £2.1m Down £3.5m to asylum 40% seekers
Loss of pay – £1.9m Down £4.3m overpayments 56% to staff
Penalty £6.9m Up 60% £4.3m 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness income collected through debt recovery
Over payments of asylum support occur where there is a delay in the notification of the cessation of asylum support after the conclusion of an asylum case to the individual and/or their contracted housing supplier. This results in accommodation providers continuing to provide housing in good faith despite individuals no longer being entitled to that accommodation. Over recent years this has fallen from £9.8m in
2008/09 and £3.4m in 2009/10, to £2.1m in 2010/11 227 27
and is expected to be less than £350k in 2011/12.
27 Data on overpayments of asylum support is taken from management information, which is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics.
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 228 Effectiveness Any payroll will carry some staff overpayments on their accounts; for example these can be due to staff leaving after payroll cut off or sickness absence entitlement changing. Our Human Resources teams seek recovery of all overpayments. Since April 2009 to date 60% of the Agency’s cases have been completed or are in recovery. £1.2m has been recovered. A strict presumption that repayment will be pursued is applied in all cases in line with the Treasury’s ‘managing public money’ guidance and an agreed overpayments recovery process is in place.
Both the central Home Office and the Agency jointly reviewed our accounts receivable (debt management) processes, and made a number of recommendations for improvement which we are taking forward during 2011/12. In particular, we have improved training and guidance to officers issuing penalties, so that more penalties are raised correctly up front; we are improving our service level agreements on debt collection with the central Home Office service provider, who manages debt collection for the Agency, and we have engaged an external debt collection Agency to pursue older debt, as well as making a number of technical changes to our accounting and reporting processes to support more effective debt collection.
During November and December, the National Audit Office (NAO) is auditing the Agency’s financial management processes and, with central Home Office Finance, we are conducting a review of the risk of financial loss that could arise from our debt management processes. These reviews are ongoing, but we look forward to their conclusion and we will implement their recommendations as soon as practicable.
3. We welcome the very significant Since 2006, we have greatly increased our focus on Partially accepted. reduction in the number of foreign national deportation of foreign criminals and have made prisoners who were released without being considerable improvements to the way we deport considered for deportation, from 1,013 in such offenders. Every case that is referred to us 2006 to just 28 in 2010–11. In order for which meets the deportation criteria is considered performance at the current level to be for deportation and, where appropriate, maintained, the Agency will need to ensure detention under immigration powers. that it communicates regularly with prison services regarding the potential release We receive around 500 referrals per month and dates of prisoners. We are nonetheless work closely with other agencies to ensure we concerned about the remaining 28 and ask deal with foreign national offenders who meet the Agency to take all practicable steps to the deportation criteria, including cases where the locate them. We consider that with proper offender will be released on sentencing directly liaison between the HM Prison Service and from court, those serving short sentences and the Border Agency the numbers of foreign remand prisoners. In 2010/11 we became aware of national prisoners released without being 28 individuals who were not referred to the UK considered for deportation will be reduced Border Agency for consideration for deportation to zero. (paragraph 7) prior to being released into the community. This was down from 64 cases in 2009/10.28
The Home Secretary has set out the steps that should be taken to reduce this number further. She has asked for progress to better identify foreign nationals early, promote earlier removals, 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness and share information. This includes: ensuring the police more routinely use finger scanning technology to identify and fix nationality at the point of arrest; working more closely with the National Offender Management Service to establish more foreign national only prisons to increase timeliness of removal and working with Criminal Justice System partners, in particular the Ministry of Justice, so that foreign national prisoners are not released from prison, or by the courts, without first referring them to the UK Border Agency to consider deportation.
229
28 Data on foreign national prisoners is taken from management information, which is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics.
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 230 Effectiveness Of the 28 individuals released in 2010/11 prior to consideration for deportation, three are not in contact with the Agency. Our Trace and Locate team are continuing to pursue these individual cases.
4. The UK Border Agency is considering Once a prison sentence has been served, or if an Partially accepted. whether to deport 1,300 foreign national offender has not been jailed, our powers only prisoners who were released in 2010–11. The allow us to detain for as long as there is a realistic fact that only 500 of these are detained is prospect of removal within a reasonable timescale. troubling, and the Agency needs to provide Our policy does however take into account the a full and detailed explanation for why they imperative to protect the public from foreign have released 800 foreign nationals who nationals who have offended in the UK and are have previously broken the law. It is liable to deportation. For this reason, proximity of unacceptable that in more than a quarter of removal, risk of reoffending, and risk of cases, the Agency is unable to explain why absconding are all taken into account at the point these foreign nationals have not yet been at which the detention decision is made and every removed. This is another example of poor 28 days thereafter. data management and inconsistent with the UK Border Agency’s stated commitment to A high proportion of FNOs are therefore detained transparency. The Agency must improve its under immigration powers after their release from systems for recording difficulties in prison, but our powers do not allow us to detain deporting former foreign national indefinitely. In 2010, for an average month, prisoners. (paragraph 9) approximately 105 FNOs were released from immigration detention on restrictions while deportation was considered. Approximately 90% of these were released on bail by the courts; the remaining 10% were released by the UK Border Agency, having assessed the risk of harm posed to the public and the prospects of removal in a 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness reasonable timescale.29
Despite the best efforts of the UK Border Agency, deportation of foreign national offenders can be delayed in many ways, such as the use of judicial challenges or by the individuals’ failure to comply with the re-documentation process. We are working on policy solutions to increase FNO removals, including tackling non compliant
29 Data on the release of foreign national prisoners is taken from management information, which is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics 231
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 232 Effectiveness individuals by making greater use of prosecution powers against FNOs who do not cooperate with the deportation process or breach bail conditions. We are also working hard to reach agreements with other Governments to open up routes of return of their nationals and to streamline documentation processes.
In our letter to the committee following Jonathan Sedgwick’s appearance in September we incorrectly recorded the barriers to removal in 350 cases as being ‘unknown’ for data quality reasons. UK Border Agency case owners were in fact aware of the immigration status of the 350 individuals who had served their sentence, but the barriers to deportation had been entered on our management information database (casework information database, CID) under the category of ‘other’ rather than specifying the barrier. We have now taken steps to rectify how case workers enter barriers on CID to ensure that our management information is up to date. Further work is ongoing to improve data quality through clear guidance and standards as well as improved monitoring of cases.30
30 This data quality information is management information, which is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics
5. We recommend that the Agency The implementation of the hubs and spokes prison Partially accepted. undertake an analysis of contact between model, and the UKBA / NOMS service level case owners and foreign national prisoners. agreement in 2009, have provided a clear and If certain methods are found to increase the effective framework for contact with Foreign likelihood of foreign national prisoners National Offenders (FNOs) and Agency embedded returning to their country of origin, they staff. The current system builds consistency and ought to be invested in as a priority. rapport and encourages compliance. (paragraph 11) The principle of the hub and spoke strategy is to promote interaction with foreign nationals from the start of their custodial sentence. UK Border Agency staff embedded in prisons are able to develop face to face relationships with FNOs at hub and spoke locations through presence at regular surgeries and respond to ad hoc requests and concerns. Our assessment of the hub and spoke strategy is that it has been very effective at driving up the early removal of FNOs. Removals under the Early Removal Scheme (ERS) have increased from 19% of CCD removals in 2008 to 43% last year. In 2010 76% of removals from hub prisons were during the ERS period.31
The current model frees case owners’ time to 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness progress cases and avoids the need for extensive travel to difficult FNO locations.
31 Data on removals under the Early Removals Scheme is taken from management information, which is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics. 233
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 234 Effectiveness 6. In his statement to Parliament in 2006, We have explained that the legacy programme Partially accepted. the then Home Secretary suggested that the reviewed 500,500 cases by the summer of 2011. Home Office would deal with the legacy The vast majority (479,000) were fully concluded. backlog in five years or less. They have A further 23,000 live cases had been caseworked concluded 455,000 cases, however we do to the furthest possible point at that time but not consider the 18,000 cases which have barriers to their conclusion remained received an initial decision but are awaiting removal as ‘dealt with’. No matter how We will continue to pursue the conclusion of all those at the UK Border Agency interpreted live cases and have already made good progress that pledge, it was not a pledge that all having concluded more than 7,700 of these cases cases would have a decision but rather that to date. These cases are the most complex and the all cases would be concluded. We timescales will be largely outside the control of recommend that the Agency establish a the Agency, in most cases because of the courts or challenging target date for the completion the difficulty of removing to certain countries. The of these removals in any case no later than Case Assurance and Audit Unit (CAAU) will 31 March 2012 and we expect Mr Whiteman progress them as soon as the remaining barriers to present us with a time table for specific to each case are overcome. We have also completion when he next gives evidence. conducted a detailed analysis of all the cases that (paragraph 17) could potentially fall into the remit of the CAAU and have, as a result of this, identified a number of cases which could fall to be dealt with by CAAU. As a result, an additional 1,300 cases have been added to the overall controlled archive figure which now totals 93,100 and 1,500 to the live cases to give a total of 17,000 cases.
7. We are also concerned by the transfer of The role of the Case Resolution Directorate (CRD) Not accepted. 18,000 outstanding files from the Case was to review and casework each legacy case as Resolution Directorate to the Case far as possible. It was always anticipated that Assurance and Audit Unit. This action risks there would be a number of cases not fully giving the impression that the UK Border resolved at the end of the legacy programme due Agency are using bureaucratic terms to hide to certain barriers. Establishing the CAAU is our the fact that they were unable to meet the commitment to the onward management of these July 2011 deadline. We recommend the cases. It was decided to base this unit in Liverpool Government investigate whether this and use experienced staff from the legacy transfer was simply a name change or programme to continue this work. whether the files were transferred to a different location to be worked on by different staff. We note that in general the claim that the backlog has been dealt with conflicts with the experience of MPs in terms of what they are told in response to enquiries about individual cases. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 235
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 236 Effectiveness 8. Whilst we appreciate the difficulties When the legacy backlog was publicised in July Partially accepted. involved in tracing people with whom the 2006, the then Home Secretary, John Reid, Agency have lost contact, usually for a announced the priorities set out in the IND review period of several years, it is clear that the for dealing with these cases: controlled archive has become a dumping ground for cases on which the Agency has “We will prioritise those who may pose a risk given up. The controlled archive has to the public, and then focus on those who increased significantly as the deadlines for can more easily be removed, those receiving the legacy backlog and the migration case support, and those who may be granted review have approached. From 18,000 files leave. All cases will be dealt with on their in November 2010, the archive now contains individual merits.” 124,000 files, roughly equivalent to the population of Cambridge. With the end of The legacy programme adhered to these priorities. the legacy backlog and review of the The priorities were such that the cases of outstanding migration cases, we see no applicants who had remained in contact with the reason why the size of the controlled Agency were resolved first; for example to receive archive should increase further. We support or to be categorised as more easily recommend that the Agency produce clear removable individuals needed to be in contact and specific guidance on the controlled with the Agency. It was expected that towards the archive which covers: end of the legacy programme we would see a higher proportion of cases being assigned to the • how often the files will be reassessed; controlled archive than in the early days of the programme. Where our records clearly indicated • how many staff will work on that we had not been in contact with the reassessing files in the controlled applicant for a number of years, or where archive; and, individuals had been identified as long term when, if ever, files will be closed • absconders, their cases did not fall within the without the applicant being located. priorities outlined and were therefore considered towards the end of the legacy programme. Many remained untraceable and were therefore assigned to the controlled archive. We have continued to conduct some dip sampling of the controlled archive against our internal and external databases and have seen some encouraging new results in terms of tracing individuals whom we have previously been unable to contact. New contact information received from Members of Parliament has also been extremely helpful in establishing contact with individuals.
We have always been open about our expectations that numbers in the controlled archive would increase. In her letter of 1 November 2010, Lin Homer confirmed that there were 18,000 cases in the controlled archive and she advised of an expected increase in the next reporting period as cases in the pipeline became six months old and were added to the conclusion statistics for cases in the controlled archive.
We actively manage those cases assigned to the controlled archive and I can confirm that the archive has reduced by approximately 5,000 cases. As you are aware there is an additional 26,000 migration cases in a separate archive and these will be subject to the same tracing processes as those in the asylum controlled archive.
We have refined the processes so that we are:
• Reassessing files a minimum of every 6 months. This will include bulk checking cases against our reporting data and our other databases to see whether applicants 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness have re-established contact with the UK Border Agency and bulk checking cases against e-borders data. Discussions have been held with Department for Work and Pensions, HM Revenue & Customs and other public sector and external bodies to undertake the checking of significant numbers of cases against their databases on a regular basis and we are also considering new approaches – for example, targeted tracing through social network sites and running selected cases through the fingerprint system of our Five Country Conference partners. 126 full time staff will be deployed to the • 237 CAAU which will conduct this work and pursue conclusion of the live cases.
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 238 Effectiveness • Where we are unable to locate individuals their cases will remain in the archive. Their cases will not be closed but will remain under review by CAAU and will be reactivated should we receive intelligence that will assist us in tracing them. However, as these cases become older our checks will be conducted on a less frequent basis. We will review our processes and the resources deployed to the continued management of these cases after 18 months. 9. We also object to the term ‘controlled It is recognised that cases in this archive are there Not accepted. archive’. It is another instance of a because we have been unsuccessful in our efforts bureaucratic term which hides the true to locate them and re-establish contact. However, nature of a government department’s we reiterate that we are actively reviewing these activity and is designed to deflect attention cases at regular intervals and CAAU will continue away from it. The controlled archive would to pursue these cases as outlined above. Where we be more appropriately referred to as an identify information that may lead to us tracing archive of lost applicants. an individual we will reactivate their case and pursue its conclusion. We do anticipate that we will reduce the resource deployed to this work over time as the return of new intelligence diminishes. We believe the archive is controlled and we will continue to look to trace all individuals with cases in the archive.
10. We have long been concerned by the Detainee custody officers conduct one of the most Accepted. conduct of staff towards detainees during difficult and sensitive parts of our business. They enforced removal and have previously are highly trained and operate in very difficult questioned contractors, the UK Border circumstances where they sometimes suffer serious Agency and ministers about the issue. We verbal and physical abuse from those being are particularly concerned by reports of the removed. The fact that they persuade so many to questionable behaviour of contracted staff leave compliantly without the use of restraint is taking place after the system was put under testament to that. Up until 30 September 2011 we scrutiny and stated to have been reformed removed 12,256 individuals from detention this following the death of Jimmy Mubenga. We year.32 3,575 of these were escorted and we used intend to take evidence from the Chief restraint in 375 cases.33 Inspector of Prisons regarding his recent reports on the treatment of detainees and Whatever the circumstances, we and our will produce a report on enforced removals contractors expect the highest standards from in the near future. However, it should be officers, which are set out in our operating expected that appropriate disciplinary standards and a code of conduct. They are highly action should be taken at all times against trained, and the vast majority are most those who behave in ways that clearly are professional in their care of detainees whatever not acceptable. Companies involved should their behaviour, a fact that has been be made aware that further incidents as acknowledged on numerous occasions by the described in previous paragraphs could lead Chief Inspector of Prisons and Independent to the loss of contracts with the UK Border Monitoring Boards. Agency. (Paragraph 29) If an officer falls below these standards, we take 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness action. This is against the individual but also his or her employer under the terms of our contracts. In relation to individuals this ranges from a requirement for re-training through to revocation of the certificate issued to work with detainees. In the case of their employer, it normally includes the application of service credits under the terms of their contract but could ultimately extend to termination of the service. This is clearly set out in the terms and conditions of our contracts.
32 Source of removals from detention: Table dt.06.q of Immigration Statistics July – September 2011, Home Office 33 Data on the use of escorts and restraint is taken from management information, which is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics. 239
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 4 Effectiveness Management information shows that as of 11 November, we received 30 complaints regarding the use of restraint this year.34 Investigations have been completed in 18 cases with 13 being found to be unsubstantiated and complaints in five cases being found to be partially substantiated. The investigations found that officers had used excessive force in 1 case, unapproved restraint techniques in 2 cases, made inappropriate remarks in 1 case and had failed to observe procedural requirements in 1 case. In some cases this has resulted in the revocation of accreditation certificates and suspension of officers, with ongoing disciplinary action taking place in others. 11. It is unacceptable that the UK Border We recognise the value of ‘tip offs’ and are Partially accepted. Agency is unable to give us more detailed making improvements to the end-to-end process information about the role that intelligence of handling such allegations. Responsibility for the plays in protecting the UK’s borders. The delivery of intelligence in the UK Border Agency Independent Chief Inspector’s report has been reviewed and a new Strategy and suggested that there was inconsistency in Intelligence Directorate, led by a new strategic the way that intelligence was collected and director, has been introduced. This will bring used and this is also unacceptable. We greater rigour, challenge and transparency to the recognise that the Agency is trying to Agency’s intelligence operations. improve the way it uses intelligence but we feel that in order for its staff and the public to appreciate the importance of individual allegations, the outcomes must be demonstrated. (paragraph 34)
34 Management information is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics.
10. We have long been concerned by the Detainee custody officers conduct one of the most Accepted. conduct of staff towards detainees during difficult and sensitive parts of our business. They enforced removal and have previously are highly trained and operate in very difficult questioned contractors, the UK Border circumstances where they sometimes suffer serious Agency and ministers about the issue. We verbal and physical abuse from those being are particularly concerned by reports of the removed. The fact that they persuade so many to questionable behaviour of contracted staff leave compliantly without the use of restraint is taking place after the system was put under testament to that. Up until 30 September 2011 we scrutiny and stated to have been reformed removed 12,256 individuals from detention this following the death of Jimmy Mubenga. We year.32 3,575 of these were escorted and we used intend to take evidence from the Chief restraint in 375 cases.33 Inspector of Prisons regarding his recent reports on the treatment of detainees and Whatever the circumstances, we and our will produce a report on enforced removals contractors expect the highest standards from in the near future. However, it should be officers, which are set out in our operating expected that appropriate disciplinary standards and a code of conduct. They are highly action should be taken at all times against trained, and the vast majority are most those who behave in ways that clearly are professional in their care of detainees whatever not acceptable. Companies involved should their behaviour, a fact that has been be made aware that further incidents as acknowledged on numerous occasions by the described in previous paragraphs could lead Chief Inspector of Prisons and Independent to the loss of contracts with the UK Border Monitoring Boards. Agency. (Paragraph 29) If an officer falls below these standards, we take 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness action. This is against the individual but also his or her employer under the terms of our contracts. In relation to individuals this ranges from a requirement for re-training through to revocation of the certificate issued to work with detainees. In the case of their employer, it normally includes the application of service credits under the terms of their contract but could ultimately extend to termination of the service. This is clearly set out in the terms and conditions of our contracts.
32 Source of removals from detention: Table dt.06.q of Immigration Statistics July – September 2011, Home Office 33 Data on the use of escorts and restraint is taken from management information, which is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics. 239
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 240 Effectiveness 14. The figures for successful appeals at We recognise that providing representation in Partially accepted. immigration tribunals are worrying. appeals is important and seek to do so whenever However we have been informed that the practicable. We have improved our representation success rate of the UK Border Agency will rates considerably since mid 2010 and the Agency improve following statutory changes is now routinely represented in over 80% of restricting new evidence being introduced appeals. The Agency also continues to maintain a at appeal. There is no doubt that the 100% representation rate in Upper Tribunal outcome of appeals would be improved if hearings.35 the Agency were to improve the quality of its representation. We expect the Agency to We are aiming to reduce the number of appeals in be represented at all appeal hearings so the system which will enable us to be represented that the case for refusal can be properly at a greater number of appeals. This will be made. (paragraph 38) achieved by embedding a ‘right first time approach’ and ensuring that all of our decisions have been thoroughly considered in accordance with guidance.
The Agency prioritises hearings of vulnerable applicants and those who may cause harm in the UK, but may take a pragmatic decision not to attend and rely instead on written submissions to the court in some instances. This will generally be where the case for refusal is strong; the appellant has signalled they will not be in attendance and can thus not be cross-examined; or in cases where the witnesses’ credibility is not in question. Where the Agency plans not to be represented at a hearing, it makes every effort to notify the Tribunal in advance, and to request that the adjudicator deals with the appeal on the basis of the contents of the letter of refusal and any other written submissions which the Agency makes when indicating it will not be represented. Non- attendance does not mean that the Agency is withdrawing its decision. Where a decision is taken to withdraw in an individual case, the Agency will notify the Tribunal in writing.
35 All statistics regarding appeals representation are management information, which is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics.
The Committee observed in its report that the Agency hoped statutory changes would lead to an increased success rate. In May this year s19 of the UK Borders Act 2007 was commenced, which limits the circumstances in which the post decision evidence can be taken into account by the Tribunal in Points Based System (PBS) appeals.
We are committed to providing high quality representation in as many cases as possible to allow us to give a robust defence of our decisions. We are working hard to improve the quality and professionalism of our presenting staff and are making real progress in this area. We have consulted directly with presenting staff and this has led to the introduction of several new measures, which have been led by our recently appointed Head of Profession for presenting staff, who is tasked with driving improvements.
We have published a set of Professional Standards for presenting staff, which formalises the behaviour and values we expect from those representing the Agency in court. A new Appeals 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness Training Team, with a wider scope of training courses, was launched in June 2011. These courses are tailored according to the needs of regional appeals staff and benefit from being delivered by qualified trainers alongside existing, experienced, Senior Presenting Officers. Consideration is currently being given to offering legal accreditation to appeals staff. Staff and the judiciary consider that this is a positive developmental initiative that will reinforce our desire to further professionalise the presenting role. 241
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 244 Effectiveness 15. The case of Mr Raed Salah highlighted a Exclusion decisions are an essential tool to prohibit Accepted. number of flaws in the UK’s border control. a person whose presence in the United Kingdom is Six opportunities for intervention were deemed not to be conducive to the public good, missed. These mistakes were then and who is outside the UK, from entering. We compounded by the lack of information fully recognise the importance of implementing provided to Mr Salah following his arrest, an exclusion decision and following the HMIC which mean that the Home Office will now recommendations, have identified a number of have to pay damages to a man who the areas where we can improve our procedures and Home Secretary believed should never have ways of working to reduce the opportunity for been able to enter the country in the first incidents such as this to occur and thereby ensure place. This is inexcusable and unacceptable. that border security is maintained at the very When the Home Secretary signs an exclusion highest level. order, it ought to be served. We urge the UK Border Agency to implement urgently the Our response to the HMIC recommendations and eight recommendations of the HMIC to subsequent changes in our procedures are as ensure that this never happens again. follows: (paragraph 41) • A single clear point of responsibility at a senior level to co-ordinate activity, overseas and at the border. • A heightened response nationally in the event of the arrival of an excluded person, including interception by UK Border Agency officers immediately upon disembarkation in the UK. • Technical changes to systems and a national refresh training programme on alert handling for all border officers. • Arrangements to ensure that the Agency is routinely able to respond to alerts overseas. • In addition an amendment to the Immigration Act 1971 to make it an offence for an excluded person knowingly travelling to the UK in contravention of the exclusion, is under consideration and the inclusion within the Police National Computer records of details of persons excluded is being taken forward with the police service.
16. We cannot understand why the UK We recognise that colleges provide a valuable Partially accepted. Border Agency is unable to tell us how service to students. For that benefit to be realised, many students had their leave curtailed or it is vital that the education providers are well were deported for breaking the terms of regulated and by doing this we ensure that their visa. We are surprised that the Agency institutions apply the necessary scrutiny to is unaware of the term ‘bogus college’ as it students’ attendance and progress. has been used by Ministers and this Committee. We are also shocked if the Students who have been reported to us for failing worst punishment a sponsor who misuses to attend their course or who have left their their licence faces is the revocation of their course of study, who have more than six months licence, although previous evidence seems leave left to remain, will have their leave to contradict this statement. We would ask curtailed. the Agency to confirm this is the case and clarify this point. On previous occasions we In our letter of 19 October we advised the have come across anecdotal evidence that Committee that 4,249 students had their leave the Agency is not always clear, fair and curtailed between April 2011 and the end of consistent in its dealing with colleges, and September 2011. We provided the following while we support efforts to deal with breakdown of students whose leave had been 36 wrongdoers and institutions that fall below curtailed in the last six months. the required standard, we are satisfied that most colleges provide an important Number of students educational service and contribute to their who had their leave local economy. It is therefore important curtailed 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness that the Agency understands the need to maintain a proper balance and is helpful to April 2011 680 genuine educational institutions. (paragraph 45) May 2011 512
June 2011 1072
July 2011 707
August 2011 964
September 2011 314
36 Please note that this data is taken from management information, which is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics. 245
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 246 Effectiveness Not all of those whose stay is curtailed will be referred for removal action: some may be able to extend their stay, for example, where a college closes and the migrant finds an alternative education provider to continue their studies; others may leave the UK voluntarily.
The current IT capability does not allow a break down of the figures above to show how many have been made the subject of removal proceedings. The information could only be obtained by undertaking a manual review of each individual case record. We are looking at how we might improve our IT systems to enable to us to develop both a greater understanding of migrant behaviour and to allow us to report in greater detail around removal activity.
We are of course aware of the term “bogus college”. However, not all colleges who have been taken off the Tier 4 register were necessarily bogus. Prior to being licensed under Tier 4 all sponsors have been visited at least twice, once by their accrediting body and once by the Agency. All licensed sponsors have been observed to be functioning providers of educational or training courses. Additionally, in order to be licensed, and to remain licensed, a sponsor must also demonstrate that they meet the standards and obligations we require.
Where a sponsor is found not to be meeting these standards we will review its licence. Within the Sponsorship Rules revocation of a sponsors licence is the strongest action that can be taken where they are found to be non-compliant. Revocation prevents institutions from bringing any further students to the UK and is likely to impact significantly on those whose business relies heavily on international students.
The fact that a sponsor has had its licence revoked does not mean that is has committed an immigration offence or broken the law. Where there is evidence of criminal activity we will work with the police and courts, as well as other regulatory bodies such as Trading Standards and HMRC, to secure prosecutions.
If convicted of immigration offences, or any other criminal activity, those involved, and any organisations they are employed by, will be prevented from holding a sponsor licence. 17. The involvement of an MP in a Whilst we do receive a larger number of enquiries Conclusion: no direct recommendation for constituent’s case often comes as a last from MPs than any other government Government action. resort, when other approaches have failed. department, we do not accept that this is entirely The high degree of correspondence between due to failures earlier in the process. Given the the UK Border Agency and MPs is evidence nature of the decisions that we make and their of failure earlier in the process. We intend potential significance to individuals, it is inevitable to examine this further the next time the that people will not always agree with, or accept Chief Executive of the Agency comes before them, and will seek their MP’s intervention. the Committee in December. In the meantime, we would welcome evidence from MPs and their staff about their 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness dealings with the Agency. (paragraph 46) 18. We recommend that it become UK Former acting Chief Executive of the UK Border Accepted. Border Agency policy that if an MP becomes Agency, Jonathan Sedgwick, has previously given involved in a case then the Agency an undertaking that where we are aware of an automatically copies the MP in on any MP’s recent involvement in a case we will provide correspondence to the applicant. This will them with an update when a decision is made that enable MPs to close cases once they have helps to conclude that case. This is already been resolved. This would be both happening in a number of cases and we will courteous and efficient and should be acted continue to roll this out across the Agency. upon at once. (paragraph 37) 247
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 248 Effectiveness 19. We welcome the introduction of MP We remain committed to improving the services Conclusion: no direct recommendation for account managers but they have to have we provide to MPs; this includes our dedicated Government action. authority within the Agency and be able to MPs’ Enquiry Line, regional MP Account Managers, obtain information quickly and accurately in MPs’ web pages and regular MPs’ events. At our order to provide an improved service to most recent MPs’ event, held on 8 November, we MPs. In order to aid our fellow received positive feedback on these services. MPs parliamentarians, we have attached the list and their staff have told us that the MPs’ Enquiry of the account managers of each region to Line is a useful alternative to writing as call this report. We will be asking MPs whether handlers are able to answer specific immigration the new system has provided the enquiries arising from individual cases and can improvements that are being claimed for it. also provide a written confirmation of the call that If the improvements we wish to see take a MP can pass to their constituent. MPs have also place, it could well be there would be a told us their MP Account Manager provides a reduction in the 66,000 letters from MPs and valuable contact within the Agency to help with peers in a single year. their more complex or urgent enquiries.
Since the introduction of the MP Account Managers and re-launching the MPs’ Enquiry Line, we have seen a significant reduction in written enquiries. In 2009 we received 66,320 written enquiries, in 2010 this was reduced to 57,651 and this year we expect to receive fewer than 50,000 written enquiries.37
37 Please note that this data is taken from management information, which is provisional, subject to change and does not form part of national statistics.
20. The UK Border Agency’s provision of We acknowledge that the Committee provides an Partially accepted. information to this committee falls short of important mechanism to ensure effective the standards that the House is entitled to Parliamentary scrutiny of the work of the UK expect and on which the Government itself Border Agency. As indicated by Chief Executive insists. The Agency has certainly not been Rob Whiteman when he appeared in front of the “as open and helpful as possible”, as civil Committee on 15 November, we will seek to fulfil service guidance requires. There is every risk requests for information whenever it is possible to that the Agency’s failure to provide us with do so. the information we require, in a format which is appropriate for our needs and within the time requested will undermine effective Parliamentary scrutiny of the Agency’s work. We hope that the standard of information provided by the Agency will improve in response to this Report. If it does not, then we will seek the information from the Home Secretary in person, in accordance with the principles set out in the Ministerial Code and related guidance on the provision of information to select committees. (paragraph 54) 21. Despite the scandals of both foreign We look forward to ongoing engagement with Conclusion: no direct recommendation for national prisoners and the legacy backlog the Committee. Government action. 249 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness happening in 2006, they have still not been completely resolved five years later. Immigration is an issue which affects the safety, the social cohesion and the economy of Britain as well as its standing on the world stage. For that reason we will continue to hold sessions with the UK Border Agency every four months or possibly even more frequently. (paragraph 55)
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 250 Effectiveness
Sixteenth Report, Policing large scale disorder: lessons from the disturbances of August 2011 (HC 1456-I), published 22 December 2011
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation
1. The death of Mark Duggan was a The Government welcomes and supports the work of Accepted. significant factor in the disorder that took the Independent Police Complaints Commission place in Tottenham. In the event of a fatal (IPCC), the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) shooting of a member of the public by a and National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) to police officer, it is essential that the force ensure that, in future, there is no confusion about concerned communicates swiftly with the the arrangements for communication with the victim’s family. There is no excuse for victim’s family following a fatal shooting. This confusion about whose role this should be: includes both the ongoing review of the NPIA family a family liaison officer should be liaison guidance and the IPCC’s and ACPO’s work to dispatched immediately by the force in review the media handling protocol and to ensure question. Until this has happened, no that the revised protocol is widely promulgated and substantive public comment should be understood. made, and the name of the deceased should not be released. Guidance on family liaison in the event of a death after police contact is provided in a National Policing Improvement Agency manual from 2008. The Agency should update this guidance to make it clear what information local police are responsible for communicating to the family and the community, and what should be left to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. The initial Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness communication should be followed by regular communication between the Independent Police Complaints Commission and the victim’s family. It is also essential that the Commission and the local police communicate accurately with the press and the public. There should be a protocol in place to ensure that staff at the Commission are clear about what information can be publicly confirmed, particularly in the very early stages of an investigation. (Paragraph 16) 25 1
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 252 Effectiveness 2. We note in passing our continuing The IPCC has a key role to play in ensuring the public Accepted. dissatisfaction that the Independent Police have confidence in our ability to hold the police Complaints Commission still does not have service to account in an independent and effective a permanent Chair, more than 18 months manner. The Home Secretary has announced today since Nick Hardwick’s move to become Her (16 February 2012) the appointment of Dame Anne Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons was Owers as the new permanent chair of the IPCC. Dame announced. We are concerned that this Anne has considerable experience of criminal justice lack of leadership is affecting the work of and a formidable public reputation for independence the Commission. We call on the and addressing sensitive and complex issues of public Government to fill this vacancy as a matter interest with integrity, incisiveness and authority. of urgency and to put in place arrangements to ensure that long gaps of this sort are avoided in relation to public appointments. (Paragraph 17) 3. Given that the disorder had a Crime statistics were broken down to local authority Accepted. significantly different character in level in the Home Office publication, An Overview of different areas of the country, we Recorded Crimes and Arrests resulting from Disorder recommend that all data produced by the Events in August 2011 (see table A5, p. 26 of the Government in relation to the disorder publication). Arrests data were broken down to the should ultimately be broken down to a lowest level possible from the police force data district level, and that an explanation be provided (which was at police force area level). The given if this is not possible. (Paragraph 19) most recent Home Office crime statistics published on 19 January 2012 Crime in England and Wales: Quarterly updated to September 2011 present the impact that the disorder had on the overall police recorded crime statistics and break this down to local authority level for the 15 local authorities that experienced the highest volume of disorder-related crimes. On 24 October 2011, the Ministry of Justice published detailed information on the local area in which defendants prosecuted or convicted of offences related to the public disorder resided. The Ministry of Justice is still investigating what additional detailed local area information can meaningfully be made available and will provide the Committee with a further response in due course.
4. There was a substantial element of The Government agrees. While cases continue to be Accepted. opportunistic criminality to the disorder dealt with by the courts, Ministry of Justice statistics that took place in August 2011, and of for the first tranche of prosecutions showed that 76% copycat behaviour. (Paragraph 20) of those who had appeared in court in connection with the riots had a previous caution or conviction. On average each rioter charged had committed 11 previous offences. Home Office statistics show that the most common crimes involved some form of acquisitive crime (burglary, attempted burglary, robbery, and theft and handling offences); these accounted for 50% of all recorded crimes. 5. Projects that have as one of their Neighbourhood Policing has transformed how Accepted. aims the improvement of relations communities experience and relate to policing. Every between the police and young people are neighbourhood in the country now has a permanent, to be encouraged. The age profile we visible and dedicated neighbourhood policing team discussed earlier suggests the need to working openly and in partnership with all members focus on young adults, as well as those of their community, including children and young below the age of 18. At a time when there people. Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) in is pressure to cut budgets, such projects particular have a vital role to play in identifying local need to produce quantitative and priorities, solving local problems and low-level crime qualitative data to demonstrate their and engaging with the community. Findings from a impact, to help funding bodies make recent survey with children aged 10-15 highlighted evidence-based choices about how to the positive impact that neighbourhood policing is 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness distribute resources. While such activities having on young people, with; • 83% having seen an and projects are to be commended, we officer or PCSO in or around their school; • almost nevertheless remain concerned at the half knowing the officer by name or sight; • over number of young people who continue to 75% being satisfied with the contact they have had complain about what they perceive as with the police. Such positive perceptions and police hostility towards them. (Paragraph relationships between local police and young people 23) can only help to improve the response to tackling local crime and anti-social behaviour. Decisions on how officers and resources are deployed in each force area are a matter for the relevant Chief Officer and their Police Authority, who will make decisions based on local priorities and needs. 253
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 254 Effectiveness 6. There is a need for an agreed The Home Office report, An Overview of Recorded Partially accepted. definition of a “gang” in this context. The Crimes and Arrests Resulting from Disorder Events in Home Secretary should clarify what the August 2011 set out the number and percentage of Home Office means by the term in the those arrested in the disorder who were considered context of the August disorder and the to be affiliated to a gang. The report explains that methodology used to establish whether a police forces, rather than the Home Office, were particular individual was “affiliated to a asked to make this assessment themselves. gang”. (Paragraph 24) Accordingly, there will have been some inconsistency between forces in how this was done as no standard definition of street gang membership was used between forces at that time. We have, however, defined street gangs in the Ending Gang and Youth Violence Report published on 1 November 2011, which adopts the definition set out by the Centre for Social Justice’s 2009 Report, Dying to Belong: “A relatively durable, predominantly street-based group of young people who:- 1. See themselves (and are seen by others) as a discernable group; 2. Engage in criminal activity and violence; 3. Lay claim over territory (this is not necessarily geographical territory but can include an illegal economy territory); 4. Have some form of identifying structural feature; and 5. Are in conflict with other, similar gangs.”
7. We were pleased to see evidence of The Home Office is aware of the strong partnership Accepted. local initiatives to tackle gang culture, approach in Waltham Forest, which was used as a such as the programme that is currently case study in the Ending Gang and Youth Violence being run by Waltham Forest Council. The report. There are many other good practice examples Home Office should continue its role in of work to tackle the gang culture in other areas keeping track of the progress and success across the country. of such initiatives and ensuring that Through the new Ending Gang and Youth Violence examples of good practice are Team, we will be gathering further examples of good disseminated to other local public sector practice and sharing these through a new Knowledge bodies and agencies. We encourage other Hub, currently under development. This is an online councils to study the anti-gang work that resource, which uses social networking models to is being carried out by Waltham Forest. create connections between practitioners and (Paragraph 28) experts. It will enable local practitioners to share practical experience and examples of innovative approaches, and to ask questions of a network of peers and experts from a range of fields. 8. We cannot recommend any The Government will always ensure that police have Partially accepted. increase in police powers as a result of the the tools and powers they need to maintain order on August disturbances without seeing our streets. Water cannon are not currently approved specific evidence of a need for such for use on mainland UK, and the Home Secretary has powers and none came our way during this not received any request for them to be approved. inquiry. It is our view that in the situation However, she would consider very carefully the views then prevailing, it would have been of Chief Officers, Police Authorities and, from 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness inappropriate as well as dangerous, to November 2012, Police and Crime Commissioners, have employed water cannon and baton bearing in mind that the water cannon situated in rounds. We agree with our witnesses, Northern Ireland can be made available at 24 hours’ including senior police officers, that such notice if needed. On 13 October the Home Office use could have escalated and inflamed the launched a consultation on police powers relating to situation further. The lessons learned in face coverings, curfews, and the relevance of the the past in Northern Ireland over such word ‘insulting’ in section 5 of the Public Order Act equipment should not be lost on policing 1986. This consultation closed on 13 January, and the in the mainland when rioting occurs. Water responses are under consideration. cannon in particular are an indiscriminate weapon and could have affected innocent bystanders, as well as rioters. (Paragraph 32) 255
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 256 Effectiveness 9. The number of officers who should Policing public order incidents depends not only on Partially accepted. be level 2 public order trained should be numbers of public order-trained officers but, also, as specified in the Strategic Policing HMIC noted, on the appropriate speedy deployment Requirement. (Paragraph 38) of all front-line officers, effective collaboration between the ‘blue-light’ services, and the successful co-ordination of mutual aid between forces. The statutory Strategic Policing Requirement will set out the national expectations of capacity, capability and interoperability to which Police and Crime Commissioners will be required to have regard from November 2012. It will be their responsibility to ensure that their forces have the capacity to contribute to national policing requirements, and to hold their Chief Constable to account for delivering their policing functions in a way that has due regard to the SPR, including the ability to respond to public disorder. 10. In fast-moving situations involving In asking HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary to Under consideration. public disorder, devolved command is undertake a review that would ‘support clearer vital: local commanders should have the guidance to forces on the size of deployments…pre- discretion, and the necessary training, to emptive action, public order tactics, the number of make their own assessment of the officers (including commanders) trained in public situation and of what tactics to deploy, order policing and an appropriate arrests policy’, the rather than rely on the guidance manual. Home Secretary was seeking to ensure that the public We are not convinced that the public order order policing response is as effective as it can be. training for commanders, and for The HMIC report has proposed a significant review of individual officers, is adequate at present. the structure of public order policing, and, further to Nor does it encourage flexibility and its recent assessment of public order training, spontaneity. We urge the Government to highlighted aspects that need to be revisited in the take our concerns into account when light of the riots. We will consider the HASC’s considering its response to the recommendation carefully alongside those of the recommendations on public order training HMIC review and of those forces who have made in the review by Her Majesty’s undertaken their own reviews. Inspectorate of Constabulary. (Paragraph 40)
11. What ultimately worked in quelling Chief Officers in some areas have said themselves Accepted. the disorder was increasing the number of that, when faced with an unprecedented situation, police officers on duty and flooding the the immediate police response was not enough. streets with police. If numbers could have What matters is not the total number of police been increased more rapidly, it is possible officers employed, but the total number deployed, that some of the disturbances could have and how effectively they are deployed. It is important been avoided. We regret that this did not that the police response to public order situations be happen and, with the benefit of hindsight, swift and targeted right from the start, so that they we regard the operation to police the do not escalate, the public are protected and disorder in many towns and cities, and reassurance to communities can be given. HMIC have particularly in London, as flawed. In made recommendations on mobilisation of forces for future, in the event of similar disorder, the the police service to consider. focus should be on increasing the number of officers on the streets as quickly as possible, both by deploying the maximum number of officers from within the force in question, and by calling on the resources of neighbouring forces and, if necessary, forces from across the country. Ultimately, the effectiveness of the tactics the police have at their disposal to address large- scale disorder depends on there being sufficient police officers available to put Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness these tactics into effect. Without the necessary numbers, the tactics cannot be deployed. During the summer 2011 incidents, flooding the streets with police appears to have been vital. A strong police presence should also have a deterrent effect on those opportunists considering joining in the disorder. The single most important reason why the disorder spread was the perception, relayed by television as well as new social media, that in some areas the police had lost control of the streets. (Paragraph 47) 257
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 258 Effectiveness 12. The current mutual aid system is Mutual aid was key to enabling forces in the areas Under consideration. intended to deal with increased demand worst affected by the riots to respond effectively. The for police officers in one or a few areas. Police National Information and Co-ordination Centre Different arrangements are required for re- (PNICC) was responsible for the deployment of 89 of deploying officers where there is the 390 Police Support Units deployed at the height widespread disorder. The Government of the riots. HMIC have highlighted some of the must also make it clear which body would barriers to PNICC’s capacity to take on a more be responsible for co-ordinating mutual proactive role in organising mutual aid. The aid if the Association of Chief Police Government will consider carefully the future of Officers were to cease to exist under PNICC in light of ACPO reforms and our intention to structural changes to the landscape of establish a Police Professional Body, as well as HMIC’s policing. It is also very important to recommendation for a public order ‘all source’ hub appreciate just how much depends on and national mobilisation capability. We will take the mutual confidence and co-operation and HASC’s recommendations into consideration not just top-down administrative alongside this. The SPR, to which PCCs will have to arrangements. Any new arrangements have regard, will set out national expectations of which merely clarify who is responsible capacity, capability and interoperability. and fail to nurture joint working and co- operation will be extremely fragile and possibly doomed to failure. (Paragraph 53) 13. All police forces should have a There were many examples of Community Safety Partially accepted. communication strategy in place so that if Partnerships and Business Crime Reduction it is decided that there is a credible threat Partnerships acting with forces to protect businesses of severe public disorder, all businesses in and business areas, benefiting from effective local the affected area are given early and communication arrangements. The Home Office will consistent advice about what action they support the sharing of effective practice in this should take. The strategy should be drawn regard through a user-friendly database on its up in conjunction with business as a website. partnership document, making use of arrangements within the local business community where these can be depended on. (Paragraph 55)
14. The Government should urgently Upfront assurance will be provided for 85% of the Accepted. clarify whether police authorities will be final operational costs incurred by police authorities able to recover the total cost of policing for policing the August disturbances. Later in the the riots, as initially suggested by the year, the Government will consider support beyond Prime Minister. The August disturbances 85% and we will work with police authorities were an exceptional series of events and, individually on this point. On Riot (Damages) Act at a time when police authorities are being costs, the Government has agreed to reimburse police asked to make significant savings quickly, authorities for the costs related to riot (damages) they might reasonably request assistance claims. in meeting the cost of the policing operation. (Paragraph 61) Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 259
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 260 Effectiveness 15. The Riot (Damages) Act 1886 is The Government is doing all it can to support those Under consideration. something of an anomaly. There are few people whose homes and businesses were damaged types of damage or loss which are the last August. Immediately following the disturbances, subject of financial compensation by the the Government made it much easier for victims to state. In order to defray some of the costs make compensation claims under the Riot (Damages) to the state of paying out under the Act, Act: • The time for victims to make their claims was we recommend that the victims surcharge, permanently increased from 14 to 42 days; • The which is currently payable at a flat rate of antiquated prescribed claims form was replaced with £15, be reviewed to consider whether in a simpler form for victims to use; • A national claims future it should be increased for public handling bureau was set up for victims with no order incidents where the Riot (Damages) insurance to make claims under the Act. The Act 1886 could be invoked, and in other Government does not make compensation payments cases where compensation is triggered. We directly to individuals or businesses - this is the further recommend that the deadline for responsibility of insurers and police authorities. The making a claim under the Act be Home Office is doing all it can to offer support to permanently extended to 42 days. In the both. The Policing Minister has met with affected light of the concerns expressed by Darra police authorities and representatives of the Singh, the Chair of the Riots Communities insurance industry on several occasions to urge them and Victims panel, we urge the to speed up their compensation payments to victims. Government to speed up the process of To date, insurers have settled 80% of claims made by reimbursing people under the Act. householders and have fully paid out, or made (Paragraph 66) interim payments, to almost three-quarters of businesses affected by the riots. Over half of all valid uninsured claims have now been settled by police authorities. The Home Office is currently undertaking a review of the Riot (Damages) Act 1886, and will consider all options for reform, including all alternatives to the current mechanism for compensation under the Riot (Damages) Act. The review will draw on lessons from the August disturbances, including consultation with people affected by the disturbances who made claims under the Act and organisations involved in the recovery. We expect the review to be completed before the end of this financial year. In the recently published consultation document, Getting it Right for Victims and Witnesses, the Government sets out its proposals to increase the value of the Victim Surcharge ordered with fines, and extend the Surcharge to conditional discharges and community and custodial sentences... [For rest of reply, please see Government response].
16. Some of those who took part in the The Government is committed to a free and open Accepted. disturbances undoubtedly did use social internet. It is clear from the use forces made of social media to communicate with each other. media to engage with their communities during the However, other, older forms of riots that they are a valuable resource, and the communication and more traditional Government has no intention of switching them off. media also played a part in spreading the They were also used by communities to organise disorder. People who made an active clean up operations in the aftermath of the riots. decision to join in the disorder could Although social media were used by some to organise equally well have learned about it on the disorder and criminality, it has been widely television as on social media. (Paragraph acknowledged in many of the reports on the riots 73) that a number of the forces used social media extensively to engage with their communities and provide reassurance. The Metropolitan Police’s number of Twitter followers rose from 4,500 before the riots to 42,000 afterwards, a figure which seems to have been sustained. As early as 9 August, Operation Withern’s gallery of images for identification had received 4 million hits. ACPO is taking the lead on making sure that expertise on using social media as a positive tool for communication is mainstreamed across police forces. The Home Secretary has held a constructive meeting with the main internet service providers to look at what it would be right to do in order to prevent 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness criminality and work is underway to take forward the actions agreed. 261
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 262 Effectiveness 17. We commend the police forces that Please see response to 16. Accepted. used social media during the August disturbances to spread messages to inform and reassure the public. We recommend that all forces make use of these media, both at times when unusual incidents are taking place and on an everyday basis. They are a cost and time effective way of improving the connection between the police and some sections of the public. By no means everyone uses such media, so there will still be a need to communicate by more traditional means, but forces should actively encourage people to sign up to their Twitter and Facebook accounts to receive the latest information. (Paragraph 77) 18. It would be actively unhelpful to Please see response to 16. Accepted. switch off social media during times of widespread and serious disorder and we strongly recommend that this does not happen. (Paragraph 78)
19. The disturbances in August were an The Government has always acknowledged the Accepted. exceptional series of events, and although bravery of individual police officers who put their disparate nature makes it hard to themselves in harm’s way to protect their draw many overarching conclusions, there communities. Police leaders worked tirelessly in are clearly some lessons to be learned leading their officers through a difficult time, and from the way in which the operation was they deserve much credit for that. This effort was policed. Individual police officers acted complemented by the swift response of the criminal with great bravery during the disorder. We justice system. We are clear that the determination also share the view of the then acting and ability to bring offenders before the courts Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, quickly and deal with them robustly has had a Tim Godwin, that it was a strength of the salutary effect on many individuals who thought police operation that it filled prison places, there would be no penalty for their unlawful rather than hospital beds, although clearly behaviour. This approach is also challenging the both of these are a sign of failure to perception that rioters were allowed to get away prevent the situation from arising in the with looting and criminal damage. The Home first place. Overall the police service needs Secretary commissioned HMIC to undertake a to improve the way in which it addresses comprehensive review to capture, analyse and public order situations. One of the key consolidate the lessons emerging from the riots. Their factors that underpinned the rioting was recommendations will be progressed with the police that people saw others apparently getting service. away with looting and other forms of criminality. Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness 263
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 264 Effectiveness 20. We reiterate that what ultimately The Government has welcomed the research Accepted. worked in quelling the disorder was conducted by a variety of organisations into the riots. increasing the number of police officers on The research has been wide-ranging and has the street. Mutual aid arrangements need provided findings and recommendations that will to be reviewed to assess whether it would inform policy and practice both locally and nationally. be possible to increase numbers more The Home Office is working with social media rapidly and to determine how best to deal companies and law enforcement to discuss the with a situation in which different forces lessons learned and technology challenges posed by in different areas of the country require the recent disorder and determine how we can work additional assistance at the same time. The better together in the future. As we outlined in use of social media, both as a source of response to recommendation 12, mutual aid was key intelligence and as a way to reassure and to enabling forces in the areas worst affected by the inform the public, is also an emerging area riots to respond effectively. The Government will of public order policing that requires consider carefully the future of PNICC in light of urgent attention. There were examples of ACPO reforms and our intention to establish a Police good practice during the August disorder Professional Body, as well as HMIC’s recommendation that should be built upon in the future. for a public order ‘all source’ hub and national There will no doubt be other lessons to be mobilisation capability. An effective multi-agency learned from the other national and local response is critical to preparing communities for any reviews into the disorder and we await future civil emergencies. The Department for their publication with interest. (Paragraph Communities and Local Government’s Resilience 80) Advisers, who provide the link between the local and national level in a wide range of civil emergencies, have been working with partners to ensure lessons learned from the disorder contribute to partnership working in the future.
21. In the aftermath of the riots and We welcome the range of work undertaken to Partially accepted. looting in London and in a number of understand what happened and why. It is important other cities, there was a search for that we understand why the riots happened, and that immediate explanations and causes. We, we do all in our power to make sure they never with the encouragement of the happen again. The Home Office analytical Government, agreed to undertake an publication, An Overview of Recorded Crimes and inquiry. We hope that this report provides Arrests Resulting from Disorder Events in August a useful insight into the events themselves 2011 provides strong evidence that the extent and but if anybody hoped that we would find nature of crimes committed varied across different specific causes, they will be disappointed. days and different areas. It was a series of events, and It has been clear from the start that the not just one riot. What we do know, however, is that death of Mark Duggan acted as a trigger. It criminality was a key factor; and there is no excuse is also clear that there was a great deal of for criminal behaviour. While cases continue to be “copycat” activity. But the clarity ends dealt with by the courts, Ministry of Justice statistics there. (Paragraph 81) for the first tranche of prosecutions showed that 76% of those who had appeared in court in connection with the riots had a previous caution or conviction. Although gangs members made up a significant minority of the rioters, they caused a disproportionate amount of harm. The statistics show that one in five of those arrested by early September in connection with the riots in London were known gang members. Similar figures were recorded by West Yorkshire police, and Nottinghamshire had only 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness a slightly lower proportion. Most other police forces identified fewer than 10% of all those arrested as known gang members. Some police forces have given examples of gang members being involved in the handful of more serious, life-threatening incidents that took place during the disturbances, for example a firearms incident in the West Midlands. It is true to say that the August riots shocked the nation – yet for many it was a call to action to defend and restore their communities. Town halls and individuals across the country organised well-attended clean-ups, and the police have seen an increase in volunteers and in followers on social media. Alongside this, the Government has initiated research into the disorder and, along with the police, will continue to learn the 265 lessons from the August 2011 riots to ensure our communities see no repeat of these dreadful events.
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 266 Effectiveness 22. Even in Tottenham, it is not clear Please see response to 21. Partially accepted. that the circumstances surrounding the death of Mark Duggan were the only influences at play. In other locations, the link to the original trigger is even more tenuous and provides no explanation for what went on. (Paragraph 82) 23. There have been several other Please see response to 21. Partially accepted. inquiries and reports. Some of them have looked at specific aspects of behaviour, interviewed specific group of people, or concentrated on police responses, training or logistical requirements. Each has provided insights, but none of them gives a full picture and despite the considerable amount of work and evidence-gathering that we have undertaken, we too have to admit that no clear causes and explanations have emerged. There may be an element of disengagement on the part of some of those involved in the disorder, but unlike some events in the past, including the riots in the 1980s, there does not seem to be any clear narrative, nor a clear element of protest or clear political objectives. (Paragraph 83)
24. There may have been some Please see response to 21. Partially accepted. elements of organisation in some locations. There may also have been some engagement by gangs, but in general this seems to have been opportunistic rather than organised and, on this occasion, appears not to have been a significant cause of the rioting and looting. Many people seem to have been drawn into criminal activity almost on the basis of joining in a big party and without any sense of the seriousness of the acts they were undertaking. In Feltham Young Offenders Institution, we met rioters who had been in work and had a secure future in front of them. Some of the rioters were well off and many were young adults rather than teenagers, whose sense of risk is often less than that of adults. In a number of locations, the police were certainly taken by surprise and were often policing the situation based on wrong assumptions about what they were Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness dealing with. But none of this leads to a clear picture, nor an explanation of causes and underlying influences. We believe we have made a useful contribution, even though we have not been able to reach complete conclusions. Some further information may emerge in the coming months, perhaps arising out of inquests and the investigations of the Independent Police Complaints Commission. We await the Government’s response to our report with interest and will then decide what further action to take. (Paragraph 84)
267
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 268 Effectiveness
Seventeenth Report, UK border controls (HC 1647), published 20 January 2012
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. We are very concerned that the We agree with this recommendation. We will set out UKBA are clarifying the HOWI guidelines. Home Office Warnings Index Guidance a new operating mandate for the Border Force. We 2007 might be being used inappropriately will amend Border Force governance and tasking at local level as a management tool structures to make it clear that their role is to deploy instead of an emergency provision. We against this mandate. We will define clearly the recommend the Agency conduct a full procedures for suspending mandatory checks. In review of its use of the Guidance since its particular, the mandate will set out in some detail introduction, clarify to all ports the limits what constitutes a "health and safety" emergency of authority which they have to that can lead to a suspension, the public authorities implement it and ensure that robust entitled to certify that such a threshold has been reporting and monitoring mechanisms are met, and the levels of authorisation within Border in place for its continued use. (Paragraph Force and the records that must be consistently kept 12) around such suspensions. 2. It would appear that senior We agree with these recommendations. We will be The Border Security Board are monitoring the officials had been made aware of the setting out in the operating mandate the record work of the UK Border Force. suspension of Secure ID and that there keeping standards to be maintained at all ports, and was potential for the pilot to become in particular how to record any unplanned routine activity yet both situations carried suspension of checking or technical failures. As part on unchecked. Officials ought to be in of this we will be setting out a new suite of key constant communication and the indicators that provide information about missed effectiveness of the departments of the checks; checks not followed up; and derogations, as UK Border Agency ought to be the well as finds and detections. These will replace the responsibility of all senior staff, not just measures previously reported upon to the UK Border the department heads. (Paragraph 21) Agency board and to the Home Office.
3. The chain of communication from The new Border Security Board will agree a The Home Office would welcome a review of Ministers, to senior management, to front- programme of internal audit work for Border Force, UKBA internal communication methods and line staff of the UK Border Agency is a including a new system for auditing front-line intends to set out border force duties in the new long and convoluted one, and it seems to compliance and will receive all reports from the operational mandate. have become seriously fragmented. We Independent Chief Inspector. John Vine recognised recommend that the Chief Inspector of the in his report in February on Border Security Checks UKBA carry out a thematic review of the (pages 75-76) the improvements that have been Agency’s internal communications and made to the internal communications processes in report to Ministers as a matter of urgency. Border Force since November. These need to (Paragraph 23) continue and be maintained. We would welcome any further inspection on internal communications should the Independent Chief Inspector decide to pursue recommendation 3. The operating mandate will also: = detail the minimum level of checks which are mandatory on passengers travelling to the UK. It will set out which mandatory checks apply to which groups of passengers. At its heart the policy will specify a core security and crime check (the Warnings Index Check). It will also cover opening of chips on passports; the use of interviews for visa holders and the use of fingerprint checking (Secure ID). = detail which derogations from this mandatory level of checks are permitted because of known 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness limitations on technology and the physical layout of ports. The Home Office - through its international work, policy development and technology programmes - will aim to reduce the number of these derogations over time in order to improve border security. = set out in that light mandatory arrangements for checks at juxtaposed controls; on international rail services; on maritime services; on direct scheduled air routes and on general aviation and general maritime traffic. = set out explicitly that border officers - acting with their own expertise and in compliance with equalities and immigration law - have the discretion to subject passengers to additional checks, but not to 269 waive mandatory checks.
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 270 Effectiveness 4. We recommend that systems of As the Home Secretary announced on 20 February, Accountability has been improved by removing the accountability, responsibility and Border Force has been constituted as a separate Border Force from UKBA and putting it under the communications be clarified and that the operational command within the Home Office to purview of Ministers but no reference is made to use of words such as “Agency” in the title ensure a clearer line to Ministers on its mandate, the UKBA’s accountability or title. of an organisation be only used in future increased management focus on border security and when that organisation is institutionally compliance as well as transparency. This will also separate from the Department. allow the UK Border Agency to focus, for example, (Paragraph 24) on removals of illegal migrants or those we wish to send home, such as Foreign National Offenders or failed asylum seekers. In making these changes, the aim is to provide much stronger management of the border with clearer accountability to ministers, while avoiding unnecessary disruption for front line staff. 5. We recommend that the Home Publishing the underlying evidence would mean that The Home Office has refused to publish the Secretary deposit copies of all the sensitive operational information would become documents. documents that have been made available public and could assist those who seek to evade our to the three internal investigations in the border controls. The Independent Chief Inspector Library of this House. This will allow this had full access to all documents in the course of his Committee to reach an informed investigation and his report has been published in conclusion of our own and would be full apart from two small redactions on national consistent with the Government’s security grounds. The management investigations commitment to transparency and carried out by David Wood and Mike Anderson were accountability. (Paragraph 27) internal management reports and will not be published.
6. The UK Border Agency, in common We welcome the Home Affairs Select Committee’s Staff can increase checks on their own initiative with the rest of the public sector, must agreement that the concept of risk-based controls but not reduce them. learn to deliver its services with fewer was promising, as long as they are authorised and resources. Making “smarter” use of its based on a proper risk assessment. The risk based own staff, giving officers on the ground pilot has been stopped. The Chief Inspector’s report the freedom to make their own demonstrated that the record-keeping and judgements, is part of this and the risk- management oversight were not good enough. based pilot could be a promising Instructions to staff did not reflect accurately what framework for a new approach. Ministers ministers had approved. Reports sent to ministers must ensure that this episode does not were inaccurate, unbalanced and excluded key discourage staff from using their own information. The report also made clear that due to initiative consistent with the the unauthorised suspension of checks, it is Government’s policies and Ministers are impossible to know what effect the pilot had. As a informed within a reasonable period of result, while we can remain open-minded about the time. (Paragraph 30) principle of intelligence-led and risk-based checks, we cannot know whether the pilot was a success or 7. The risk-based pilot must not be not. The Government agrees that risk-based controls scrapped because of this controversy. We There are many hard-working and dedicated are valuable but cannot measure the success of the recommend that the findings and analysis members of staff in Border Force. They want to get pilot and so will not reintroduce it. of the pilot be published in full, with a on with their work securing our border. We want to clear commitment to further action if the give them the discretion to use their expertise. This is initial findings suggest that it indeed has why the operating mandate will set out explicitly been a success. (Paragraph 31) that border officers - acting with their own expertise and in compliance with equalities and immigration 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness law - have the discretion to subject passengers to additional checks, but not to waive mandatory checks.
271
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 272 Effectiveness
Eighteenth Report, Rules governing enforced removals from the UK (HC 563), published 26 January 2012
Committee recommendation Government response Implementation 1. Those who have no right to remain It has been the practice of successive Governments to No planned changes to current procedures in the UK must leave the country and, if use private security companies to undertake escorting they refuse to do so voluntarily, they may of immigration detainees where they refuse to leave have to be detained for a short time, if the UK compliantly or where they are being removed necessary escorted throughout the flight on a chartered flight. These services are currently and, in extreme situations, may have to be provided by Reliance Secure Task Management, who restrained physically in order to prevent assumed the contract in May 2011. The UK Border greater harm. However, whenever the Agency takes the welfare of those in its care very state uses force to coerce a person, there seriously and has a team of eight staff who monitor need to be checks on that force. These and report on Reliance's performance and the checks take the form of carefully conduct of individual members of staff. However, constructed procedures to limit harm, of given the volumes we cannot monitor every removal. adequate training and proper supervision All vehicles are therefore fitted with audio and of staff, and adequate means of complaint digital recording facilities, and the Secretary of State and redress if anything goes wrong. Where appoints Independent Monitoring Boards (IMBs) who the state has contracted out responsibility regularly report to the team leader. The Chief for coercion, it retains ultimate Inspector of Prisons also carries out announced and responsibility for ensuring that all the unannounced inspections. Whilst the UK Border checks are in place and working well. It is Agency leads on addressing concerns and important that this is understood within recommendations, reports from IMBs and the Chief the culture of both the Agency and that of Inspector of Prisons are also considered by Home its contractors, and not just acknowledged Office Ministers, the Permanent Secretary and senior in formal documents. This is one of a managers. The performance of the UK Border Agency number of areas of activity where there is overseen by the Permanent Secretary through the appears to be a reluctance by officials to Home Office Executive Management Board and accept constructive criticism, and as the UK regular Operating Reviews. The Home Secretary also Border Agency is not an independent body, monitors the overall performance of the Agency but is in fact an integral part of the Home through the Home Office’s Supervisory Board. Office, this is a matter that we call on the The UK Border Agency operates a comprehensive Home Secretary to require the Permanent complaints system as part of its monitoring Secretary to address as part of the central arrangements. All detainees are told how to
management responsibilities of the complain on arrival at a removal centre and upon Department. (Paragraph 11) escort, and forms are widely available in a range of different languages. Complaints about the use of force are referred to the UK Border Agency’s Professional Standards Unit for investigation and are also referred automatically to the police for their own parallel investigation. The Professional Standards Unit uses a team of dedicated investigators, who are all professionally trained to police standards. Where an allegation is made about the conduct of an individual officer, the UK Border Agency contract monitor considers the content of the complaint and the totality of the evidence available to reach a decision whether it is appropriate to suspend his or her certification pending an investigation. Reliance will also commission its own internal investigation. In the event of an investigation being substantiated by the UK Border Agency, disciplinary action follows. This could amount to informal advice, re-training, formal warnings or in the most serious cases the revocation of an individual’s certification to work for the Agency. The individual may also face criminal charges if the police decide that an offence has been 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness committed. Where detainees are not satisfied with the outcome of their complaints, they may refer the matter to the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman and are told at the time how to do so. The Ombudsman sends copies of all his reports to the UK Border Agency Director with responsibility for detention and escorting. 273
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 274 Effectiveness 2. We are not persuaded that head- In order to exercise their powers, detainee custody NOMS National Tactical Response Group are down restraint positions are never used, officers must be certified by the Home Secretary, a conducting a thorough review of restraint even though they are not authorised. We condition of which is that they have undergone techniques to see if safety can be improved. All recommend that the Home Office issue training of restraint techniques approved by the custody officers receive training on the dangers of urgent guidance to all staff involved in National Offender Management Service (NOMS). The enforced removals about the danger of techniques and procedures are contained in NOMS' head-down restraint techniques. Any officer seated restraint techniques in which the Control and Restraint manual and trainers are caught using them is subject to serious disciplinary subject is bent forwards. We also themselves certificated by NOMS. Officers are well action. recommend that the Home Office aware that the use of any technique which pushes commission research into control and the head down and therefore could impede restraint techniques which are suitable for breathing is prohibited and any officer caught doing use on an aircraft. The use by contractors so would face severe disciplinary action, including of unauthorised restraint techniques, dismissal. sanctioning their use, or failing to In 2011 the UK Border Agency formally requested challenge their use, should be grounds for that NOMS' National Tactical Response Group dismissal. (Paragraph 18) conduct a review of the current restraint techniques being used by escorts including those used during overseas removals given the unique environment. NOMS advised in the first instance that the techniques used by escorts are not unsafe. However, any use of restraint carries an element of risk and NOMS are currently examining the techniques to see if they can be adapted to make them even safer. Officials will carefully consider any recommendations arising from that review. 3. The use of excessive numbers of The Committee’s comments follow a The Committee’s recommendations regarding escorts, to the extent that HM Chief recommendation of the Chief Inspector of Prisons in a contracting have not been accepted. Inspector of Prisons believes that escort report of an inspection of a chartered flight to numbers are in some cases detrimental to Jamaica in 2011. Inspectors commented that the ratio the removals process, is hard to justify of officers to detainees on that flight appeared high against a background of reduced staffing and recommended that “the number of escorting levels across the public sector. It is a staff on a flight should not exceed that required by symptom of a weakness in the contracting the normal risk assessment procedure”. The UK process that the contractor is able to Border Agency accepted the recommendation in supply more staff than are required to do principle. The UK Border Agency operates a working the job, with costs passed on to the Home ratio of two escorts per detainee for chartered Office. When the contract for enforced flights; this ratio is in line with our EU counterparts removals is next revised, it should specify who also operate similar flights. However, it is not
precise ratios of escorts to detainees and fixed and can be either increased or decreased the contractor should be able to depart depending on the specific circumstances of each from these only for clearly-defined, flight. Reliance carries out a risk assessment of every operational reasons. (Paragraph 21) enforced removal and allocates an appropriate number of escorts to each flight which is based on a combination of factors including the lay-out of the aircraft, the anticipated conduct of each detainee based on an individual assessment, any specific intelligence about attempts to disrupt the operation, and the duration of the flight given the requirement for escorts to be provided with rest periods to ensure they remain alert at all times, particularly to long haul destinations like Jamaica. The UK Border Agency further reviews every risk assessment to assess whether the number of escorts allocated is proportionate and can adjust the number where appropriate in consultation with Reliance. The UK Border Agency considered the findings of the Inspectorate report carefully with regards to the light to Jamaica in 2011 but was satisfied that the number of escorts was proportionate. The contractual requirements for escorting services are output-based and cannot be overly prescriptive without compromising the flexibility required by the 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness service provider to carry out the required tasks effectively, based on their knowledge and expertise. 275
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 276 Effectiveness 4. We agree with HM Chief Inspector We agree that the UK Border Agency should ideally Although the recommendation is accepted in of Prisons, that the use of reserves on not have to use reserves on enforced flights. principle it is not believed to offer good value for enforced removal flights should be However, it is an unfortunate fact that detainees are money in practice. discontinued. (Paragraph 23) removed from the manifest right up until the point when the aircraft is ready to depart on account of last minute applications, appeals and judicial reviews made by their legal representatives. To ensure value for money and maximise the use of the seats available on charter flights, reserve cases are taken to the airport to replace any who may have to be removed from the flight. Since the Chief Inspector’s report of an inspection of Tinsley House in 2011 when the recommendation was made, the UK Border Agency has initiated a process whereby detainees who are on the reserve list are notified in advance that they may not fly. It would, however, be wrong to stop the practice completely given the significant number of last minute legal challenges faced by the Agency and where detainees have to be removed from the flights. 5. It seems to us that the form The UK Border Agency is already reviewing the UKBA will discuss the Committee’s concentrates mainly on any risk to those process by which the need for medical escorts is recommendations with NOMS, which has have escorting the detainee rather than to the identified and confidential medical information is ownership of the detainee removal form. It is detainee him/herself. Moreover, the exchanged, including when detainees refuse to give currently working to improve the process of section on health is cramped, and it is not consent, and expect to pilot an improved process at all clear that it would necessarily be within the next few months. The Person Escort highlighting medical conditions relevant to completed in a way to make it immediately Record to which the Committee refers is a national removals to the officers involved. comprehensible to a non-medical expert, document owned by the National Offender like an escort officer: the lack of space Management Service (NOMS) and is used by a range would tend to force the experts to make of different law enforcement agencies and suppliers, terse notes rather than giving helpful including the police and Prison Service. We are detail. This is of special importance if the therefore not in a position to make arbitrary changes use of some—or any—restraint techniques to the form ourselves and will discuss the might exacerbate an underlying medical Committee’s recommendation with NOMS. condition, such as heart disease or asthma. (Paragraph 25)
6. While we do not want to add to the paperwork which detention centres and escort officers have to deal with, we consider that there is a strong argument for providing a simple indication on the front page of the form flagging up the fact that the detainee has a medical condition which might lead to problems in the stressful conditions of enforced deportation. If a possible problem is flagged up, then the escort officers should be briefed on the practical consequences before the removal begins. (Paragraph 26) 7. It is a matter for serious concern We agree with the Committee that such conduct is Contracts already contain performance measures that contractors should use racist language totally unacceptable and that the UK Border Agency that can be levied in the case of proven racism on among themselves. That they were content should take prompt and decisive action against any the part of the contractor. In addition both the to do so in front of not only UK Border person who behaves in such a way. The Committee’s UKBA and Reliance have taken a number of actions Agency staff but also inspectors from HM observations and recommendation relate to those Inspectorate of Prisons is shocking. It is made by the Chief Inspector of Prisons following the to improve professional standards and reporting possibly the result of a relationship inspection of charter flights to Jamaica and Nigeria in mechanisms between the Agency and its contractors 2011. The offending language was not heard by UK which had become too cosy. We Border Agency staff who were on board the aircraft recommend that the senior management of and the inspection team unfortunately did not bring 2010–12 in the Committee of Effectiveness the UK Border Agency send a clear and it to their attention at the time. The UK Border strong message to staff who are involved Agency referred the allegations of misconduct to its in removals, that they have the full Professional Standards Unit for investigation as soon support of senior management in as it learned about them from the inspectors’ report, challenging the use of racist language by although it was not possible to identify the contractors, and that they are expected to individuals given the lack of available detail. The do so. The contract should be amended to Chief Inspector of Prisons has since agreed a new include a provision which requires the process with the UK Border Agency whereby initial contractor to pay a financial penalty to the written feedback is provided shortly after each visit. Home Office where there is a proven We expect the highest standards from our staff and incident of the use of racist language by its contractors and will take appropriate robust action staff. (Paragraph 32) against those who fail to adhere to them. If a complaint is substantiated, performance measures can already be levied under the terms of the contract, and the UK Border Agency can take action against 277
in2010–12 oftheCommittee 278 Effectiveness individuals, which could involve re-training or in extreme cases revoking their certification completely. The UK Border Agency has introduced a professional code of conduct for all those staff working with detainees, and Reliance has introduced a training programme of cultural change for all escorting staff. It has also introduced a freephone number to enable staff to report colleagues whose behaviour causes concern. All Reliance vehicles have CCTV fitted with digital audio capability. The Home Office Equality & Diversity strategy outlines the legal obligations and responsibilities on the Department as an employer and contractor of services to prevent discrimination or harassment. All Home Office staff are given appropriate training. The learning programmes highlight that inappropriate language and behaviour should and will be challenged and where proven will result in disciplinary action and penalties including dismissal. 8. We recommend that members of The UK Border Agency has been piloting the presence UKBA is consulting on making the presence of the Independent Monitoring Boards for of independent monitoring board members independent monitors standard on all chartered immigration removal centres—or a similar accompanying some chartered flights and intends to removal flights. UKBA and its contractor, Reliance, independent monitoring network—be have discussions with the Ministry of Justice about are taking a number of steps to improve given access to chartered removal flights. this becoming a permanent fixture and broadening it However, the main issue is the need for to include all chartered flights. The Agency will also professional standards among staff. better management and more confident review again the contents of the Use of Force report behaviour by staff of the Agency and this and conduct a review of compliance to ensure escorts is a matter that must be addressed by the are completing it as comprehensively as they should. Permanent Secretary in relation to As is outlined above, the UK Border Agency has removals as well as to the generality of the introduced a professional code of conduct for all work of this Agency which is—as we have those staff working with detainees, and Reliance has pointed out repeatedly—an integral part of introduced a training programme of cultural change the Home Office and not an independent or for all escorting staff. As outlined in the answer to arm's-length agency. (Paragraph 40) recommendation 1, Ministers and the Permanent Secretary oversee the work of the Agency through a variety of means.