House of Commons Home Affairs Committee
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
Fourth Report of Session 2014–15
Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report
Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 3 September 2014
HC 238 Published on 16 September 2014 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited 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) Ian Austin MP (Labour, Dudley North) Nicola Blackwood MP (Conservative, Oxford West and Abingdon) James Clappison MP (Conservative, Hertsmere) Michael Ellis MP (Conservative, Northampton North) Paul Flynn MP (Labour, Newport West) Lorraine Fullbrook MP (Conservative, South Ribble) Dr Julian Huppert MP (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge) Yasmin Qureshi MP (Labour, Bolton South East) Mark Reckless MP (Conservative, Rochester and Strood) Mr David Winnick MP (Labour, Walsall North)
The following were also members of the Committee during the Parliament.
Rt Hon Alun Michael (Labour & Co-operative, Cardiff South and Penarth) Karl Turner MP (Labour, Kingston upon Hull East) Steve McCabe MP (Labour, Birmingham Selly Oak) Bridget Phillipson MP (Labour, Houghton and Sunderland South) Chris Ruane MP (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)
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), John-Paul Flaherty (Second Clerk), Dr Ruth Martin (Committee Specialist), Duma Langton (Committee Specialist), Andy Boyd (Senior Committee Assistant), Iwona Hankin (Committee Assistant) 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 2049; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 3
Contents
Report Page
Key facts 5
1 Introduction 6 The UK passport 6 Her Majesty’s Passport Office 6 How delays became apparent 7
2 The emergence of a ‘backlog’ 9
3 Ministerial and managerial response 13 Contingency measures 13 Late reaction and communication with Ministers 13 Disparity in the service to the public and to MPs 14 Proposed relaxation of security checks 16 Compensation, and upgrading to a fast-track application 16 Twelve-month extension and emergency travel documents for children 18 Prioritising the backlog of applications 18 Advice on the HMPO website 19 Redeployment of staff 19 Reviews to be undertaken 20
4 Offices and staffing 21 Staffing resources 21 Office closures and staff reductions 21 Identity cards and the National Identity Service 22 Staff numbers as at June 2014 22 Overtime 23 Management relations with PCS union, and the prospect of a strike 25
5 Applications from overseas 27 The decision to move the processing of overseas applications to the UK 27 The impact on HMPO 28 Interaction with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office 29
6 Forecasting the level of demand 31
7 Operating costs, revenue and surplus 32 Contractors 33
Conclusions and Recommendations 34 The emergence of a ‘backlog’ 34 Ministerial and managerial response 35 Offices and staffing 36
4 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
Applications from overseas 37 Forecasting the level of demand 38 Operating costs, revenue and surplus 38
Annex A: Passport Office: UK operations 39
Annex B: Number of British Citizens living overseas 40
Formal Minutes 43
Witnesses 44
Published written evidence 45
List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament 46
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 5
Key facts
• Fee charged for normal passport application service: £72.50
• Unit cost of processing a passport application in 2013-14: £57.71
• Peak level of work in progress: 537,663 (22 June 2014)
• Estimated number of passport applications from British nationals overseas: 390,000 annually
• Full time equivalent staff in March 2010: 4,017.52
• Full time equivalent staff in May 2014: 3,506.36 (NB not directly comparable)
• Total overtime cost for January to May 2014: £3,198,847
6 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
1 Introduction
The UK passport
1. The UK passport is of prime importance as a travel document, but also as important indicator and confirmation of an individual’s identity, a fact recently reiterated by the Chief Executive of Her Majesty’s Passport Office, Paul Pugh.1 The Minister for Security and Immigration, James Brokenshire MP, referred to passports as “not just dry official documents. They are the key to once-in-a-lifetime trips, eagerly anticipated holidays and visits to loved ones”.2 It is also a gateway document, providing the bearer with access to a variety of benefits and services in the United Kingdom.
2. Because the UK passport is of such importance, it has very sophisticated design features. Paul Pugh stated that, in terms of security, the UK passport and its associated processes were recognised as some of the most secure in the world. 3 He added that the benefit of this was that British passport holders have access without visa or additional checks to more countries than virtually any other citizen of any other country.
Her Majesty’s Passport Office
3. Applications for a passport are administered by Her Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO). This executive agency of the Home Office was established on 13 May 2013. Formerly the Identity and Passport Service, HMPO carries out two functions: providing passport services to UK nationals, and overseeing civil registration of births, deaths and marriages in England and Wales. In the most recent Annual Report, Paul Pugh stated, “we have an important role to play in supporting the Home Office’s priorities, including public protection, reducing the impact and likelihood of identity crime and preventing terrorism. We are very proud of our reputation for customer service standards and integrity”.4
4. The new HMPO was designed to make the service more easily recognisable to British citizens and the agency changed its name to reflect its changing role (following the cancellation of identity cards in 2011)5 and official status. At the time the then Immigration Minister, Mark Harper MP, said that the inclusion of ‘Her Majesty’s’ in the title recognised that passports are the property of the Crown, bear the Royal Coat of Arms and are issued under the Royal Prerogative. He added that “The new name of ‘HM Passport Office’ reflects the fact that the organisation is no longer responsible for government policy on
1 Q 87 2 HC Deb, 10 June 2014, col 522 3 Q 155 4 Identity and Passport Service, Annual Report and Accounts 2012-2013, July 2013, p 5 5 Identity Documents Act 2010
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 7
identity but continues to provide a gold-plated passport service to British nationals in the UK and abroad.”6
How delays became apparent
5. At the beginning of June 2014, three months after Paul Pugh’s tenure as Chief Executive had been confirmed, it became apparent that there were delays in the processing of passport applications. This was an issue about which Members from all sides of the House were being contacted with increasing regularity. One Member said that he had had nine times as many cases that involve passports in the first two weeks of June 2014 as in his previous nine years as an MP.7
6. The Committee has also received a large amount of correspondence from members of the public who are concerned about the delays in the Passport Office. For example:
I wish to make you aware of my plight and the lack of clarity that has been provided to both me and other people in similar positions to ours.
I am sure that you will be getting lot of complaints around the poor process, lack of staff and a reckless move of the government to close all overseas passport centres.
I read with interest that the Passport Office will be appearing to explain its performance before the Home Affairs Select Committee. As [an overseas applicant], I contend the new application process is simply not fit for purpose.
I thought I would send you an example of sadly what I believe is currently the typical experience of overseas passport renewal. I am basing my assumption on my personal experience but also the stories I have read on multiple Internet forums such as Trip advisor and Mumsnet. Whilst one usually is loath to indulge anecdotal evidence the sheer numbers seem astounding … It might interest you to know that Australian news is currently reporting this UK bureaucratic disaster.
7. When Paul Pugh appeared before the Committee on 17 June, we presented him with the correspondence we had received. We also offered him the opportunity to apologise to all those members of the public who had been made to wait due to the poor level of service at HMPO. Mr Pugh said:
I absolutely, Chair, recognise the anger and distress that some people have suffered and I would like to put on record, yes, that in every case where we
6 “Introducing HM Passport Office”, HM Passport Office press release, 13 May 2013
7 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1159 [Mr Robert Flello]
8 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
have not met our service standards, where we have not been able to meet the customer’s need, yes, certainly, we are sorry for that.8
8 Q 87
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 9
2 The emergence of a ‘backlog’
8. The issue of delays in processing passport applications was first raised in the House of Commons Chamber on 5 June.9 The following evening, The Guardian reported that an email leaked to them showed that staff employed by HMPO to detect fraudulent applications and conduct interviews with suspect applicants had been asked to process thousands of delayed passport applications. The email, written by Paul Pugh, acknowledged the existence of “work in progress levels which are much higher than we would like”, and noted that, due to complaints made by members of the public, HMPO was experiencing “very high volumes of contact with members of parliament”. He said that, in a “last push” to clear the backlog, it was necessary to redeploy approximately 80 staff, including about 25% of staff working in fraud teams.10
9. It is notable that neither HMPO nor Ministers have ever conceded that there was a backlog of applications. Paul Pugh told us that he first informed ministers of “exceptional demand” for passports at the beginning of March. The Home Secretary told the House on 10 June that HMPO was “still meeting the service standards of 97% of straightforward applications being returned within three weeks, and 99% being returned within four weeks”, but she was nonetheless considering whether further contingency measures would be required.11 Later that evening, the Minister for Security and Immigration, James Brokenshire MP, told the House that, since January 2014, HMPO had received 3.3 million applications between 1 January and 31 May 2014 — 350,000 more than the same period in 2013. This surge in demand began much earlier and was more sustained than normal.12 He reiterated that “the overwhelming number of straightforward applications are dealt with within the three-week service standard, and HMPO is working tirelessly to improve performance still further.”13 On 12 June the Home Secretary conceded that the number of straightforward applications “being dealt with outside the normal three-week waiting time” was about 30,000.14 By 18 June, this figure had risen to approximately 50,000.15
10. During our evidence session on 17 June, we sought clarification of the figures in order to establish the facts. Paul Pugh told us:
I can give the total number of applications that we received since 1 January this year, which is now approximately 3.6 million. The total number of
9 HC Deb, 5 June 2014, col 126 10 “UK Passport Office fraud staff diverted to deal with applications backlog”, The Guardian, 6 June 2014 11 HC Deb, 10 June 2014, col 414-416. A “straightforward application” is one where all the required information, including supporting documentation, is provided, the application is signed, and no further inquiries are required in order to progress the application (see HC Deb, 3 July 2014, c720W) 12 HC Deb, 10 June 2014, col 524 13 As above. 14 HC Deb, 12 June 2014, col 693 15 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1144
10 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
applications that we have received since 1 April, the start of the financial year this year, is now approximately 1.9 million. …
The figure, as of Monday [16 June], I think, was just under 480,000 work in progress. We receive over 150,000 applications each week and our output similarly in a week is over 150,000. …
Last week, [the number of passport applications processed] was just over 165,000. Of those, across all types, I think it was approximately 90% were within the agreed service standards.16
11. We pressed Mr Pugh further on the work in progress figures, asking him in a series of questions what the backlog – understood by the Committee as applications that were not processed within service standards – was. He replied, “I don’t want to get into a debate about terminology. … That would not be my day-to-day interpretation of what a backlog constitutes. … To me a backlog is an accumulation of work that is not likely to be dealt with in a reasonable time. … A reasonable time would depend upon the nature of the piece of work”.17
12. The issue of service standards has been a persistent theme in the way the Home Office defends the delay in dealing with cases over several governments. These service standards are arbitrary and set by the Passport Office Officials in line with what they believe to be the correct level of service. We are yet to be convinced by this defence, for example in our other reports on UKBA we have consistently questioned why backlogs have been developed when we have been told that it can take as little as 45 minutes to process a case and if you pay more for expedited service then you expect the processing within that time frame.
13. Her Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO) have set a standard service time for the processing of passport applications. It appears clear to the Committee that applications that are not processed within that time period are outside the service standard, and therefore undoubtedly constitute a backlog. To claim otherwise causes confusion, and leads to frustration and worry amongst those applicants who are waiting for their passport. We have reiterated several times that, whilst accepting there needs to be a reasonable allowance of time to process an application, internally set measures of success should not allow any Home Office entity to avoid addressing outstanding cases promptly. Any case that has been received by HMPO and that has not been processed within a reasonable period of time constitutes a backlog. The focus of HMPO, and indeed any processing entity of the Home Office, should be on clearing any cases as quickly as possible not just within an arbitrary deadline. The culture of using the service standards as a shield goes to the heart of the problem with the recent delays in the work of HMPO.
16 Qs 75, 80 and 115 17 Qs 178-181
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 11
14. As noted above, during the early weeks of June, Ministers continued to reassure the House that the HM Passport Office was processing applications within its service standards. However, HMPO’s operational performance data for the weeks ending 8, 15 and 22 June, set out in Table 1 below tells a very different story.
Table 1: Percentage of straightforward applications completed within 15 working days (KPI)
Actual this Target % Previous week Change in 2014/15 Year week % % week +/- to Date
8 June 88.62% 99.75% 87.4% 1.2% 95.5%
15 June 85.08% 99.75% 88.6% -3.5% 94.4%
22 June 72.28% 99.75% 85.1% -12.8% 92.6%
Source: Extracted from Her Majesty’s Passport Office: Vital Signs – Operational Performance (weeks ending 8, 15 and 22 June)
The figures show that, despite reassurances given to this Committee and to the House, HMPO’s performance at the beginning of June was well below target, it continued to deteriorate during that month, and the rate at which it was deteriorating was increasing.
15. Applications for UK Passports from British citizens living overseas were formerly processed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office through an international network of seven Regional Passport Processing Centres.18 From early 2014, the processing of these applications was transferred from the FCO to HMPO. As Table 2 shows, HMPO’s performance in processing these applications from overseas was particularly poor.
Table 2: Percentage of straightforward applications from overseas completed within 15 working days (shadow target)
Actual this Target % Previous week Change in 2014/15 Year week % % week +/- to Date
8 June 39.99% 99.75% 37.8% 2.2% 13.4%
15 June 11.44% 99.75% 40% -28.6% 13.2%
22 June 20.48% 99.75% 11.4% 9.0% 13.8%
Source: Extracted from Her Majesty’s Passport Office: Vital Signs – Operational Performance (weeks ending 8, 15 and 22 June)
18 In Dusseldorf, Hong Kong, Madrid, Paris, Pretoria, Washington, and Wellington
12 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
The performance for 2014–15 is lamentable, barely reaching double figures in the middle of the month against a target of 99.75%. More than 17 of every 20 overseas applications had been delayed since the beginning of April 2014.
16. Given the impact that these delays have had on constituents, Parliament must be in a position to know how the current backlog in processing applications is being managed, and must be able to monitor whether a new backlog is beginning to develop. The Committee is concerned that it appears that Ministers were not provided with up- to-date statistics when they addressed the House. We recommend that HMPO publish on-line its weekly operational performance data, so that Ministers, MPs and others can have accurate, up-to-date information about its performance. We will also add the work in progress level as an indicator to our quarterly review of immigration.
17. On Tuesday 8 July, we called Mr Pugh to give evidence for a second time, during which he provided the following update:
work in progress is falling and output is rising substantially. We are now issuing over 170,000 passports each week. I expect that to continue and to rise over the summer, so in the summer period I expect us to be issuing probably in the region of 180,000 passports per week.19
During the evidence session we were informed that the level of work in progress at the beginning of June was 483,000. By 22 June this had increased to 537,663. Mr Pugh then told the Committee, “[i]t is now 508,000 and it is continuing to fall”.20 On 22 July, James Brokenshire MP provided a further update, stating that work in progress was then 403,959.21
18. We are concerned that the work in progress figure remained unacceptably high, despite the contingency measures. Although work in progress has begun to fall, it seems apparent that the backlog will remain for some time. In future, HMPO needs to do more to prevent work in progress getting to this level, as it is clearly unsustainable. This must include formally requesting further resources from the Home Office and installing regular Ministerial meetings until the peak is dealt with.
19 Q 193 20 Qs 193-201 21 Oral evidence taken on 22 July 2014, The work of the Immigration Directorates (2014 Q1), HC 501, Q106 [James Brokenshire]
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 13
3 Ministerial and managerial response
Contingency measures
19. As the crisis developed, the Home Office took measures to address it, including both measures to increase processing capacity and measures to reduce demand. Additional staff were taken on, staff were redeployed from elsewhere in HM Passport Office and the Home Office to process applications, opening hours were extended, weekend working was introduced, and new offices were opened in Liverpool. Those applying to renew passports from overseas were given a 12-month extension to their existing passports, and those applying for children’s passports from overseas were issued with emergency travel documents, subject to parents providing comprehensive proof of the child’s identity. People with an “urgent need to travel” in the next seven days, whose applications had already been with HMPO for at least three weeks, were offered free upgrades to the faster, premium service.22 Paul Pugh explained that some of the additional staff were seasonal staff and shift-workers who would normally have been deployed at times of peak activity. He said that Ministers had been supportive: “at no point did I ever feel that there was anything that I was asking for or that I needed that I was not receiving”.23
Late reaction and communication with Ministers
20. One criticism of HMPO is that the measures they have taken to deal with the delays have been implemented too late. It has been argued that more should have been done at an earlier stage, and that appropriate measures were only taken when there was little time for them to have effect before the summer holiday period.24 Mike Jones, Home Office Group Secretary, Public and Commercial Services Union, told us “there is the backlog that was denied for days upon days and has been denied previous to that by the Government Ministers. Now it is out in the open that there is a major backlog and our members have been trying to struggle to deal with that influx of work as it has been coming in”.25
21. In addition, the changing information and repeated updates that were provided to Members in the week commencing 9 June indicate that Ministers were not fully appraised of the facts of the situation by HMPO at the outset.26 When Paul Pugh appeared before the Committee we asked him when more staff and more resources were requested, and how quickly those decisions were taken by Ministers. He responded:
I can broadly answer, and the answer is very quickly. When we felt we had come to a point where in order to maintain our service standards and to keep
22 HC Deb, 12 June 2014, col 693-694 23 Q 150 24 HC Deb, 10 June 2014, col 517 25 Q 31 26 HC Deb, 12 June 2014, col 694
14 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
them where we wanted them to be we needed to be able to mobilise staff from other parts of the department, those discussions with other parts of the department and with Ministers took place in a matter of days. I cannot recall exactly which days, but it was very, very quickly.27
22. We are concerned that the contingency measures announced to respond to the backlog were too little, too late, for this summer holiday period. This is despite the impression that any request for resources from managers was acted upon and granted by Ministers.
23. We do not expect Ministers to have to perform detailed management of HMPO especially considering the Office has a complete management team and a Chief Executive, Paul Pugh. We expect someone in Mr Pugh's position, who is paid £104,000 of taxpayers’ money, to be able to manage the running of HMPO effectively. The recent crisis shows that there has been a complete management failure at the highest levels of the organisation.
24. Given the information that was provided in Parliament, it seems that initially Ministers were not adequately briefed on the level of underperformance in HMPO, and subsequently did not have to hand the most up-to-date statistics. We are concerned by the apparent miscommunication between the executive agency and its home department.
25. We note the establishment of a review of HM Passport Office’s operations, and a review of its agency status. We further highlight the apparent miscommunication between HMPO and Ministers as the crisis unfolded, and call on the Permanent Secretary to consider the reasons for this within the review of oversight arrangements. However, we do not believe there is a need to delay action as a result of this review. We call on the Home Office to remove the agency status from the HMPO and bring it back under the direct control of Ministers. HMPO should still retain a separate Director General as the Home Secretary has done previously with the former UKBA. In addition regular updates must be produced against key indicators and provided to Ministers in bi-monthly meetings.
Disparity in the service to the public and to MPs
26. During the course of the delays, it has appeared that those applicants whose Member of Parliament intervened on their behalf were receiving a markedly better service than those whose MP did not. During an evidence session with the Minister for Immigration and Security, Dr Julian Huppert MP referred to the problems faced by one of his constituents. The applicant was seeking a passport for their daughter. Over the course of a month they were told that the daughter’s birth certificate was required, and then told it was not; they were told that the father’s birth certificate was required, and then told it was not; they were
27 Q 130
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 15
told it was being processed in Glasgow, then told it was being processed in Belfast; they were told that a declaration form was required, then told a different declaration form was required; and they were told that the passport had been sent out, and then told it had not, and further information was required. One MP raised this saying “It is clear that cases are dealt with differently when people go to their MPs. How can we ensure that people who do not go to their MPs receive the same service and have their complaints dealt with in the same way as though they had gone to their MP?” In response the Home Secretary said:
MPs take up issues in many areas of activity, and they are dealt with perhaps more expeditiously than they would be normally. That is part of the issues that we deal with in our constituency surgeries and so forth. … The Passport Office is making every effort to ensure that people get the service they require, so that it is not necessary for people to go to their MPs or feel that that is the only way they can get that service.28
27. Despite the intentions of the Home Secretary it seems clear, through the experiences mentioned by Members, that when an MP follows up a case, it has then been dealt with swiftly.29 In addition, in order that they might be able to advise their constituents, MPs have benefitted from receiving information about the implementation of contingency measures30, and have also been able to raise individual cases with the Immigration Minister or the Home Secretary. 31 Furthermore, Ministers have sought to augment the service to MPs, by providing, from 16 June, 20 additional staff to handle MP queries.32
28. Since the crisis hundreds of cases have been passed to Ministers’ private offices and the Chief Executive’s office, including during our evidence sessions where we handed over 200 additional cases.
29. The Committee fully appreciates the work of Ministers, the Chief Executive of HMPO, and their private offices, in particular Farooq Belai, in dealing with individual cases that have been brought to them by MPs in a timely manner. However, for members of the public who did not contact their MPs, they were still held in queues and their cases were not dealt with a sufficient level of service. This is a matter of customer service, and all applicants should be able to receive details of their applications, regardless of whether they follow it up themselves, or if it is followed up by their constituency MP. We recommend that all those who answer customer service calls are allowed access to information relating to the progress of an application.
28 HC Deb, 12 June 2014, col 702 29 For example, see: HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1164; and Q 271 30 HC Deb, 12 June 2014, col 697 31 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1138 32 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1141
16 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
Proposed relaxation of security checks
30. As we have previously set out, passports are not just travel documents. Once a person has have a British passport, they can use it as a gateway document to enable individuals to access a variety of benefits and services within the United Kingdom. When dealing with delays for passports, it is extremely important that the security of the application is ensured so that only somebody who is entitled might receive a passport.
31. On Wednesday 11 June, The Guardian reported that HMPO had ordered its staff to relax checks on applicants for British passports from abroad in an effort to reduce the backlog. The article referred to a briefing note circulated which allowed HMPO staff to drop checks on countersignatories, as well as requirements for evidence of addresses and letters of confirmation from employers and accountants.33 The Home Secretary responded by saying “Ministers were not aware of the document … and they asked for it to be withdrawn immediately”, and emphasised that nobody would be examining passport applications without proper training.34
32. Paul Pugh told us that the document in question described “a procedural change in the processes that apply to certain types of overseas application, particularly to evidence that is required of … [a]n alternative address for applicants”. The guidance made it clear that discretion should only be applied in those cases where the person considering the application was satisfied on other evidence that there is no indication of fraud. The guidance had not been seen by Ministers before it was issued, which Mr Pugh admitted was an error on the part of HMPO.35
33. Relaxing security checks in the examination of passport applications could be a quick fix for a temporary problem, which could have the potential to do significant damage to the UK’s national interests and national security. We are alarmed that such measures were even contemplated, let alone introduced without ministerial approval. The Home Secretary was right to intervene to have the new guidance withdrawn.
Compensation, and upgrading to a fast-track application
34. One of the welcome contingency measures that the Home Secretary announced was the fast-track upgrade of applications. There are four levels of passport service, set out in the table below.
33 “Passport Office orders staff to relax application checks to help clear backlog”, The Guardian, 11 June 2014 34 HC Deb, 12 June 2014, col 700–704 35 Qs 122-125
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 17
Table 3: Fees for passport services
Service Description Fee
Normal service Online or by post £72.50
Post Office Post Office counter staff check application is completed correctly, with £81.25 correct documentation and fee, and send it by Special Delivery Check & Send
Fast Track Applicant attends at Passport Office in person with application and £103.00 supporting documentation; passport delivered to home address within one week
Premium Applicant attends at Passport Office in person with application and £128.00 supporting documentation; passport available for collection on the same day
Source: https://www.gov.uk/passport-fees
35. To meet the criteria for an upgrade, applicants were required to provide proof that they had booked to travel within the next seven days, and their applications had to have been with the Passport Office for longer than three weeks through no fault of their own. On 22 July, James Brokenshire MP told us that 16,000 applicants had made use of this upgrade.
36. A number of applicants, however, had already upgraded their application before this contingency measure was announced.36 There is no provision for these people to receive any compensation for the additional cost. The Home Secretary told the House that “I recognise that some people have paid sums of money to ensure that their passport application was upgraded, and I have indicated that for urgent travel in the future we will be doing that free of charge”.37
37. In addition to the extra cost for the fast-track service, many applicants will have incurred extra costs by travelling to HMPO offices to apply for or collect their passports in person. Other applicants have had to rebook flights at a late stage at significant cost, while those not so lucky have had to cancel their travel plans completely. We raised these matters, and the possibility of compensation, with Paul Pugh who told us “[w]e have a very clear approach to compensation in relation to where someone has suffered a financial detriment as a result of our error”.38
38. We are concerned that a number of people have ended up out of pocket due to the Passport Office’s inability to meet its service standard. We believe it is unfair that some applicants are able to receive a fast-track service free of charge, because they have made
36 HC Deb, 10 June 2014, col 415 37 HC Deb, 12 June 2014, col 702 38 Q 164
18 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
use of it after an arbitrary date decided by HMPO, while other applicants have had to pay. Furthermore, we believe it would be wrong for HMPO to make a surplus from the extra fees of those who were too early to get the fast-track offer, but too late to wait any longer before upgrading. We believe an equitable solution would be for the HMPO to compensate all those people who made an initial application on or after 1 May 2014, who subsequently upgraded to the fast-track service and who met the criteria for the free upgrade which was later offered.
Twelve-month extension and emergency travel documents for children
39. The Home Secretary also announced that those who applied from overseas to renew their passports for travel to the UK would have their existing passports extended for 12 months, and that the FCO would issue emergency travel documents for children who needed to travel to the UK. However, people who had already applied and whose applications were being processed were told that if they wanted to use these contingency measures they would have to withdraw their existing application, which could take two weeks, and wait for their existing papers to be returned before they could apply for the emergency provisions and emergency travel papers instead.39
40. Like the free upgrade to a fast-track service, these contingency measures relating to renewals and children’s applications may have helped those who needed to travel after they were announced, but were not helpful for those whose applications were already in the system. We see no reason why people could not have these contingencies applied seamlessly, without the need for withdrawing applications and the consequent delay.
Prioritising the backlog of applications
41. It is understood that the backlog of applications was being dealt with in the order of travel date. However, this caused problems as the date of travel is not always the date on which someone needs their passport. For example, if a traveller has to apply for a visa, or has to submit an Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) visa waiver for travel to the USA, they will need their passport some time before the date on which they travel.40
42. We recommend that, to eliminate further difficulties for applicants, HMPO should deal with passport applications on the basis of stated need, rather than by travel date. To enable this, HMPO should advise in its guidance to applicants that reasons for earlier processing, such as a visa application, should be set out when a passport application is submitted.
39 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1131 40 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1163
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 19
Advice on the HMPO website
43. By the point at which the delays were raised in Parliament, it was obvious that usual service standards were not being met. However, a problem raised by a number of Members was that applicants were acting on the basis of advice on passport forms and the HMPO website, which indicated a turnaround time of three weeks. There has been no attempt to warn prospective applicants that, due to high demand, passports may not be dealt with within that time.41
44. In debate, Ministers seemed to dismiss this as an issue, with the Home Secretary saying that the website had “always indicated to people what the normal expected period for a straightforward application is. … If there is a problem with the application, it can take longer”.42 Additionally, the Minister for Immigration stressed that the website advised users that applications could take longer than the usual three weeks, and to use a different service if they needed to the passport urgently.43
45. People rely on the advice that is given on application forms, on the Passport Office website and via the helpline. Based on this information, they act and make plans accordingly. We believe that once it became clear to HMPO that they were experiencing high demand, they should have been proactive in managing the expectations of applicants by informing them that processing times could be longer during this period. This could have been easily done through updating the website and providing this message through the helpline.
Redeployment of staff
46. One of the key steps taken to deal with the backlog was to increase the number of staff who were able to process passport applications.44 Mike Jones, PCS, told us that an appeal for staff had been made to Border Force, but due to staffing issues there, he was not aware of any Border Force staff moving to HMPO. However, he was able to confirm that staff had moved from the Passport Fraud section to mainstream work. He was concerned, however, that these staff would not have sufficient training to do the job effectively—only one week, compared with six weeks for regular staff.45 Paul Pugh told us that 250 staff had been deployed into passport processing from within the Agency, and that they intended to deploy a further 400 staff from other parts of the Home Office to passport processing and customer inquiries. He explained that staff were being drawn from UK Visas and Immigration, because they were already familiar with nationality law, so their training needs were considerably less than those of “a brand new recruit fresh off the street”.46
41 HC Deb, 10 June 2014, col 519, and HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1167 42 HC Deb, 12 June 2014, col 701 43 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1175 44 HC Deb, 12 June 2014, col 704 45 Q 18-19 46 Qs 118-119 and 168-170
20 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
47. On 8 July, Mr Pugh told us that over 600 staff had been brought in as part of the contingency measures. He expected to keep those staff in place during the summer period and then gradually to step them down.47 On 22 July, Sir Charles Montgomery KBE, Director General of Border Force, confirmed that Border Force had lent 23 staff to HMPO, but would call them back if the Border Force were experiencing pressure points.48
48. We welcome the flexibility of HMPO staff, and staff from the wider Home Office, to be able to take on other duties in order to deal with the backlog. We further welcome the identification of staff with the necessary experience of nationality law as this will enable those individuals to hit the ground running. However, we seek reassurance that essential duties, for example fraud checks, will still be carried out to the necessary standard. Furthermore, just as this is a busy time for the Passport Office, it is an increasingly busy time at the border. We urge the Home Office not to try to deal with this backlog by redeploying staff from other areas and offices and causing a crisis there a few months later.
Reviews to be undertaken
49. In order to prevent a recurrence of the problems experienced by HM Passport Office this year, the Home Secretary has asked the Permanent Secretary, Mark Sedwill, to conduct two reviews: a) the first review will ensure that HMPO works as efficiently as possible, with better processes, better customer service and better outcomes and will include a review by the head of Home Office Science of HMPO’s forecasting model; b) the second review will consider HMPO’s agency status and look at whether it should be brought back into the Home Office, reporting directly to Ministers, in line with other parts of the immigration system since the abolition of the UK Border Agency.49
The outcome of both reviews is expected later this summer.50
47 Q 245 48 Oral evidence taken on 22 July 2014, The work of the Border Force, HC (2014-15) 502, Q50 [Sir Charles Montgomery] 49 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1145 50 Her Majesty’s Passport Office, Annual Report and Accounts 2013-2014, HC 595, p5
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 21
4 Offices and staffing
51. There is no doubt about the dedication, commitment and hard work of HM Passport Office’s frontline staff. As Paul Pugh told us:
I would like to put on record my gratitude and admiration for the many thousands of staff across the organisation who are exceptionally committed, who are very proud of the work that they do. I receive examples every day of members of staff who have gone the extra mile.51
52. We acknowledge that this crisis placed a significant burden on the staff of HM Passport Office and applaud them for their efforts, which have helped to minimise the consequences of the unexpected surge in demand.
Staffing resources
53. When the problem of delays first emerged, it was initially posited that this was due to a reduction both in the number of offices and the number of staff. On 9 June, the PCS union wrote to Paul Pugh blaming the delays on “major job cuts and office closures during the past five years”, as well as the increased use of private companies. The letter stated that 22 interview offices and one application processing centre had closed in recent years, with 315 staff – a tenth of the workforce – losing their jobs. The Union did not accept that the current problems could solely be down to unusual demand and was considering industrial action over the issue.52
54. Mike Jones, Home Office Group Secretary, PCS, told us that the backlog was “clearly down to staffing”, citing the loss of 550 jobs and the closure of 22 offices since 2010.53 Paul Pugh pointed to the seasonal nature of the work and argued that under-employment had been a significant problem in the past, when staff were forced to fill their time “tidying the office, keeping things up-to-date, filing, in some cases reading books”.54
Office closures and staff reductions
55. The Identity and Passport Service55 Annual Report and Accounts 2012–13 states that the Agency was on course to meet its Spending Review target to be self-funded on core operations, and had implemented plans to reduce administrative costs by 33% by the end of the Spending Review period in 2014–15.56 In the CEO foreword, Paul Pugh states “The [passport] fee has gone down by £5, a direct result of the efficiency measures we have taken
51 Q 106 52 Threat of industrial action over passport office cuts, PCS Press Notice, 9 June 2014 53 Qs 9 and 12-13 54 Q 107-114 55 The predecessor to Her Majesty’s Passport Office. See para 3 56 Identity and Passport Service, Annual Report and Accounts 2012-2013, HC 275, p7
22 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
since 2010, which saw a reduction in costs by £80m, decreased the space we occupy by nearly 30% and reduced our headcount by 20%”.57
56. When he gave evidence to us, Mr Pugh said that the size of the organisation had in fact increased by roughly 300 people in the last two years,58 and that it was actively recruiting new staff above the levels required to manage natural turnover.59 The Home Secretary told us that on 31 March this year, HMPO had 3,444 full-time equivalent staff, up from 3,260 in 2013 and 3,104 in 2012.60 Mike Jones described these figures as “very misleading”, arguing that, notwithstanding the increase in staff numbers between 2012 and March 2014, there had still been an overall net reduction of 550 staff since 2010.61 He suggested that HMPO’s business model, which he described as being dependent on “copious amounts of overtime, which burns out staff” was primarily to blame for the crisis.62
Identity cards and the National Identity Service
57. Part of the complication with comparing staff numbers in HMPO over a period of time is that it is a changed organisation, with different responsibilities to its predecessor body, the Identity and Passport Service, of 2010. The Home Secretary told the House that, once the ID cards programme was terminated, “it was possible to take action both in relation to staff numbers and to the closure of certain premises. … Those measures were taken because HMPO had too much office space after we scrapped ID cards”.63 Mike Jones, on the other hand, claimed that HMPO had to be staffed at the 2010 level. He told us that the comparison was not accurate:
We need to go back to the 2010 figure because we need that amount of staff … we are in a crisis now because we do not have enough jobs; people are working excessive overtime for month and month on end.64
Staff numbers as at June 2014
58. Due to the confusion as to the level of staffing over the years, we requested information on the number of staff employed by HMPO from January 2010 to the present. This has been summarised in Figure 1:
57 Identity and Passport Service, Annual Report and Accounts 2012-2013, HC 275, p4 58 Q 166 59 Q 245 60 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1143 61 Q 25-26 62 Q 47 63 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1143 64 Q 25-26 and 31
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 23
Figure 1: Number of full time equivalent (FTE) staff employed by HMPO
Source: Extracted from letter from Paul Pugh, Chief Executive, HM Passport Office, 20 June 2014 (WPO0002)
59. The data shows that between March 2010 and March 2014 the number of full time equivalent staff employed by both elements of HMPO had fallen by 548. During this time the number of staff fell steadily from 4,017.52 FTE in March 2010 until it reached the lowest amount of 3,103.83 FTE in September 2012. This amounts to a reduction of 913.69 FTE. Since September 2012, the number of staff has steadily grown to 3,506.36 in May 2014, an increase of 402.53 FTE.
60. Based on the figures of the number of staff, we cannot agree with the statement of PCS that the backlog in processing applications “is clearly down to staffing”. If that were the case, delays would have been experienced in previous years when fewer people were employed in HMPO. However, questions remain over whether HMPO have the right number of staff, and the right mix to deal with peaks in demand.
Overtime
61. Mike Jones claimed that HMPO had moved to a business model which reduced staffing to a shoestring, and was supplemented by using massive amounts of overtime to try to compensate. 65 When we pressed Mr Jones further on the use of overtime, he said:
We are obviously getting feedback from our members … dating back from January where overtime has been used to an excess. … There have been [previous] backlogs and there have been problems. … Our members have
65 Q 47
24 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
been working really hard to manage a ship that has been sinking for years and it has eventually come to a crisis point now.66
62. At our follow-up evidence session on 8 July, Paul Pugh said that it was important to see overtime costs within the overall context of the Agency’s pay costs. Staff and pay costs accounted for about 25% overall of HMPO’s running costs as an organisation, so overtime costs were a very small proportion of overall costs.67
63. Similarly, we requested from HMPO the costs for overtime from January 2010 to the present. This has been summarised in Table 4:
Table 4: HMPO overtime costs
2011 2012 2013 2014
January — £46,498 £105,137 £199,146
February £84,342 £67,582 £400,812 —
March £569,117 £369,397 £840,588 —
April £436,686 £407,202 £793,559 —
May £702,602 £581,587 £964,742 —
June £682,474 £477,902 — —
July £229,527 £342,479 — —
August £466,549 £227,851 — —
September £138,918 £123,480 — —
October £109,030 £94,474 — —
November £196,538 £73,558 £93,127 —
December £61,035 £78,017 £84,145 —
Total N/A £3,617,318 £2,974,363 £3,198,847
Source: Extracted from letter from Paul Pugh, Chief Executive, HM Passport Office, 20 June 2014 (WPO0002)
66 Qs 1 and 12 67 Q 240
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 25
64. The data shows that in 2014, more has been spent on overtime in January to May than in the whole of 2013. Additionally, when comparing month by month, the amount spent on overtime in each month of 2014 is of a significantly greater than in the same month in previous years.
65. Based on the figures for overtime, it is clear that the use of overtime to deal with peaks in demand has proved unsustainable this year. This again raises the question of whether HMPO have the right number of staff, and the right mix to deal with peaks in demand. We recommend that future additional jobs should be located, where possible, in areas that suffered from previous job losses in the Passport Office.
Management relations with PCS union, and the prospect of a strike
66. Mike Jones was scathing about the way in which HMPO responded to concerns raised by the union. He said that the Union had “consistently been given the brush off” and, although some discussions had taken place, there had been “no genuine attempt to address the issues properly”. He said that two letters to Mr Pugh had not received a response or even been acknowledged.68 Mr Pugh, by contrast, described his relations with many representatives of the Union as “extremely good”. He said that he regularly met union representatives when he visited regional offices, and he had invited national representatives to attend a management board meeting in late 2013, where a constructive discussion took place. He said that he did not recognise the picture of poor staff morale presented by Mr Jones:
Now, clearly I am very happy to listen to the views that Mr Jones has to put about the picture of our organisation as he perceives it, but I do not believe that the PCS union are the sole means by which the views of staff within the organisation are legitimately expressed.” 69
67. Mike Jones told us that the Union had a number of areas where it wanted to negotiate with management—staffing levels, the use of overtime, levels of pay, and privatisation. In particular, PCS was looking to secure the creation of 600 new jobs and for HMPO management to guarantee that there would be no further privatisation. He said that the Union had no current plans for industrial action, but that “if we are continually ignored we will go out to our members and ask them whether they are prepared to take action if they feel that that is necessary”.70
68. On Monday 28 July, Passport Office staff went on strike over staff shortages. PCS General Secretary, Mark Serwotka said, “The staffing crisis in the Passport Office has been obvious for everyone to see and it shouldn't have taken a committee of MPs to force the chief executive to meet us to discuss it. We are still a long way off getting a commitment
68 Q 58-64 69 Q 134-135 and 144-146 70 Q 51-52
26 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
from the agency that it will work with us to put the proper resources in place to ensure these backlogs do not reoccur year after year."71
69. We are concerned that the PCS Union invited its members in HM Passport Office to go on strike. This would cause further problems and delays in processing passport applications. We call on the Union and HMPO management to discuss the issue of adequate staffing, so that a sustainable solution can be negotiated, and call for the restoration of goodwill between management and the Union in this area that is of great importance to UK citizens.
71 “Passport Office staff strike over staff shortages amid applications backlog”, The Guardian, 28 July 2014
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 27
5 Applications from overseas
70. Research published by the Home Office in November 201272 stated that, although there were difficulties in producing accurate estimates, there were around 4.5 to 5.5 million British citizens or UK-born people living abroad. The World Bank estimated there were 4.7 million UK emigrants (around 7.5 per cent of the UK population) living abroad. They report the largest stocks of UK-born, based abroad, to be living in Australia, the USA, Canada, Spain, Ireland, New Zealand, France and Germany, as shown in Table 5:
Table 5: Top ten countries for stocks of UK-born citizens resident abroad
Country of residence Residence stocks of UK-born citizens
Australia 1,208,000
USA 701,000
Canada 675,000
Spain 411,000
Ireland 397,000
New Zealand 268,000
France 173,000
Germany 155,000
Netherlands 46,000
Philippines 42,000
Source: Extracted from Emigration from the UK, Second Edition, Research Report 68, November 2012, Home Office
The decision to move the processing of overseas applications to the UK
71. The idea to transfer the responsibility for processing overseas applications for passports to the UK for approximately 5 million UK citizens was first proposed in a report by the National Audit Office in November 2005. The report suggested that most other comparable countries had already repatriated their passport service to their home
72 Emigration from the UK, Second Edition, Research Report 68, November 2012, Home Office, p18
28 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
countries, in part to improve security, but also recognising that this is a more cost effective service for applicants. It clearly acknowledged that these repatriated services were often slower than the local services they replaced.73 The Committee of Public Accounts supported this proposal in April 2006:
Issuing passports at over 100 Posts is inefficient and exposes the Department to increasing risks from fraudulent applications. The Department should analyse the costs and benefits of repatriating large elements of passport work to take advantage of the economies of scale and quality assurance arrangements of the United Kingdom Passport Service. Consolidating its passport issuing service in fewer locations would also aid the Department in reducing inconsistencies in security checking, and in dealing with the technical complexities in moving to biometric passports.74
72. On 28 April 2009, the Identity and Passport Service (IPS) and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) signed a Memorandum of Understanding for the integration of UK and overseas passport issuing operations. At the time, it was expected that full integration would be achieved by 2014–15.75 On 1 April 2011, IPS officially took responsibility from the FCO for UK passports issued overseas.76 The Home Office’s 2013– 14 Annual Report and Accounts highlighted that the process of repatriation had concluded:
In partnership with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, HM Passport Office completed the transfer of responsibility for passport applications from British nationals overseas and now serves an additional 390,000 customers annually, as the single UK passport issuer. Following the reduction in fee for domestic UK applications in 2012, HM Passport Office announced a fee reduction for its overseas customers, which took effect on 7 April 2014. The reduction, as a result of the efficiency savings made by bringing the processing and issuing of overseas passports back to the UK, is a further step in providing the fee payer better value for money.77
The impact on HMPO
73. Given the similarities between the increase in demand and the number of expected overseas applications coming into the system—both figures are in the region of 350,000— we pressed Paul Pugh as to whether the current delays had been caused by the decision to transfer overseas applications back to the UK. He said:
73 Consular Services to British Nationals, Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, HC 594, Session 2005-2006, 24 November 2005, para 2.19 74 Consular Services to British Nationals, Public Accounts Committee, HC 813, Session 2005-06, p5 75 Identity and Passport Service Annual Report and Accounts 2008-09, HC 629, p51 76 Identity and Passport Service Annual Report and Accounts 2010-11, HC 1077, p6 77 Home Office Annual Report and Accounts 2013-2014, HC 21, p16
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 29
It important to understand the kind of history of the overseas work. I think the figures that you are referring to are a bit like comparing apples and pears. We knew when we were preparing to take over the overseas work that we would need additional capacity to deal with that work. That was planned for, that was built into the organisation and indeed we recruited a substantial number of staff and trained them specifically in expertise of overseas work to make sure that that could be dealt with.
He explained the difference between domestic work, which is high volume but broadly very consistent, and overseas work, which is low volume and highly variable, depending upon which country people were applying from. Additionally, he explained that in the transition HMPO found that improvements in the information for customers were required to make sure the right information was received the first time. To enable this, staff had to develop their familiarity so that HMPO could “get to a steady state on the overseas work”. He added that the way that an overseas case is processed will differ very significantly depending on the country, depending on the level of risk and depending on the complexity of the application, but he expected over the next few months for the Agency to get to a position where it would be able to see the great majority of straightforward properly completed overseas applications being turned around in no more than four to six weeks.78
Interaction with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
74. On 5 June, the same day that passport delays were first raised in the House of Commons, a written ministerial statement was made by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Entitled “Support for British Nationals Overseas” it described the achievements of the 2013–16 FCO Consular Strategy. It states “One year on, the FCO has already delivered significant improvements to the services received by our consular customers across the world”, and cites positively that “In March 2014, we completed the full transfer of all responsibility for passport applications, decisions and the issuing of documents to Her Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO), who now offer [an] online passport application service to 4 million British nationals overseas, and have reduced the cost of replacing or renewing passports for British nationals overseas by 35% (from April 2014)”.79
75. The Foreign Affairs Committee have been undertaking an inquiry into FCO Consular Services, where the decision to transfer responsibility for overseas passports has also been challenged. That Committee asked former British Ambassadors whether it was a good decision to repatriate responsibility for passports to the UK and the Home Office. Sir Michael Arthur KCMG, said, “It was unpopular in Germany. A lot of Germans felt that the distance made it more difficult to get a passport. … It is a service that is provided postally. Logically, it is not hugely different to do it in the UK than overseas, but it is not popular”.80
78 Q 128-129 79 HC Deb, 5 June 2014, col 14WS 80 Foreign Affairs Committee oral evidence, FCO Consular Services, 25 February 2014, Q 121
30 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
76. The initial decision for overseas applications was taken by Ministers in 2009 and confirmed by the current Government in 2011. This was part of the regrettable line of removing overseas posts. The Committee have consistently been against the reduction in overseas resources. Whatever the reason for transferring responsibilities for processing overseas passport applications from the FCO to HMPO, it is clear that this is a mistake. Regardless of whether the overseas production of UK passports was more expensive than in comparable countries, or could have been produced more efficiently in the UK, UK citizens should be able to achieve a standard level of service. HMPO’s own statistics show that in the current financial year to date, only 13% of applications from overseas have been dealt with within the three-week target. Successive Ministers over the last 29 years from all administrations have been too focused on their departmental budgets, rather than the fact that providing a passport is a service, the cost of which is paid for by UK citizens.
77. The management of the transfer has been poorly handled. HMPO say that further work is required for them to get to a steady state in overseas work, whilst the FCO say that on transition risk had been managed. This contradiction highlights that the appropriate questions about business resilience were not being asked. Furthermore, the transition was completed in April 2014, which meant that this year HMPO was approaching its annual peak in demand with full responsibility for overseas applications for the first time. We believe it would have been far better to manage the transition so that responsibility was passed over when there was low demand, and then as demand increased this could be managed more effectively. In the meantime the Home Office have created emergency travel documents which British citizens should be able to pay for in the overseas posts until the crisis has passed as these will be quicker and more secure.
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 31
6 Forecasting the level of demand
78. HMPO receives around 5.5 million passport applications each year. In 2014, by 9 July, 4.2 million applications had been received. In each of the four months, March to June 2014, the total number of applications received exceeded that of the highest monthly total in any of the three preceding years.81 HM Passport Office models demand in order to try to predict future demand. In 2012–13, demand was generally about 3% below the predicted level.82 In 2014, however, Mr Pugh told us that demand had been “completely out of line with the forecast, which [had] been reliable over previous years for many years” and wondered whether this might be due to some “significant permanent demographic shift in the population of [HMPO’s] customers”.83 He emphasised that in previous years, the model had been accurate to within 3–4%, or at most 7–8% in any given month, and suggested that the current surge in demand was probably more likely to be to do with changing annual patterns of demand over the year, rather than increasing annual demand.84 The Home Secretary was somewhat more direct in her assessment:
I should emphasise that it is clear that HMPO’s modelling failed, and we will need to address that.85
79. HM Passport Office could take a more proactive approach to managing demand by sending out reminders to passport holders in the months before their passport is due to expire, the invention of email making this an easy process. Where the holder’s passport will expire during the peak late spring / early summer demand period, they might be offered a small reduction in the application fee to submit their application a few months earlier. This could help smooth out the level of demand over the year, and prevent a recurrence of this year’s problems.
81 Q 226-232 82 Identity and Passport Service, Annual Report and Accounts 2012-2013, HC 275, p8 83 Q 120-121 and 157 84 Q 232-239 85 HC Deb, 18 June 2014, col 1143
32 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
7 Operating costs, revenue and surplus
81. HM Passport Office remains on course to meet its Comprehensive Spending Review targets by the end of the review period in 2014–15, which includes being self-funded on core operations and delivering a reduction of administrative costs by 33%. In fact, in 2012– 13 the Agency made an overall surplus of £56 million.86 The Agency is primarily funded through the fees it charges and, in line with HM Treasury guidance, prices for passports are set to recover the cost of processing and producing them. Since 2010–11, HMPO have made £80m of efficiency savings through IT improvements, reviewing processes, operating from fewer offices, improving contracts with suppliers and reducing the use of consultants.87 This has reduced the average unit cost for UK passports, as set out in Table 6.
Table 6: Unit cost of processing a passport application
Financial year Average unit cost
2009–10 £68.92
2010–11 £70.91
2011–12 £64.68
2012–13 £59.40
2013–14 £57.71
Source: Extracted from letter from Paul Pugh, Chief Executive, HM Passport Office, 20 June 2014 (WPO0002) and Her Majesty’s Passport Office, Annual Report and Accounts 2013-2014, HC 595, p7
82. Some of these efficiency savings have been passed on to customers in the form of reduced application fees.88 The fee for a standard adult passport was reduced from £77.50 to £72.50 in September 2012, and for a child passport, from £49 to £46.89 From April 2014, the passport fee for customers applying for a UK passport from overseas was reduced by £45.00 for adults to £83.00, and £28.50 for children to £53.00. The fee for an overseas 48- page passport application was also reduced by £63.50 to £91.00.90
83. HMPO is not an enterprise that aims to make a profit on behalf of HM Treasury. It is a public body that provides services to UK citizens. Many of these citizens are already paying taxes. They are then asked to pay a fee to acquire a passport, and pay a fee to get
86 Her Majesty’s Passport Office, Annual Report and Accounts 2013-2014, HC 595, p10 87 Her Majesty’s Passport Office, Annual Report and Accounts 2013-2014, HC 595, p7 88 Her Majesty’s Passport Office, Annual Report and Accounts 2013-2014, HC 595, p7 89 “Passport fees” https://www.gov.uk/passport-fees 90 Her Majesty’s Passport Office, Annual Report and Accounts 2013-2014, HC 595, p7
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 33
a better service than the standard level. Whilst it is right that applicants are asked to cover the cost of the passport, it is clear that the price they are paying is too high, which is resulting in repeated, large surpluses. The state should not be exploiting its citizens by making a profit on what is a basic right. We recommend that HM Passport Office set prices at a break-even point (allowing for a reasonable margin of error), either by reducing prices, or by devoting surplus revenue to measures designed to raise service standards by investing in the product and training people who deliver it.
Contractors
84. HMPO’s Annual Report and Accounts 2013–14 sets out the ‘Key supply arrangements’ for the agency. The key IT supplier, Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC), completed the roll-out of the new passport application management system, which has been designed to be easier to use and to enable cases to be examined more efficiently. De La Rue, who design and produce the passports, produced 5.5m passports that year, and have produced 17.5m since they started production in October 2010. In September 2013, a new agreement was signed with Post Office Ltd to provide the Check and Send service to customers for the next seven years. In addition, in February 2014, the French company Teleperformance were awarded the new contract as the contact centre provider.91
85. Due to the number of complaints received by the Committee regarding call centres, we questioned Mr Pugh on the contact centre contract. He informed us that the amount Teleperformance were paid was determined by the volume of calls they received. Additionally, as they did not have full access to HMPO’s casework system for individuals, they could access only basic information which they could relay to the customer.92
86. We are concerned that callers wishing to find out about their passport application will not receive a decent service due to the information they require not being accessible to Teleperformance. We are also concerned that the contract between HMPO and Teleperformance has the potential to be gamed to the detriment of UK taxpayers. If Teleperformance are being paid by volume of calls it gives them a perverse incentive to ‘create’ more calls. This could be easily achieved, by cutting off a call, so another call has to be made, or by not fully dealing with the callers query, so that a further call is required. We recommend that the basis of payment is altered, so it is not by the phone call but by completed customer query.
91 Her Majesty’s Passport Office, Annual Report and Accounts 2013-2014, HC 595, p10 92 Q 248-263
34 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
Conclusions and Recommendations
The emergence of a ‘backlog’
1. The issue of service standards has been a persistent theme in the way the Home Office defends the delay in dealing with cases over several governments. These service standards are arbitrary and set by the Passport Office Officials in line with what they believe to be the correct level of service. We are yet to be convinced by this defence, for example in our other reports on UKBA we have consistently questioned why backlogs have been developed when we have been told that it can take as little as 45 minutes to process a case and if you pay more for expedited service then you expect the processing within that time frame. (Paragraph 12)
2. Her Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO) have set a standard service time for the processing of passport applications. It appears clear to the Committee that applications that are not processed within that time period are outside the service standard, and therefore undoubtedly constitute a backlog. To claim otherwise causes confusion, and leads to frustration and worry amongst those applicants who are waiting for their passport. We have reiterated several times that, whilst accepting there needs to be a reasonable allowance of time to process an application, internally set measures of success should not allow any Home Office entity to avoid addressing outstanding cases promptly. Any case that has been received by HMPO and that has not been processed within a reasonable period of time constitutes a backlog. The focus of HMPO, and indeed any processing entity of the Home Office, should be on clearing any cases as quickly as possible not just within an arbitrary deadline. The culture of using the service standards as a shield goes to the heart of the problem with the recent delays in the work of HMPO. (Paragraph 13)
3. Given the impact that these delays have had on constituents, Parliament must be in a position to know how the current backlog in processing applications is being managed, and must be able to monitor whether a new backlog is beginning to develop. The Committee is concerned that it appears that Ministers were not provided with up-to-date statistics when they addressed the House. We recommend that HMPO publish on-line its weekly operational performance data, so that Ministers, MPs and others can have accurate, up-to-date information about its performance. We will also add the work in progress level as an indicator to our quarterly review of immigration. (Paragraph 16)
4. We are concerned that the work in progress figure remained unacceptably high, despite the contingency measures. Although work in progress has begun to fall, it seems apparent that the backlog will remain for some time. In future, HMPO needs to do more to prevent work in progress getting to this level, as it is clearly unsustainable. This must include formally requesting further resources from the Home Office and installing regular Ministerial meetings until the peak is dealt with. (Paragraph 18)
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 35
Ministerial and managerial response
5. We are concerned that the contingency measures announced to respond to the backlog were too little, too late, for this summer holiday period. This is despite the impression that any request for resources from managers was acted upon and granted by Ministers. (Paragraph 22)
6. We do not expect Ministers to have to perform detailed management of HMPO especially considering the Office has a complete management team and a Chief Executive, Paul Pugh. We expect someone in Mr Pugh's position, who is paid £104,000 of taxpayers’ money, to be able to manage the running of HMPO effectively. The recent crisis shows that there has been a complete management failure at the highest levels of the organisation. (Paragraph 23)
7. Given the information that was provided in Parliament, it seems that initially Ministers were not adequately briefed on the level of underperformance in HMPO, and subsequently did not have to hand the most up-to-date statistics. We are concerned by the apparent miscommunication between the executive agency and its home department. (Paragraph 24)
8. We note the establishment of a review of HM Passport Office’s operations, and a review of its agency status. We further highlight the apparent miscommunication between HMPO and Ministers as the crisis unfolded, and call on the Permanent Secretary to consider the reasons for this within the review of oversight arrangements. However, we do not believe there is a need to delay action as a result of this review. We call on the Home Office to remove the agency status from the HMPO and bring it back under the direct control of Ministers. HMPO should still retain a separate Director General as the Home Secretary has done previously with the former UKBA. In addition regular updates must be produced against key indicators and provided to Ministers in bi-monthly meetings (Paragraph 25)
9. The Committee fully appreciates the work of Ministers, the Chief Executive of HMPO, and their private offices, in particular Farooq Belai, in dealing with individual cases that have been brought to them by MPs in a timely manner. However, for members of the public who did not contact their MPs, they were still held in queues and their cases were not dealt with a sufficient level of service. This is a matter of customer service, and all applicants should be able to receive details of their applications, regardless of whether they follow it up themselves, or if it is followed up by their constituency MP. We recommend that all those who answer customer service calls are allowed access to information relating to the progress of an application. (Paragraph 29)
10. Relaxing security checks in the examination of passport applications could be a quick fix for a temporary problem, which could have the potential to do significant damage to the UK’s national interests and national security. We are alarmed that such measures were even contemplated, let alone introduced without ministerial approval. The Home Secretary was right to intervene to have the new guidance withdrawn. (Paragraph 33)
36 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
11. We are concerned that a number of people have ended up out of pocket due to the Passport Office’s inability to meet its service standard. We believe it is unfair that some applicants are able to receive a fast-track service free of charge, because they have made use of it after an arbitrary date decided by HMPO, while other applicants have had to pay. Furthermore, we believe it would be wrong for HMPO to make a surplus from the extra fees of those who were too early to get the fast-track offer, but too late to wait any longer before upgrading. We believe an equitable solution would be for the HMPO to compensate all those people who made an initial application on or after 1 May 2014, who subsequently upgraded to the fast-track service and who met the criteria for the free upgrade which was later offered. (Paragraph 38)
12. Like the free upgrade to a fast-track service, these contingency measures relating to renewals and children’s applications may have helped those who needed to travel after they were announced, but were not helpful for those whose applications were already in the system. We see no reason why people could not have these contingencies applied seamlessly, without the need for withdrawing applications and the consequent delay. (Paragraph 40)
13. We recommend that, to eliminate further difficulties for applicants, HMPO should deal with passport applications on the basis of stated need, rather than by travel date. To enable this, HMPO should advise in its guidance to applicants that reasons for earlier processing, such as a visa application, should be set out when a passport application is submitted. (Paragraph 42)
14. People rely on the advice that is given on application forms, on the Passport Office website and via the helpline. Based on this information, they act and make plans accordingly. We believe that once it became clear to HMPO that they were experiencing high demand, they should have been proactive in managing the expectations of applicants by informing them that processing times could be longer during this period. This could have been easily done through updating the website and providing this message through the helpline. (Paragraph 45)
15. We welcome the flexibility of HMPO staff, and staff from the wider Home Office, to be able to take on other duties in order to deal with the backlog. We further welcome the identification of staff with the necessary experience of nationality law as this will enable those individuals to hit the ground running. However, we seek reassurance that essential duties, for example fraud checks, will still be carried out to the necessary standard. Furthermore, just as this is a busy time for the Passport Office, it is an increasingly busy time at the border. We urge the Home Office not to try to deal with this backlog by redeploying staff from other areas and offices and causing a crisis there a few months later. (Paragraph 48)
Offices and staffing
16. We acknowledge that this crisis placed a significant burden on the staff of HM Passport Office and applaud them for their efforts, which have helped to minimise the consequences of the unexpected surge in demand. (Paragraph 52)
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 37
17. Based on the figures of the number of staff, we cannot agree with the statement of PCS that the backlog in processing applications “is clearly down to staffing”. If that were the case, delays would have been experienced in previous years when fewer people were employed in HMPO. However, questions remain over whether HMPO have the right number of staff, and the right mix to deal with peaks in demand. (Paragraph 60)
18. Based on the figures for overtime, it is clear that the use of overtime to deal with peaks in demand has proved unsustainable this year. This again raises the question of whether HMPO have the right number of staff, and the right mix to deal with peaks in demand. We recommend that future additional jobs should be located, where possible, in areas that suffered from previous job losses in the Passport Office. (Paragraph 65)
19. We are concerned that the PCS Union invited its members in HM Passport Office to go on strike. This would cause further problems and delays in processing passport applications. We call on the Union and HMPO management to discuss the issue of adequate staffing, so that a sustainable solution can be negotiated, and call for the restoration of goodwill between management and the Union in this area that is of great importance to UK citizens. (Paragraph 69)
Applications from overseas
20. The initial decision for overseas applications was taken by Ministers in 2009 and confirmed by the current Government in 2011. This was part of the regrettable line of removing overseas posts. The Committee have consistently been against the reduction in overseas resources. Whatever the reason for transferring responsibilities for processing overseas passport applications from the FCO to HMPO, it is clear that this is a mistake. Regardless of whether the overseas production of UK passports was more expensive than in comparable countries, or could have been produced more efficiently in the UK, UK citizens should be able to achieve a standard level of service. HMPO’s own statistics show that in the current financial year to date, only 13% of applications from overseas have been dealt with within the three-week target. Successive Ministers over the last 29 years from all administrations have been too focused on their departmental budgets, rather than the fact that providing a passport is a service, the cost of which is paid for by UK citizens. (Paragraph 76)
21. The management of the transfer has been poorly handled. HMPO say that further work is required for them to get to a steady state in overseas work, whilst the FCO say that on transition risk had been managed. This contradiction highlights that the appropriate questions about business resilience were not being asked. Furthermore, the transition was completed in April 2014, which meant that this year HMPO was approaching its annual peak in demand with full responsibility for overseas applications for the first time. We believe it would have been far better to manage the transition so that responsibility was passed over when there was low demand, and then as demand increased this could be managed more effectively. In the meantime the Home Office have created emergency travel documents which British citizens
38 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
should be able to pay for in the overseas posts until the crisis has passed as these will be quicker and more secure. (Paragraph 77)
Forecasting the level of demand
22. HM Passport Office could take a more proactive approach to managing demand by sending out reminders to passport holders in the months before their passport is due to expire, the invention of email making this an easy process. Where the holder’s passport will expire during the peak late spring / early summer demand period, they might be offered a small reduction in the application fee to submit their application a few months earlier. This could help smooth out the level of demand over the year, and prevent a recurrence of this year’s problems. (Paragraph 79)
Operating costs, revenue and surplus
23. HMPO is not an enterprise that aims to make a profit on behalf of HM Treasury. It is a public body that provides services to UK citizens. Many of these citizens are already paying taxes. They are then asked to pay a fee to acquire a passport, and pay a fee to get a better service than the standard level. Whilst it is right that applicants are asked to cover the cost of the passport, it is clear that the price they are paying is too high, which is resulting in repeated, large surpluses. The state should not be exploiting its citizens by making a profit on what is a basic right. We recommend that HM Passport Office set prices at a break-even point (allowing for a reasonable margin of error), either by reducing prices, or by devoting surplus revenue to measures designed to raise service standards by investing in the product and training people who deliver it. (Paragraph 83)
24. We are concerned that callers wishing to find out about their passport application will not receive a decent service due to the information they require not being accessible to Teleperformance. We are also concerned that the contract between HMPO and Teleperformance has the potential to be gamed to the detriment of UK taxpayers. If Teleperformance are being paid by volume of calls it gives them a perverse incentive to ‘create’ more calls. This could be easily achieved, by cutting off a call, so another call has to be made, or by not fully dealing with the callers query, so that a further call is required. We recommend that the basis of payment is altered, so it is not by the phone call but by completed customer query. (Paragraph 86)
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 39
Annex A: Passport Office: UK operations
Corporate functions London (Marsham St)
General Register Office Southport
Application Processing Centre Belfast & Customer Service Centre Durham
Liverpool
Peterborough
Customer Service Centre Glasgow
London (Globe House)
Newport
Customer Service Office Birmingham Leicester
Blackburn Luton
Bristol Maidstone
Chelmsford Manchester
Crawley Plymouth
Derby Portsmouth
Edinburgh Reading
Leeds Sheffield
Flexible Team Aberystwyth Norwich
Carlisle Swansea
Coleraine Warwick
Dundee Wrexham
Hull Yeovil
Newport, Isle of Wight
Source: HMPO Business Plan 2014–15
40 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
Annex B: Number of British Citizens living overseas
COUNTRY BRITISH CITIZENS Australia 1,277,474 United States of America 758,919 Canada 674,371 Spain 381,025 New Zealand 313,850 South Africa 305,660 Ireland 253,605 Germany 96,938 Channel Islands 73,030 Italy 72,234 Netherlands 48,977 Switzerland 47,327 Cyprus 42,854 Isle of Man 39,344 Least developed countries 38,447 Poland 37,020 United Arab Emirates 33,856 Bangladesh 32,852 Saudi Arabia 31,361 Turkey 28,008 Belgium 27,835 Indonesia 27,351 Sweden 23,129 Israel 22,250 Japan 20,812 Norway 20,322 Portugal 18,989 Denmark 18,047 China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region 17,455 Zimbabwe 15,561 China 12,623 Malta 11,429 Chile 10,801 Austria 9,843 Malaysia 9,676 Kuwait 8,672 Greece 8,445 Botswana 7,534 Jamaica 7,139 Libya 7,090 Qatar 6,846 Luxembourg 5,927 Hungary 5,829 Oman 5,613 Finland 5,570 Republic of Korea 5,149 Brazil 5,013 India 4,956 Brunei Darussalam 4,624 Czech Republic 4,456 Gibraltar 4,327 Philippines 4,309 Slovakia 4,276
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 41
Bermuda 4,047 Barbados 4,015 Mexico 3,885 Romania 3,846 Bulgaria 3,206 Ecuador 3,144 Bahrain 3,119 Egypt 2,978 Cayman Islands 2,753 Thailand 2,531 Lithuania 2,187 Ghana 2,117 Trinidad and Tobago 2,087 Peru 1,928 Monaco 1,862 Panama 1,732 Russian Federation 1,688 Vietnam 1,627 Algeria 1,606 Bahamas 1,492 Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) 1,473 Latvia 1,423 Malawi 1,402 Mauritius 1,326 Uganda 1,278 Argentina 1,256 Fiji 1,246 Colombia 1,205 Iceland 1,184 Falkland Islands 1,120 United Republic of Tanzania 1,070 Andorra 973 Antigua and Barbuda 969 Saint Lucia 924 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 891 Dominican Republic 803 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 767 France 720 Jordan 704 Zambia 588 Dominica 587 Guyana 583 Slovenia 577 Papua New Guinea 573 Costa Rica 524 Anguilla 513 Belize 513 British Virgin Islands 459 Belarus 440 Turks and Caicos Islands 414 Guadeloupe 411 Saint Helena 401 Sri Lanka 378 Sierra Leone 343 Saint Kitts and Nevis 315 Democratic People's Republic of Korea 294 Croatia 290 Seychelles 275 Tajikistan 265 Lebanon 261 Faeroe Islands 252
42 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
Puerto Rico 227 Guatemala 213 Serbia 201 Uzbekistan 189 Uruguay 176 Paraguay 172 Maldives 171 Rwanda 160 Madagascar 156 Martinique 151 Republic of Moldova 133 Solomon Islands 120 Vanuatu 108 Montserrat 105 French Polynesia 102 Cambodia 94 El Salvador 89 Mongolia 86 Honduras 74 Nicaragua 73 Central African Republic 61 Cook Islands 61 Liberia 60 Eritrea 56 Estonia 54 Caribbean Netherlands 54 Cape Verde 52 Cuba 52 Sint Maarten (Dutch part) 52 Liechtenstein 48 Bhutan 38 Samoa 32 Kiribati 22 Niue 11 Bosnia and Herzegovina 10 Tuvalu 7 San Marino 4 Source: United Nations website
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 43
Formal Minutes
Wednesday 3 September 2014
Members present:
Keith Vaz, in the Chair
Michael Ellis Dr Julian Huppert Paul Flynn Mark Reckless
Draft Report (Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications), proposed by the Chair, brought up and read.
Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.
Paragraphs 1 to 86 read and agreed to.
Annexes agreed to.
Resolved, That the Report be the Fourth 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 9 September at 2.15 pm]
44 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
Witnesses
The following witnesses gave evidence. Transcripts can be viewed on the Committee’s inquiry page at http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons- select/home-affairs-committee/inquiries/parliament-2010/the-work-of-the-hm-passport- office/
Tuesday 17 June 2014 Question number
Mike Jones, Home Office group secretary, Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) Q 1-67
Paul Pugh, Chief Executive, HM Passport Office, and Registrar General for England and Wales Q 68-189
Tuesday 8 July 2014
Paul Pugh, Chief Executive, HM Passport Office, and Registrar General for England and Wales Q 190-276
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 45
Published written evidence
The following written evidence was received and can be viewed on the Committee’s inquiry web page at http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a- z/commons-select/home-affairs-committee/inquiries/parliament-2010/the-work-of-the-hm- passport-office/. INQ numbers are generated by the evidence processing system and so may not be complete.
1 Paula Vennells, Chief Executive, Post Office (WPO0001) 2 Paul Pugh, Chief Executive, HM Passport Office (WPO0002) 3 Paul Pugh, Chief Executive, HM Passport Office (WPO0003) 4 Paul Pugh, Chief Executive, HM Passport Office (WPO0004) 5 Paul Pugh, Chief Executive, HM Passport Office (WPO0005)
46 Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications
List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament
All publications from the Committee are available on the Committee’s website at http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/home- affairs-committee/publications/
Session 2014–15 First Report Tobacco smuggling HC 200 Second Report Female genital mutilation: the case for a national action HC 201 plan Third Report The work of the Immigration Directorates (October – HC 237 December 2013)
Session 2013–14 First Report Police and Crime Commissioners: Register of Interests HC 69
Second Report Child sexual exploitation and the response to localised HC 68 grooming Third Report Leadership and standards in the police HC 67 Fourth Report The work of the UK Border Agency (Oct–Dec 2012) HC 486 Fifth Report E-crime HC 70
Sixth Report Police and Crime Commissioners: power to remove Chief HC 487 Constables Seventh Report Asylum HC 71 Eighth Report The work of the UK Border Agency (Jan–March 2013) HC 616
Ninth Report Pre-Lisbon Treaty EU police and criminal justice measures: HC 615 the UK’s opt-in decision Tenth Report Leadership and Standards in the Police: follow-up HC 756
Eleventh Report Khat HC 869
Twelfth Report Drugs: new psychoactive substances and prescription drugs HC 819
Thirteenth Report The work of the Permanent Secretary HC 233
Fourteenth Report The Government’s Response to the Committees’ Reports HC 1177 on the 2014 block opt-out decision
Fifteenth Report The work of the Immigration Directorates (April– HC 820 September 2013)
Sixteenth Report Police and Crime Commissioners: Progress to date HC 757
Seventeenth Report Counter-terrorism HC 231
Eighteenth Report Reform of the Police Federation HC 1163
Her Majesty’s Passport Office: delays in processing applications 47
Session 2012–13 First Report Effectiveness of the Committee in 2010–12 HC 144 Second Report Work of the Permanent Secretary (April–Dec 2011) HC 145 Third Report Pre-appointment Hearing for Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector HC 183 of Constabulary Fourth Report Private Investigators HC 100 Fifth Report The work of the UK Border Agency (Dec 2011–Mar 2012) HC 71 Sixth Report The work of the Border Force HC 523 Seventh Report Olympics Security HC 531 Eighth Report The work of the UK Border Agency (April–June 2012) HC 603 Ninth Report Drugs: Breaking the Cycle HC 184-I Tenth Report Powers to investigate the Hillsborough disaster: interim HC 793 Report on the Independent Police Complaints Commission Eleventh Report Independent Police Complaints Commission HC 494 Twelfth Report The draft Anti-social Behaviour Bill: pre-legislative scrutiny HC 836 Thirteenth Report Undercover Policing: Interim Report HC 837 Fourteenth Report The work of the UK Border Agency (July-Sept 2012) HC 792
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 (Nov 2010-March 2011) HC 929 Tenth Report Implications for the Justice and Home Affairs area of the HC 789 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-Dec 2011) HC 1722