UK Borders Bill

It will not be the existing BID that is designated as a document; it will be the second generation that becomes ID cards. I turn to Amendment No. 16. The purpose of Clause 5(2)(k) is to enable the Border and Immigration Agency to require the surrender of old, less secure documents which currently serve as evidence of immigration status, such as immigration status letters—which can be forged—or vignettes. Our intention is to replace them with the secure biometric immigration document. Bleeding out insecure documents is a key contributor to tackling illegal working. Our intention is significantly to reduce the number of acceptable immigration documents issued by the Border and Immigration Agency to the biometric-enabled visa and the biometric immigration document. Representatives from the NCP stated in the public evidence sessions in another place that good employers want us to reduce the number of different documents issued to foreign nationals granted leave in the United Kingdom. We intend to reduce these to two types of secure document: the biometric-enabled visa and a biometric immigration document. It has always been our intention only to require the surrender of immigration- related documents, which would include vignettes granting leave. We have therefore tabled Amendment No. 15A to make this clear in the Bill. Noble Lords will know that we have tabled Amendments Nos. 16A, 16B, and 19A, to which the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, referred, to address some of the concerns emanating from the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee in respect of insufficient detail about the biometric registration scheme in the Bill. The noble Baroness has very honourably consulted a colleague in another place, Damian Green, and I fully understand why she cannot give a firmer commitment on the points covered by the amendments today. I respect her need to reflect further on their content. The amendments set out in the Bill more detail about when the Secretary of State may cancel a biometric immigration document and when a holder may be required to notify the Secretary of State. However, they also reflect the fact that circumstances change and, for this reason, it is necessary to allow for additional circumstances to be specified in regulations, which will of course be subject to the affirmative procedure. The proposed changes are designed to follow more closely the comparable provisions in the Identity Cards Act. There are certain differences because of the different immigration functions of the biometric immigration document. There will no longer be a power to suspend a biometric immigration document, because it is no longer needed. If the Secretary of State considers that she may have to cancel a biometric immigration document, she may require it to be surrendered to enable her to investigate further before making a decision to cancel it. This approach reflects similar practices for other types of secure document, including passports. The government amendments address the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee’s concern about the circumstances in which the holder of a biometric immigration document would be required to notify the Secretary of State. We would clearly prefer this approach to Amendment No. 17, which could mean that the Secretary of State held out-of-date information about some biometric immigration document holders and their entitlements in the UK, and that the biometric immigration documents contained inaccurate information. The list omits key situations in which we want the biometric immigration document holder to tell us about a change in circumstances—for example, breakdown in relationship or other factors which could impact on eligibility to remain in the UK. The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, made some comments about the purpose of allowing a biometric immigration document to be combined with another document. I am happy to give some further consideration to what he said. I have already explained some of the detail about the types of document that the Secretary of State will require to be surrendered. We may well require individuals to surrender their passport to enable an existing vignette or stamp to be cancelled, with the passport being returned when the BID is issued to replace the old vignette or stamp. Those are the sorts of circumstances in which we might want to do that. We will fully and amply publicise any changes to the circumstances in which a holder of a biometric immigration document is required to notify the Secretary of State so that people are aware.