UK Borders Bill

I do not have a response to that point, except to say that the inspector made some positive comments even about Yarl’s Wood. She observed that a child protection committee had been established and met regularly twice a month; that the terms of reference were clear and appropriate; that the committee operated as a strategic planning and policy-making group; and that the work plan produced to develop child protection policy and practice was impressive. Those are positive observations. She also observed that progress had been made on detainee welfare, with the appointment of a welfare officer, and that there was sound management of diversity, healthcare and education issues. There are positives there. I accept that in any of these centres there can from time to time be difficulties. We know that Yarl’s Wood has had its fair share. I will try to respond outside the parameters of today’s Committee to other questions raised about Yarl’s Wood if I can. I have pointed up some of those alternatives to detention that have been under discussion with the Migrant Helpline and the arrangements being developed there. That is a useful initiative we should be pleased to see in development. The noble Earl, Lord Listowel, raised a question about record keeping. He was concerned that poor record keeping meant families and children were kept in detention for longer. I am not sure I can accept that. The noble Earl has an absolute assurance from me that the centres holding families with children keep cumulative totals of time spent in detention, not just the time spent at a particular centre. It is obviously difficult in some of these situations to be absolutely precise, but we have an obligation to keep timely records, and we try to keep rigorously to that. A number of noble Lords suggested that I might like to visit Yarl’s Wood or other detention centres. I am considering that. I have to make a couple of other visits relating to this Bill and may well build that into the programme over the summer. It helps me to understand better the issues raised and, in general, is a positive thing that should be done. To return to the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, about our response, I understand that the Yarl’s Wood action plan has been developed in response to the report by Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons. If the noble Lord has not seen the action plan, I am happy for a copy of it to be made available to him and to other noble Lords who have contributed to our Committee deliberations on this. I thank noble Lords who have played a part in this debate, which has been constructive. I made a commitment earlier that we will continue to have discussions on how we can improve the quality of care and raise standards of practice in detention centres and how we reflect that, not necessarily in the Bill but perhaps in some of the guidance that is issued. That offer of further discussions outside Committee is very much meant, and I hope that we can have some of those discussions in the next couple of months.