UK Parliament / Open data

UK Borders Bill

Proceeding contribution from Lord Bassam of Brighton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 16 October 2007. It occurred during Debate on bills on UK Borders Bill.
My Lords, this amendment would impose a requirement to provide immigration detainees held in a police station with access to immigration advice on request. Noble Lords on the Liberal Democrat Benches tabled this amendment during Committee and we had a very full debate on it at that point. Although we could not accept the amendment, I had hoped that the reassurances I gave during the debate might have addressed some of their major concerns. I explained in Committee why we did not consider this amendment necessary and, in essence, we have not changed our view. We agree, however, that it is entirely right for individuals detained under Immigration Act powers to be able to access competent and independent legal advice at an early stage. Those are two essentials. That includes individuals held at a police station. We acknowledge that in the past immigration detainees held initially at police stations, usually before transfer to an immigration removal centre, may not always have been able to gain easy access to immigration advice. It would be fairly accepted that that was in large part due to the fact that duty solicitors, who would normally be contacted by the police on behalf of detainees, were unlikely to be able to provide advice to individuals on non-criminal immigration matters. To address this issue, the Legal Services Commission has been running a pilot scheme since June 2006 to provide independent immigration advice by telephone on non-criminal immigration matters to people detained at police stations. I explained in Committee that the commission believes that telephone advice is, realistically, the most effective method of providing timely advice to individuals held at police stations, particularly as they will usually be held for very short periods before transfer to an immigration removal centre or release. Indeed, the commission has been piloting the provision of telephone advice for people held at police stations since October 2005. Under the Criminal Defence Services Direct pilot scheme, the commission evaluated the use of telephone advice for individuals detained at police stations and facing specific criminal charges. The pilot established that the provision of telephone advice provided clients with prompt access to legal advice and represented value for money in terms of public expenditure. In relation to the telephone pilot for immigration detainees, I understand that feedback received from advisers taking part in the scheme has suggested that the benefit to clients has been very positive, and that no significant problems with telephone advice as a method of delivery have been reported. One of the concerns raised in Committee was how a telephone-based service could deal with the need for interpreters. The pilot scheme explored this issue. Under that scheme all advisers have to be able to set up three-way conversations between the police station, the interpreter and themselves. This is a contractual requirement—it is specified in the terms of the contract—for firms taking part in the pilot. The commission has indicated that it will share its findings in relation to the evaluation of the scheme with representative bodies, and that the evaluation will be published on its website in November. I understand that the findings have been positive and that the commission will be tendering for new contracts later this year. The noble Lord has identified a genuine issue. We have taken steps to meet some of the pressures and demands that have arisen as a consequence of that issue. I think that we can fairly say that we have addressed those concerns through the pilots and, when the evaluation report is fully absorbed, we hope that it will be possible to see in the tendering process next year a wider adoption of the telephone advice service. On the point raised in particular by the noble Lord about the need to meet organisations concerned about this which in one way or another provide advice and support, the department meets regularly with a range of stakeholders including the Poppy Project and others that he referred to. No doubt they will seek to use the opportunity of those discussions and meetings to reflect on the issue raised by the amendment. In any event, I give an undertaking that this is one issue that will be fairly considered when department officials next meet.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

695 c669-71 

Session

2006-07

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top