Clause 2 - Individuals entered in Register
Identity Cards Bill
5:45 pm
Mr Des Browne (Minister of State (Citizenship, Immigration and Counter-Terrorism), Home Office; Kilmarnock and Loudoun, Labour)
Again, we have had a short but interesting and important debate, which I shall seek to answer. I cannot answer the specific questions on numbers asked by the hon. Member for Woking, but I can give him some numbers, although they do not specifically respond to his question. I shall endeavour to get that information to him.
The hon. Gentleman's amendment No. 12 would entitle any foreign national with leave to remain in the UK for more than a month to an identity card. However, as hon. and right hon. Members know, under European legislation we are not able to require European economic area nationals and their family members to register before they have been resident for three months. That European legislation applies, and all the countries in the European Union subscribe to it.
As I understand it, British citizens who are resident in France must comply with the requirements of French law, whatever those are; I am not sure about the detail of that. I am sure that there are European countries where residential registration is required after three months, and I will try to find out in order to share that with the Committee. We are not seeking to do anything on EEA nationals that we are not empowered to do by European legislation and what other Governments do, albeit not universally. I do not consider that a period of a month would be helpful, either to an individual or in controlling immigration, even if it were legally possible—and it is not legally possible for all people who are resident in this country, for the reasons that I have stated.
The Bill allows us to prescribe a period after which foreign nationals would have an entitlement to register and be issued with an ID card. In the consultation document published with the draft Bill, we made it clear that our intention was to make that period three months, for the reasons, among others, that I have set out relating to European legislation. After that, we would require a foreign national to obtain a card. However, I believe that we need to retain a power to prescribe the period, so that, should it prove necessary to extend or reduce it, we could do so.
There are good reasons for the three-month period. At present, the UK admits short-term visitors for up to six months, as has been pointed out, but internationally it is more common for people to be admitted for three months for a short visit. In the USA, for example, visitors are admitted for 90 days, whereas in Europe three months is the norm for a short visit. I think that we shall consider moving towards that shortly.
In practical terms there is little point in requiring people who are here for so short a period as 31 days to register and obtain an ID card and to meet the costs of doing so. However, we need to draw a line somewhere, and it seems more logical to expect that anyone who is here for more than three months is resident on a longer-term basis—as a student, for example—where the need to register and obtain an ID card would seem much more sensible.
Amendments Nos. 13 and 14 further widen the entitlement to register by removing the ability to stop those residing in the UK without any entitlement to remain from being entitled to be entered on to the register. That would seriously restrict the scheme's ability to perform its public-interest statutory purposes of enforcing immigration controls and the prohibitions on unauthorised working and employment. If the amendments were accepted, an individual who simply met the time requirements of having been resident in the UK for what we intend to be three months would be entitled to register, even if he had no legal right to remain in the UK. That would include those who have no right to reside here but are seeking asylum, those who have entered legitimately but have overstayed, and those who have entered illegally and have remained. Therefore, we would be opening up the register to a number of people who would otherwise have no status to be on it.
Clause 2(4) is intended to provide the flexibility needed to allow a person's details to be recorded where it would be useful to have those details even though they are not entitled to be registered. Amendment No. 70 would remove that flexibility, but I believe that there are good reasons to keep it. One example of the way in which the provision could be used is to record failed applicants or those about to be deported. That would ensure that any further attempts to register would be flagged up, particularly if we register those who have been deported and they turn up later trying to register.
Another example could be of a person applying for and being issued with a biometric visa in anticipation of coming to the UK. In that case it might be useful to have the information recorded in the register, so that if the person exercised their right to stay longer than three months, the process of getting a residence permit or ID card would be made easier. There are also cases where it would be useful, for national security reasons, to have information recorded on the register about an individual who would not be entitled to register or who had not yet applied for a card.
It is important that we maximise the use of the register to obtain the most benefits. Therefore, I invite the hon. Member for Woking to withdraw the amendment.