Tom Brake (Carshalton & Wallington, Liberal Democrat)

We tabled an amendment that unfortunately was a starred amendment, so it is not subject to debate here. However, I thought that I would use this opportunity to ask the Minister to clarify precisely what is being achieved in the clause. The explanatory notes suggest that, as a result of the clause

“the IPCC may carry out investigations in relation to the exercise of specified immigration and asylum enforcement functions by contractors”—

I emphasise that word, “contractors”—

“and in relation to the exercise of customs functions by (a) designated customs officials and officials of the Secretary of State”.

Am I right therefore that it will not be possible to make a complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission about immigration officials, as opposed to immigration contractors? If so, I hope the Minister will explain why that is the case. Are there circumstances in which a complaint could be made to the IPCC about the activities of immigration or customs officials outside the UK?

Phil Woolas (Minister of State (also in the Home Office), Home Office; Oldham East & Saddleworth, Labour)

The hon. Gentleman did indeed table an amendment that gave me notice to provide background information, which I have in front of me. I thank him for raising the point.

I will outline the background to clause 30 in relation to the IPCC. Section 41 of the Police and Justice Act 2006 gives the Secretary of State the power to make regulations conferring functions on the IPCC in relation to the exercise by immigration officers and officials of the Secretary of State of specified enforcement functions that relate to immigration or asylum. Clause 30 will enable the Secretary of State to extend further the functions of the IPCC to inspect any contractual services provided in relation to the discharge of those enforcement functions. It may also investigate the exercise of the general customs functions by designated customs officials and officials of the Secretary of State; the exercise of customs revenue functions by the director and any  person exercising those functions on his behalf, and; the provision of contractual services provided in relation to the discharge of any of those customs functions.

The clause is necessary to give the IPCC oversight of all immigration and asylum-related enforcement functions and the customs functions that will now be exercised by or on behalf of the UK Border Agency. It will also have oversight of contractual services provided in relation to the discharge of those functions. The IPCC already has an oversight role in respect of the exercise of customs functions by HMRC. The clause will ensure that it plays the same role when general and revenue customs functions become exercisable by the UK Border Agency. The purpose of the clause is the extension to contractors.

On a pragmatic, day-to-day basis, the UK Border Agency works hand in glove with the police. Many of our operations are carried out with the police and many of our functions are carried out with their co-operation.  That is why, notwithstanding the point made in the previous debate, we think it right to extend this power in recognition of the reality on the ground.

Tom Brake (Carshalton & Wallington, Liberal Democrat)

Can the Minister also respond to the query about whether it is possible to make a complaint to the IPCC in relation to something that happens when an agency is working abroad?

Phil Woolas (Minister of State (also in the Home Office), Home Office; Oldham East & Saddleworth, Labour)

No, it is not. Our inspectorate covers the functions that are carried out by our people overseas, but complaints to the IPCC cannot be related to something that takes place overseas. That is outside its remit.