UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 217-ivHouse of COMMONSMINUTES OF EVIDENCETAKEN BEFOREHOME AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
MANAGING MIGRATION: POINTS-BASED SYSTEM
|
|
1. |
This is an uncorrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others.
|
|
2. |
Any public use of, or reference to, the contents should make clear that neither witnesses nor Members have had the opportunity to correct the record. The transcript is not yet an approved formal record of these proceedings.
|
|
3. |
Members who receive this for the purpose of correcting questions addressed by them to witnesses are asked to send corrections to the Committee Assistant.
|
|
4. |
Prospective witnesses may receive this in preparation for any written or oral evidence they may in due course give to the Committee. |
|
5. |
Transcribed by the Official Shorthand Writers to the Houses of Parliament: W B Gurney & Sons LLP, Hope House, Telephone Number: 020 7233 1935
|
Oral Evidence
Taken before the Home Affairs Committee
on
Members present
Keith Vaz, in the Chair
Tom Brake
Mr James Clappison
Mrs Ann Cryer
David TC Davies
Mrs Janet Dean
Margaret Moran
Gwyn Prosser
Bob Russell
Martin Salter
Mr Gary Streeter
Mr David Winnick
________________
Memorandum submitted by Migration Advisory Committee
Examination of Witnesses
Witness: Professor David Metcalf CBE, Chair, Migration Advisory Committee
Chairman: This is the sixth session in our inquiry into the points-based system. We are very pleased to see Professor Metcalf, the Chairman of the Migration Advisory Committee. May I first ask members to declare any interests? I declare an interest. I am a non-practising barrister and my wife is an immigration solicitor. I refer everyone present to the Register of Members' Interests where the interests of members are noted.
Mr Winnick: I am a former Chairman of the UKIS.
Q249 Chairman: Professor Metcalf, thank you for coming to see us. How long is it since you have been Chairman of this organisation?
Professor David Metcalf: I was appointed in October '07, so a little bit over a year.
Q250 Chairman: Given the current economic climate and the mantra of "British jobs for British workers", which has been circulated by politicians, and indeed in the media, do you feel that you can remain as independent as you would have hoped?
Professor Metcalf: That is a very reasonable first question. The answer unambiguously is "yes". The Government sets our tasks for us but in coming to our conclusions in the two major reports we have done so far, one on the Occupation Shortage List and one on Romania and Bulgaria restrictions, I can state unambiguously that nobody has put pressure on whatsoever. For what it is worth, I would not stand for it. I have spent ten years setting the minimum wage, as it were, and there was no political interference on that either. Also, my strong-minded colleagues on the Migration Advisory Committee would not. I would go further than that and say that I have had a number of meetings with the previous Minister, Liam Byrne, and the present Minister, Phil Woolas, and also with the Home Secretary and on each of those occasions what they have emphasised is that it is very important for us to be independent because, in a sense, that raises the level of the debate and it provides greater substance, if you want, to the debate. They have emphasised the importance of the independence. The one area which I would particularly point to is that we are very keen that immigration is not seen as a substitute for upskilling the British workforce, and that has been quite a theme right throughout our work. It is a serendipitous situation I suppose because that is also the position of the Government. It is very much the position of the Migration Advisory Committee.
Q251 Chairman: You do not see yourself under a pressure to tow a particular political line?
Professor Metcalf: No, I do not feel under pressure to tow a political line. Both major parties are in favour of some system
of managed migration, managed immigration.
They have different policies. In
a sense, one is doing it through a points-based system and one is doing it
through a quota. For myself and I think
speaking on behalf of the committee, we recognise that
Q252 Chairman: Do you have an optimum number in your head about the number of people who should be allowed into this country?
Professor Metcalf: No.
Q253 Chairman: We had discussions at the end of November. The new Immigration Minister, who is obviously coming to give evidence to us, talked about the 70 million mark. Do you feel that there is a limit beyond which the population of this country cannot go?
Professor Metcalf: With respect, I do not think that this is a matter for me. This is a matter for the politicians. If we were asked to do a report which was dealing in some sense with optimal population policy/contribution of immigration into that, then we would do that, but it is not something I have put my mind to. I do not think in the first instance it is a matter for the Migration Advisory Committee.
Q254 Chairman: You mentioned your recommendations and your recommendation on Bulgaria and Romania, which the Government of course accepted. What proportion of your recommendations has the Government accepted and which of those have they rejected? What kind of justification do they give when they tell you they cannot accept your advice?
Professor Metcalf: On the two major reports that we have done so far, the first on the
Shortage Occupation List, and the second on the restrictions on
Q255 Mr Winnick: Professor Metcalf, at a time when there is so much concern about employment and unemployment rising, as in other industrialised countries, do you feel that your committee made up of five economists including yourself, had the list been circulated, have sufficient understanding, if I can put it this way, with respect to what is happening on the ground? People may say that the five economists have highly professional jobs, and all the rest of it: how can they know and understand what it means to lose one's job and be faced with competition from abroad?
Professor Metcalf: That is a reasonable question, although I started my working life as a welder, so I have done things other than being an academic economist. Let me answer that in a number of different ways. It depends in a sense on what one is trying to do. What we are tasked to do is to give advice and in particular the running theme is whether there are shortages in particular occupations. I think for that basically you need pretty good economic skills and particular labour market skills and that is what the committee bring in various forms, some with statistics, some with good knowledge about the way the economy will develop and the skill mix. We do not just do that. We have made a point of consulting stakeholders very widely, the sector skills councils, loads of visits to employers, trade unions and so on. We have been to every region of the country. We have been into lots of firms.
Q256 Mr Winnick: I am sorry to interrupt. You do say in the memorandum that you do meet with employers and the TUC but do you ever actually go into work places, factories and so on, and speak to people on the shop floor?
Professor Metcalf: Oh, yes, lots - fish filleting factories, for example. We went to
Chairman: I do not think we need the entire list.
Q257 Mr Streeter: Professor, you mentioned the Shortage Occupation List earlier. Were there some occupations that you recommended in your September report which the Government did not actually put on the list in the end?
Professor Metcalf: No, they accepted the whole list but they added back, as it were, social workers.
Q258 Mr Streeter: You have just been talking about how robust your data is in terms of trying to spot these skill shortages. You will be aware of course that in this time of fierce recession people are losing their jobs by the month. The monthly figures are rolling on all the time. I would just like to ask you how up to date your list is on shortages? You may go into the changes and so on but the picture is changing all the time and people are very worried about this. Are you confident that your picture is up to date and the Government is getting the right information?
Professor Metcalf: That is a very good and reasonable question. Let me deal with it in a couple of ways. The data about the immigration is really quite good data; it is getting better now that the ONS has recognised some of the weaknesses of the previous passenger survey. The data on things like the Labour Force Survey on which you get a lot of information about people's characteristics and so on is very good data indeed but it is not designed specifically to deal with immigration. Data on earnings is very good. There is a real issue with this data which is that oftentimes it is out of date. The earnings survey, for example, only comes out once a year; it taken for April and it comes out in October. Let me back-track a little bit. When we are thinking about skills, we have three main indicators there. When we are thinking about shortages, we use 12 indicators. It is the case that we are attempting to keep these indicators up to date but some of the data is not timely. That of course is the reason why we take so much trouble consulting stakeholders so that then we try to dovetail the data that we have from the national data sources with the data that we get by our workplace visits. In terms of how up to date the list can be, what we have agreed essentially informally with Home Office and across Government is that we will produce a new list every six months. It is a very big job to do a complete analysis. We will not do the complete analysis every six months; we will do that every two years but we will update it every six months. Frankly, obviously we could do things a little bit shorter than that but it takes quite a long time to consult the stakeholders and to think through and to make sure that we do respond to changes. I am pretty content - I do not perhaps want to anticipate where you might go subsequently - that not all of the shortages are actually of a cyclical nature; some of the labour shortages are very different to that. So I would not expect many of the occupations presently on the list immediately to come off, even in a downturn.
Q259 Tom Brake: I was wondering whether in the last six months you have picked any of the skill shortages that are linked to the economic downturn paradoxically and, if so, what are they?
Professor Metcalf: We are reporting at the end of this month; in a sense, that is the first six-monthly review. Some of that is material that the Government has specifically asked us to do: social workers, social care, for example. Some of it is occupations where we thought in our previous report, the September one, that there is a bit of evidence of a labour shortage there but actually we did not get any evidence. We have gone back to the centres and asked about that. Some of it is occupations which we have taken it upon ourselves to analyse - these are particularly construction-related - because we think the labour market has changed profoundly very quickly. I am not going to anticipate, if you will forgive me, what we are going to conclude at the end of March; that will be available very soon. We are having a very close look - and I choose my words carefully - at the construction-related occupations, particularly quantity surveyors and construction managers, which were previously on the list, in the light of up-to-date information on vacancies and on unemployment. Let me go through this a little more, if I may. If you were to think about, say, the medical profession, and some but not all consultants are on the list presently, it takes a long time to acquire the skills for that, so you would not expect them to come off so quickly. If you think about some of those that are high culture - the ballet dancers and so on ---
Q260 Chairman: We will be coming on to ballet dancers later.
Professor Metcalf: Not all of the occupations on the list are cyclical, but we are having a good look at those that are cyclical.
Q261 Margaret Moran: I can tell you that in Luton in the construction-related industries at the levels you are talking about there is certainly an issue about people now being made redundant, and so we do not have a skills shortage. That relates to my question and apologies if you have already mentioned this. How frequently are you in touch with the job centres to see what is really happening on the ground? The evidence again in my area is that it is not so much a skills shortage we are seeing any more but a glut of professionals that you would not traditionally have thought of, such as IT managers and people with those kinds of skills, who are now coming on to the market as a result of the recession. Whereas you still have them listed as being a skill shortage, they are now finding that the only offer of work they are being given at a job centre is to become a truck lift driver. There is a big mis-match here, surely?
Professor Metcalf: If I may say so, it is not us that has the skills shortage. We have done the report for September and we have done the review now to March. You are absolutely right and we have had a good look at the construction trades and we will report on that in a couple of weeks' time.
Q262 Margaret Moran: The point that I am asking you is similar: six months sounds like a short period but surely your staff should be looking at the job centre week by week, given the speed with which things are changing in the current economic circumstances?
Professor Metcalf: That will be one approach and if there is a keenness to do it, we
might be able to do so. We have been
doing other things, as it were. We have
been doing
Q263 Mr Clappison: Migrants can also come in not just by passing a shortage occupation test which gives them automatic entrance - I think it gives them the necessary 50 points straight off - but they can also come in by passing the resident labour market test and then acquiring the appropriate number of points through age and earnings and so forth. The Government has said very recently that it is going to ask you to look at whether there is an economic case for restricting Tier 2 skilled workers to shortage occupations only. Do you have a time scale for when that is going to take place?
Professor Metcalf: Yes. This will be by July.
Q264 Mr Clappison: And you will be reporting back to Government then?
Professor Metcalf: Yes.
Q265 Mr Clappison: May I follow on from what Margaret Moran was saying? Some of my constituents might also find it curious. My constituency is very near London. We now have nine job-seekers to every vacancy advertised at the local job centre and many of the people who have been made redundant recently are people who have been working in computer services, administration, business and management services. Some of them work in London and some at the Bradford and Bingley, which has just closed its premises in my constituency. They might find it curious if they look at the list of people who have been allowed to come into this country as migrants under this system. We have been supplied with some documents as a committee which show that the two largest categories of work permits for the times we have been given are for computer services, firstly, and, secondly, for administration, business and management services, which are just the sorts of things in which people in my constituency are looking for jobs. Do you understand why my constituents might find that curious?
Professor Metcalf: I do but this is nothing to do with the Shortage Occupation List. If I may say, what you have said is absolutely right. There are three different routes through which you can come in under Tier 2 and get your work permit, of which the Shortage Occupation List is one. In the past, the number of people coming in through the Shortage Occupation List was actually rather modest. It was probably of the order of 10 - 15% of the total work permits issues. The others were, as you rightly say, through the resident labour market test and through the intra-company transfers. It is not in some sense that the IT people are on the list; indeed they are not on the list. I think, if I may say, that your point is very well taken because in the review of Tier 2, which the Home Secretary has asked the MAC to do, the issues that will come up there are that, all right, we have the Shortage Occupation List, in some sense why should there be other routes in: one, the resident labour market test and one the intra-company transfers? The people to whom you are alluding coming in to do IT jobs are disproportionately coming in under the intra-company transfer route, and we will be having a proper look at that in our review that we have been asked to do on Tier 2.
Q266 Mr Clappison: The numbers on that have increased very significantly in the last couple of years.
Professor Metcalf: Yes, they have.
Q267 Mr Clappison: You can understand somebody who might think that it is a flawed system on account of that.
Professor Metcalf: It does not mean it is a flawed system but we will definitely have a proper look at the different routes in. One of the issues on intra-company transfers is this, and I am sure it is legitimate for people to be brought in to do the IT projects under the intra-company transfer but it is possible that the original intention for that was more like Honda bringing people in from Japan to work at Swindon for a bit, and so we will have a proper look at that route. Clearly, to the extent if there were some real elements for example of displacement or levels of undercutting, then we will report on this.
Q268 Mr Clappison: Can I ask you about one other aspect? The Chairman put what I thought was a good point to you earlier about population size. What you have told us about today so far has been, if I may say so, very well-founded but is narrow and technical. Really you should be called the Labour Market Shortages Committee. You are in fact called the Migration Advisory Committee. Do you not think that that is a bit of a misnomer because you have said to us you cannot look at population size. We have a population which is predicted to go to 70 million, by both the UN and the Government forecasts, but that is not something which you can take account of, is it? Can you express an opinion about it? Do you think that the population of the UK will rise to 70 million, which is the forecast, and 60 million in the case of England alone, which is a very significant increase in a short time?
Professor Metcalf: With respect, this is a matter for politicians; it is not a matter for me.
Q269 Chairman: It may be a matter for politicians but Mr Clappison is asking you if you think that the terms of reference for your committee should be extended or that the name of your committee should be extended? We are not asking you to make the decision, Professor.
Professor Metcalf: I am very content with the terms of reference.
Q270 Chairman: Are you happy with your name?
Professor Metcalf: Yes, and I was just going to come to that. Originally, I think that you would have been absolutely spot on that it should have been the Labour Market Shortages Committee, but actually we gave been asked to report on the issue of Romania and Bulgaria and the issue about the Workers' Registration Scheme and now the reviews of Tier 1 and Tier 2 and dependants are less to do with labour shortages and more to do with immigration. It seems to me that the title of Migration Advisory Committee is correct.
Q271 Mr Clappison: We are told that net migration running at the present level, and it may actually well increase, will take the population, say of England, up from just over 50 million to over 60 million by 2031 and that population increase will be driven very largely by net migration. Can you look at that and take into account the consequences of such a significant population increase and the effect upon infrastructure and housing needs and so forth?
Professor Metcalf: As I say, our work plan is set by the Government and if we are asked to look at it, we would. I have to say I am very sceptical about these forecasts because all they do is take the present levels of net immigration and project them forward 20 years.
Q272 Mr Clappison: They have been going up recently. Since then, we understand that there are people who are now coming back to this country from Europe when they thought they were going to retire over there. They are returning because of the collapse of the pound. It would well be that net migration could increase since immigration is running at a very high level and is continuing to do so?
Professor Metcalf: That is possible, yes.
Q273 Margaret Moran: Can I take you back to the intra-company transfer scheme, particularly again relating to IT? I think when we were in Bangladesh we heard some evidence from IT companies. I chair an IT committee here in Parliament. What is very clear from large companies like IBM and Tata for example is that they would actually prefer to recruit some of the specialist niche IT skills that may be lacking from the UK. Have you reviewed that? Do you ever give recommendations to the Government of the sort that they were recommending, which is that where there are very specific IT skills, there should be a more strategic link with UK universities to fill those gaps rather than them having to rely on shifting their people across from India or elsewhere?
Professor Metcalf: We have tried to do that in a way throughout our report, both in
terms of the issue of upskilling and the links now with the Commission for
Employment and Skills, our list being in a sense a guide for resources
allocation. On the specific point about
IT, they are not on the list because in fact when we discussed this with the
Sector Skills Council, they did not want to be on the shortage list because
basically they thought that many of the jobs could indeed be filled from the
Q274 Gwyn Prosser: Professor Metcalf, Mr Winnick and others have asked you about the possible mis-match or disconnect between what someone described as your academic studies and what is actually happening on the ground. Last November when you published your list of shortage occupations, and I do not have the full list in front of me, I recall that amongst a list of a dozen occupations, and some of them are restated in your brief and they look the natural sorts of subjects, is a shortage of hovercraft pilots.
Professor Metcalf: Pilot officers.
Q275 Gwyn Prosser: I have been part of that industry for some time before coming into this place. I cannot think of a single hovercraft service in existence. What is happening there?
Professor Metcalf: It is very straightforward and we should have alluded to this in the report. We use the standard occupation classifications and I am sorry to be boring and technical but that is the way that the Office of National Statistics classifies occupations. When they drew up this classification some years ago, we no doubt had hovercraft and the occupation is called "hovercraft and ships' officers". The main shortage when we did this list was of ships' officers. I hear want you say about hovercraft.
Q276 Gwyn Prosser: Yes, there is a shortage there.
Professor Metcalf: the occupation still happens to be called "hovercraft and ships' officers" and we decided, possibly wrongly, to keep to the occupation title as it appears in the national statistics. That is the reason. As it happens, you put your finger on an occupation which may very well have changed in the last little while, this one that we are going to be reviewing by September to see whether or not that should sill be on the list. The union, I think it is NUMAST---
Q277 Gwyn Prosser: Nautilus.
Professor Metcalf: Sorry, it is Nautilus. It was keen that the occupation should be on the list as well when we took the evidence, but this is one we are going to be reviewing by September.
Q278 David Davies: Professor Metcalf, you have been in place for two years now. Have you any signs that the Government has started to compensate for the lack of skilled workers in this country by offering increased training places to the UK workforce?
Professor Metcalf: I have been in position for not quite 18 months. The short answer to that is that I have not looked at it in quite the way that you imply.
Q279 David Davies: If you were short of workers in the hovercraft industry two years ago, ships' officers, whatever, hypothetically, within 18 months or two years you would have expected the Government to say, "We are short of these people and so rather than bring them in from abroad, we are going to offer increased training so that British jobs can go to British workers". Have you any seen any examples because if you are not looking at that specifically, you would surely be saying to yourselves: @We do not need quite so many in that hypothetical occupation now, be it hovercraft drivers or whatever, because over the last 18 months the Government has trained more them". Have you seen that?
Professor Metcalf: You are absolutely right. Yes. Basically, our occupation list is being used now by the new commission and by DIUS in terms of guidance for the sector skills councils that these are areas where they should put resources to make sure we get some up upskilling. The answer to your specific question about whether I have seen the results of this is: less so here but, for example, we know that with consultants, which are on the list presently, there are a lot of people being trained and they will become consultants quite soon; electricity linesmen are on the list and a lot of training is going on there.
Q280 Tom Brake: Are these specific jobs where you have reduced the numbers of people coming in because there has been an increase in the numbers of British people qualified to do them?
Professor Metcalf: There were quite a lot of occupations that we did not put on the list where people say there is a skills shortage. The reason that we did not put them on was that in our judgment there were plenty of British people to do those jobs.
Q281 Tom Brake: But are there any occupations where there was a shortage two years ago but there is not now because the Government has trained up more British workers for those British jobs?
Professor Metcalf: The answer is that I cannot immediately put my finger on that. It is the case that the Sector Skills Council for Hospitality has been liaising with the catering industry with a view to training up more chefs.
Chairman: We will be having evidence on that.
Q282 Tom Brake: Can you be certain that all of the people who have come in with specific skills have taken jobs in those areas where the skills were lacking?
Professor Metcalf: They come in with a work permit for a specific employer. Presumably the employer is requiring them for that job.
Q283 Tom Brake: May I suggest to you that very few checks are carried out on employers?
Professor Metcalf: That is a matter for the UKBA; it is not a matter for the Migration Advisory Committee.
Q284 Mr Winnick: As far as care workers are concerned, the evidence shows that there is an acute shortage of care assistants. Professor Metcalf, since they do not qualified as skilled on the basis of qualifications, migrants cannot be recruited. Is that the position?
Professor Metcalf: Not quite.
Q285 Mr Winnick: Can you explain?
Professor Metcalf: Yes. In order to come in under Tier 2, the job has to score a skill. There are some occupations on the list, subsets of occupations, which when we did our analysis did not score a skill - chefs and care workers are the two main ones - but we recognise that there is a subset within that that are skilled. Care workers is a case in point. We recognise there are some issues with care about expansion of the sector, the high vacancy rates, turnover rates and so on. We have put on the list senior care workers. We took a particular way to define senior care workers, which I can go into if you would wish. The sector did not especially like our way. We have listened to the sector about how to define it.
Q286 Mr Winnick: Can they come in?
Professor Metcalf: Senior care workers are on the shortage list, yes.
Q287 Mr Winnick: But not otherwise?
Professor Metcalf: I think that if you had the care sector here, they would be arguing essentially for a Tier 3 scheme because what they want is workers other than senior care workers also to be able to come in but, as you know, Tier 3 is suspended.
Q288 Mr Winnick: As regards to chefs, we have heard constant representation, not simply as members of this committee but as MPs, where there are clearly Chinese and Bangladesh communities who say that as a result of the new system they are finding it virtually impossible to get people to come in because of the regulations. There are enough people obviously keen to come from those countries abroad but because of the new restrictions it is very difficult. The restaurant owners are saying that they cannot recruit locally. Is there any merit in the criticism that we are hearing?
Professor Metcalf: If I may say, the criticism is disproportionately about the lower level skills. It is essentially like the care sector that many in the restaurant sector would wish for a de facto Tier 3 scheme for less skilled workers to be able to come in. The skilled components of chefs, as it were, are on the shortage list, subject to a certain earnings threshold and the profession is able to bring them in. Could I say, by the way, that we have been lobbied of course as well through representations from Bangladeshi, Indian and Chinese restaurants and it was not only them; the Chief Executive of the Dorchester came to talk to us, for example. It was not just the ethnic community but others as well.
Q289 Gwyn Prosser: Professor Metcalf, do you think that the way points are awarded for qualifications, age and earnings is a proportionate way of assessing skills?
Professor Metcalf: Under the new system, in Tier 1 and Tier 2 where you are getting points for qualifications and earnings, and age also in Tier 1, it seems to me that that is a very reasonable way of going about it. It may be that the calibration of the points requires a little bit of tweaking periodically because it is possible that you do not get those right immediately. This will be one of the things that we will be looking at in our review of both Tier 1 and of Tier 2. Of course, under Tier 2 when we do our bottom-up evidence, we try to look at issues like innate ability, training and experience, as well as just those points criteria.
Q290 Gwyn Prosser: Bearing that in mind, you have looked at that and your committee has considered it to be quite key to decision-making, why do not those attributes count towards points?
Professor Metcalf: The short answer is that it would be very difficult indeed to measure both the nature of the experience that people have had on an individual basis and innate ability; it is very much more subjective. Whereas you have objective criteria in terms of pay, qualifications and age.
Q291 Gwyn Prosser: In February, the Home Secretary asked you to consider restricting Tier 2 in shortage of occupation areas. This is not a political question. Do you think that was a practical way to go?
Professor Metcalf: I will tell you when we have done the work. It seems to me that that is an absolutely legitimate question to ask and the MAC are very keen to undertake this. Now that we have a downturn in the labour market, and the previous work permit system had the three routes, the shortage route is in some sense the one where we have done all the analysis and we say this is truly where there is a shortage of labour. The question which is implicitly being raised here is: should people also be allowed to come in through the resident labour market test and through the intra-company transfers? This is the question that we will be addressing over the next three or four months.
Q292 Gwyn Prosser: Finally, do you have a feel for how many migrants would be affected by those changes coming through that route?
Professor Metcalf: In principle, that could be very substantial. I am not anticipating at all because we have not done any of the work. If the committee were to decide, for example, that there was less of a case for intra-company transfers, and by definition those using them presently are people in information technology - we have referred to Tata, for example - then it would be very much more difficult for Tata to bring the people in. Therefore, when we do the work, we will want to be talking to employers like Tata, for example, to gauge the merits of continuing with the three routes or, as is implicit in the Home Secretary's question, possibly focusing on the one route.
Q293 Tom Brake: Could I return briefly to the points system and the fairness of it? You said it was fair. What is fair about a system that includes points based on people's earnings when people from developing countries are not possibly going to be able to earn the same number of points as someone from an industrialised country?
Professor Metcalf: This is not a matter for the MAC. My understanding of this is that there is a multiplier there; they are multiplied up according to the GDP of the country.
Chairman: Professor Metcalf, thank you very much for giving evidence. I am sure we will be in touch with you for further information. If you would like to help this committee in any way with any information about our inquiry, please do not hesitate to write to us. If we have missed anything out or you want to add to your evidence, please do so.
Memorandum submitted by
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Mr Phil Woolas, Minister of State for Borders and Immigration, Home Office, Mr Matthew Coats, Director of Immigration Group, Home Office, and Mr Neil Hughes, Director of the Points-based System, gave evidence.
Q294 Chairman: Good morning Minister, Mr Hughes and Mr Coats. Thank you very much for coming to give evidence to us this morning. I know, Minister, that you were up very early on GMTV and I would like to start by asking you a question based on what you said this morning concerning the locking out of migrants from Calais. You made a statement to the BBC I think that the UK's borders were tougher than the US Mexico frontier. I am not sure whether you have actually been down there to have a look at the US Mexico frontier, but are you pleased with the efforts that are being made to tighten up on illegal immigration?
Mr Woolas: Thank you, Chairman, and thank you for the invitation to this
inquiry, which we are very keen to support.
The point that I was making this morning on the television interviews is
that the reason why numbers of people are seen to be gathering in
Q295 Chairman: We have just taken evidence from Professor Metcalf on the points-based system and I am going to bring you back to your evidence to this committee on 20 November last year and the events since then. Does the Government regret using the phrase "British jobs for British workers" in respect of immigration issues, bearing in mind the current level of unemployment and the wish under the points-based system to let people in on the basis of their skills? I know this was not your phrase; it was a phrase which the Prime Minister used. Do you stand by that phrase?
Mr Woolas: Yes, I do, Mr Chairman, and I am more than happy to say that as a
British Minister in a British government representing a British constituency, I
want my constituents to have the first bite of the cherry in the employment
market. That seems to me to be
uncontroversial. It is what local
authorities do in their regeneration departments. It is what devolved governments are doing in
Q296 Chairman: Do you think there is a limit on the number of people who can come into the United Kingdom? You mentioned previously in November that you did not favour a cap but the figure of 70 million was put about then as being the kind of population that Britain could not extend beyond. Are we still talking about these kinds of figures? Is it still the Government's intention to keep the limit at about 70 million?
Mr Woolas: The population projections of 70 million are based on extrapolations from current or most recent (last three year) net migration figures. Those net migration figures include the number of people who are in this country temporarily. The points-based system addresses exactly the temporary economic migrants, both students and workers. The counting in and counting out e-border system enables us to know who has left the country and who has not. We are therefore in a much stronger position to identify within the population figures those who are temporary and those who are permanent and therefore to get a more accurate extrapolation. The points-based system also enables us to control, by moving the criteria, the numbers of people coming into the country as economic migrants covered by the PBS. I hope to be able to show you, Mr Chairman, by the end of this year, the figures to back up my proposition.
Q297 Chairman: And they will show that fewer people have come in as a result of the points-based system?
Mr Woolas: that is our expectation.
Q298 Chairman: On the British jobs slogan, since you came to give evidence to us of course there have been the demonstrations at Lindsey. A large number of British workers were complaining that the Government was letting in too many people from the EU; in that particular case it was from Italy. As someone who has campaigned very strongly against the British National Party throughout your political life, did it worry you that the British National Party had adopted this slogan as a means of keeping out of this country people who were not British?
Mr Woolas: I think the British National Party are making an electoral appeal to former supporters of UKIP, and indeed the revelations recently on membership would back up that point of view. I think the campaign they have is aimed at those areas. It is the anti-European Union sentiment of the British National Party campaign; it is one of their three priorities in the current European election campaign. I think that there was a coincidence of those issues. Clearly the Government's policy, and the one I whole heartedly support, is that the Posted Workers' Directive provides a regulation within the European Union but also European Union people through the Freedom of Movement Directive have access to our labour market, just as British people have access to the European Union Member States' labour market.
Q299 Chairman: Finally from me, have you finished your public spat with the ONS? What prompted your statement against them?
Mr Woolas: My concerns I think have been recognised in the UK Statistics Authority notice of yesterday, Note 3/209, and they looked at the ONS release in the context of the code of practice. I think that the UK Statistics Authority has recognised the concern that not just I but others had on the confusion between the one in nine of the population figure who are foreign born population within the UK (which of course includes children born to British nationals overseas, for example to our Armed Forces) and the one in 15, which is the actual figure of foreign work people not including British nationals born overseas that are in those population figures. My concern was that those figures may be confused and that that indeed may have a serious impact in communities, partly for the reasons you, Mr Chairman, were referring to in relation to some of the political parties. The answer is: yes, I have finished my spat with them.
Q300 Mr Winnick: Would it not be odd, Minister, if any government here was not aware at a time of rising unemployment, which is being faced by us and other industrial countries, and very sensitive about British workers having the first opportunity for vacancies? Is that not perfectly natural?
Mr Woolas: I think so. I think this is about Killingholme in Lindsey. I understand the point that the trade unions
are making about their need as they see it for those agreements to stick and
I think that dispute in reality had more to do with enforcing agreements
than it did with British jobs for British workers, although that was the
headline. I think it is perfectly
natural. With the measures that we have
taken we have already implemented the change to the Resident Labour Market test
that the Home Secretary announced recently and other measures within the PBS to
drive towards that policy. What is
perhaps most important in the context of Mr Winnick's question is the effort
that we are making to ensure that where Professor Metcalf's committee has
identified skill shortages, government across Whitehall have skills and training
strategies as well as the points-based system.
I think in that way the
Q301 Mr Winnick: In that recent demonstration which the Chairman mentioned, was it not the case that every effort by fringe, lunatic and racist elements to set one group of workers against foreign workers failed but the unions made it totally clear that their dispute, their quarrel, was in fact with companies exploiting the situation to try to get in people from abroad at a cheaper rate?
Mr Woolas: Yes, I think so. Outside my role, in a previous life I have much experience of the big sites' agreement in the construction projects sector. My experience is that employers and trade unions on the whole needed each other to make sure the relevant labour was in the relevant place. We could not have built many of the major projects in this country under different governments without that agreement, and I think it is very important.
Q302 David Davies: Turning to the Sangatte issue, is it the case that you are missing the point a bit if you think that the reason people are gathering there is because of increased security. The reality is that they are marching sometimes through dozens of European Union countries because they know that the benefits system is far more generous in the United Kingdom?
Mr Woolas: I do not accept that point of view.
Q303 David Davies: Why do they not claim benefits in France then or in Italy?
Mr Woolas: It is true that the majority of people there are not claiming
asylum in
Chairman: We are now going to turn on to the details of the points-based system, and if you want to turn to Mr Coats or Mr Hughes, please feel free to do so.
Q304 Mrs Dean: Minister, do you agree that it is not political palatable for the Government to promise one thing to the electorate, i.e. safeguarding jobs for British workers, only to risk being contradicted by an unelected advisory body, such as the Migration Advisory Committee? Is political pressure being brought to bear on the MAC in terms of the advice which is requested from it?
Mr Woolas: No, it is not. The value of the MAC, as we call it, is not just in presentation of policy but critically in formulation of policy. Very important areas, such as are there enough children's care workers in our local authorities, are the subject of investigation by the Migration Advisory Committee. These are things that one could not use in the political arena. My own experience is that it absolutely is not, and indeed I think you would back me up in saying that if we tried, I do not think Professor Metcalf would succumb in any shape whatsoever. I find him a very impressive man.
Q305 Chairman: Do you think that its name should be changed? You were not where when Professor Metcalf gave evidence. Mr Clappison asked him whether the name should be Labour Shortages Committee rather than Migration Advisory Committee because the terms of reference are actually quite limited.
Mr Woolas: That is an interesting question.
Q306 Chairman: You can think about it and write to us if you like?
Mr Woolas: The difficulty I have is that the first bit of advice that he gave in my tenure was over the Workers Registration Scheme, the A8, and critically he was able to draw on advice from what other European countries had done in relation to that point and what the migration impacts were of those; for example, Poland and Germany. He does take that on board.
Q307 Chairman: The distinction made by Mr Clappison was that it actually does provide a good service and if you are going to call it a Migration Advisory Committee, it should actually advise you beyond labour shortages.
Mr Woolas: The ball is bouncing that way, Mr Chairman.
Q308 Martin Salter: Minister, we read that Australia for the first time in many years is reducing its net immigration by around 14%. We have heard a lot about the points-based system giving Ministers the levers or the facility, an employment tax might be a better metaphor, dependent on the needs of the British economy. Is it not about time, with unemployment rising, that people actually saw Ministers using the powers that the points-based immigration system give you? We understand the Home Secretary has asked the Migration Advisory Committee to consider whether or not there is an economic case for restricting Tier 2 workers. When are we actually going to see that advice and see some form of implementation and is there not a case for restricting access to Tier 1 employers as well, given the state of the British economy?
Mr Coats: What the Home Secretary announced were three broad changes plus three questions. The first change was to introduce Jobcentre Plus into the resident labour market test to change the requirements for Tier 1 and also to set in place a mechanism to review skills in particular sectors. She also asked the MAC three specific questions. The first was: is there a case for restricting Tier 2 to shortage only occupations? The second was: what is the impact of dependants in Tier 2? She asked the MAC to come back by July on those two questions. She also asked the MAC to assess whether there were further measures beyond which we have already talked to restrict Tier 1, and that question is to be assessed by the autumn.
Q309 Martin Salter: Minister, do you not think that is too long to wait? We are losing jobs at an alarming rate. Why on earth do you not use the powers now to put a moratorium on these categories and then see where the advice goes? Frankly, if we wait till July, we could have the situation running away from us. You are not obliged to follow the advice of the Migration Advisory Committee. For once, the Government has not conceded all its powers to a quango. Why not take some action now in order to protect the situation? You could always open the tap a little further down the line if the needs of the economy require it. Why do we need to wait to July or the autumn?
Mr Woolas: The beauty of the points-based system is that you have that option. We have already taken tough action. Tier 3 is closed, as the committee knows. We have already announced and implemented the changes on the Resident Labour Market test under Tier 2. On Tier 1, we have already announced an increase in the criteria on graduate to postgraduate and other measures. So we have done that and because we have the points-based system, we have been able to get this advice underway earlier, and indeed if we had not had the points-based system, we would not have been able to do it. I think that on that side we have that flexibility. On the other side, I was very struck by the advice from the Department for Children and Schools and Families on the previous analysis of the shortage list on critical care workers. I realised that a bit of caution and looking at each sector is very important. Some of these skills shortage are critical to the public services.
Chairman: Mr Clappison has a very quick supplementary.
Q310 Mr Clappison: My quick supplementary is to keep talking about the resident labour market test. In fact that was not something which was introduced by the points-based system, it was in place a long time before the points-based system came into being and at the beginning of, I think it was, last year - certainly very recently - you were proposing to abolish it for higher paid workers. I asked lots of questions of your predecessor about this and eventually he kept to it, but it is wrong to say that the resident labour market test is an innovation of the points-based system because your Government's policy was to relax it.
Mr Woolas: No, I am sorry, Mr Clappison, the resident labour market test being under Tier 2 is a consequence of the points-based system; the resident labour market test at Tier 1 does not apply; so the fact that we can use the resident labour market test within Tier 2 is a policy innovation. Of course the resident labour market test has been around for donkey's years and I always thought that it was subject to abuse actually: that was one of the reasons why we wanted to change.
Chairman: Thank you very much. Ann Cryer.
Q311 Mrs Cryer: Minister, can I briefly ask you about the position of employers who are seeking to plan their recruitment ahead? It may be a bit difficult if the Shortage Occupation List keeps changing. Can you give us some assurance that you will be taking them into account?
Mr Woolas: The flexibility that the points-based system gives the Government with a sector by sector approach, we think, does allow for much better engagement with industrial sectors. Of course there is the point about disruption and the need for advanced notice, but the person who enters through Tier 2 shortage, their grant for temporary worker is not affected if the shortage list subsequently changes so that that flow is not for staff under the points-based system. I do not know if there is another experience there.
Mr Coats: There is always going to be a balance between keeping something for long enough so people can get used to it and updating it so it reflects the circumstances at the time. There are two mechanisms. The first is that elements from the shortage occupations can be updated each six months, and the Government agrees with the MAC as to what will be looked at in each of those groups and then each two years the whole document is updated, and we think that is the right balance between creating certainty for people but also keeping the list current.
Q312 Mrs Cryer: Can you comment briefly on the tiers? If you are going to change the tiers, will those changes in tiers be carried out retrospectively?
Mr Coats: No.
Mr Woolas: No, the change is within the tiers and there is no retrospection.
Q313 Mrs Cryer: Can I ask you a very short supplementary. I am having a lot of fairly bad reports about a certain residential home in my area and nearly all of the bad reports stem from the fact that many of the staff there either have no English or a very limited amount of English and many of the elderly people being cared for have either dementia or other related illnesses. It does confuse an already confused person if the person who is helping them does not have the same language. Are you looking at this in the Shortage Occupation List?
Mr Woolas: Within the tiers, apart from not all cases of Tier 5, one is required to have command of spoken and written English, so the people that you have in your constituency will be people who have been granted before the introduction of the scheme. As from now, as from the operation of the scheme, the use of English is a requirement for entry.
Q314 Mrs Cryer: This will not be happening?
Mr Woolas: That is right.
Chairman: Thank you, Mrs Cryer. Tom Brake.
Q315 Tom Brake: Minister, do you acknowledge that some people are highly skilled but they do not have formal academic qualifications?
Mr Woolas: I think it would be foolish not to, Mr Brake.
Q316 Tom Brake: The obvious question which follows is should not the points-based system acknowledge this?
Mr Woolas: This is the "nomad knowledge" point, is it not? The points-based system, of course, as Mr Brake says, provides for objective criteria. That, in turn, has many benefits in terms of being able to administer the system more easily. The criticism that it does not allow for commonsense, I think, is met by the fact that in, for example, Tier 1, one is able to find an employer or a sponsoring university, for example, who would be able to bring such a person in, in a specific situation. So I think there is enough flexibility to meet the Einsteins of this world, but I think that is a policy choice that has been made, and I think it is fair of you to ask the question, if you do not mind me saying so.
Q317 Tom Brake: So you have no plans to review that to look at whether you could allocate points based on some measure of experience or skill which does not have to be demonstrated through a formal qualification?
Mr Woolas: I am sorry, Chairman, I am trying to be very clear with the committee, obviously. If, for example, a university or an employer had a vacancy that only that person could fit, then they would be required. There are other routes, of course. If it was temporary it tends to be Tier 5, but my experience, Chairman, of the points-based system so far, and I would like to put on record my our admiration for the staff and management of the UKBA; they have, I think, brought about a big change in an exemplary way. Governments are often criticised for making changes that have bad or unintended consequences, and there have been teething troubles, but my experience so far is that we have been able to flex a little bit within the structure of the tier system. For example, professional footballers is an obvious one.
Q318 Chairman: We will come on to that.
Mr Woolas: So whether there is room to meet Mr Brake's point, clearly I can see the desirability of it, but we have no plans in place at the moment.
Q319 Tom Brake: Can we continue on the subject of unintended consequences. Witnesses have told us that the way in which points are awarded for maintenance and for previous salary is discriminatory to migrants from developing countries, where equivalent salaries are lower, and the minimum salary has now been increased to £20,000 for Tier 1 migrants. Are you open to charges of discrimination?
Mr Woolas: We reject the proposition because of the way in which we calculate. We have different bands that are adjudicated by international bodies. Could I ask, through you, Chairman, if Mr Hughes could supply some detail.
Q320 Chairman: Of course.
Mr Hughes: On the maintenance side, the
maintenance figure is one that was published by the British Council as being
the amount of money that an incoming migrant would need to live in the
Q321 Chairman: Could you provide us with what that figure is?
Mr Hughes: It is £800 if you are
in
Q322 Chairman: So they have got to show that in their balance?
Mr Hughes: They have to show that, and
it is for a different length of time depending on which tier they are coming to. For example, if it is just one month it will
be in Tier 2 but it will move you into Tier 1 because it may take you time to
establish yourself in the
Q323 Tom Brake: You say the maintenance has been independently assessed, and we understand that, but is it not a fact that someone coming from a developing country is much less likely to have £2,800 than someone from another country?
Mr Hughes: That may well be true, but
the fact is, if you are coming to the
Q324 Tom Brake: I understand that. In relation to the £20,000 that has been set for the minimum salary, have you been able to make any assessment of what impact that will have, particularly on people coming from developing countries, that increase that you have introduced in terms of the minimum?
Mr Hughes: We have not made the change yet, so it is very hard to say exactly what it will be. We have made an assessment, but, again, I do not think it will impact on developing countries disproportionately because of the multipliers that we use. The multipliers should account for those differences.
Q325 Tom Brake: If it is a minimum, presumably they have to reach it within your---. I will let you answer?
Mr Hughes: The effect of the change that we are making on 31 March is to raise the bar across the board, so we will be eliminating some people who may have previously qualified from the USA, or Canada, or Australia in the same way as we are from developing countries as well, but I think that impact is fair and across the board and does not target developing countries disproportionately.
Q326 Tom Brake: But at the moment you do not have any feel for numbers across the board?
Mr Hughes: It is too early to say, I think, on numbers.
Q327 Mrs Dean: Minister, following the tightening of Tier 1, how can the Government guarantee that its initiatives to retrain and upskill the resident British population will produce enough skilled candidates when employers actually need them?
Mr Woolas: That is the challenge. I cannot guarantee it. The efforts across government departments - the work of the Learning and Skills Council, the work of DIUS, the universities, and so on, and the various training councils - are pulling the shoulders of the wheel and exactly filling that point, which, incidentally, Chairman, we would be doing irrespective of the economic situation, but, clearly, it is more urgent and more important. So, again, I am afraid, it is probably too early to tell, but no doubt your committee will be keeping a very close eye on that point, as will the colleagues from the newspapers.
Q328 Mr Winnick: The ethnic catering industries have been lobbying us, as I am sure they have been lobbying you, about shortage, and Professor Metcalf said it is not just ethnic catering industries, it is also places like the Dorchester, where you and I, Minister, go on such a regular basis. That was a joke by the way. I would not want to damage your reputation or enhance it, as the case may be. Do you feel there is any justification, certainly as far as the ethnic community, the Indian, Bangladeshi people complaining - restaurant people - that they simply cannot get labour from within the UK?
Mr Woolas: Chairman, I have been to the
Q329 Chairman: That is very helpful information.
Mr Woolas: You would have to ask Mr Bower whether it is true or not! The example of catering, I think, is a very, very powerful one to back up our policy. I make no assumptions that people from certain ethnic backgrounds or communities are the only people who want to work in ethnic catering, but commonsense dictates that, if it is Bangladeshi cuisine, it may be British Bangladeshis who would want to work in that industry. The fact is that the Shortage Occupation List contains skilled occupations in ethnic hospitality and catering, and the MAC took evidence from a number of organisations - the Academy of Oriental Cuisine, the Chinese restaurant community in China Town, the Chinese Takeaway Association, Itihaas, which is the Bangladeshi and Indian restaurant, and a number of other organisations - and we did put that on the skill shortage list as a result of the advice from MAC and, indeed, critically, from this committee, I think in your last but one report, Chairman.
Q330 Chairman: Indeed.
Mr Woolas: I think that was telling evidence. What we are now, of course, doing is putting into place strategies to provide training in skilled cuisine for British people. So it goes back to the earlier point.
Q331 Mr Winnick: We come back to the question of British workers for British jobs, because unemployment amongst South Asian and Chinese is very high indeed and, therefore, without being unsympathetic to some of the representations we have made, it is difficult to believe why they cannot recruit and train without bringing in people from abroad.
Mr Woolas: Hear hear.
Q332 Mr Winnick: You accept that.
Mr Woolas: If I have heard correctly the point that is being made by Mr Winnick.
Chairman: Specifically the catering
industry we are talking about. What he
is saying is that there is a large diaspora of British Asians and British
Chinese people here and Mr Winnick is saying, why can they not get their
chefs from
Q333 Mr Winnick: Thank you for interpreting.
Mr Woolas: Because Oldham College of Catering has not provided specific training in the past in those areas, and our argument is that perhaps it should do.
Chairman: David Davies has a quick supplementary.
Q334 David Davies: We have heard representations from the Asian catering industry to the effect that they much prefer foreign workers because they are more malleable, and I assume they take less money, but surely the Minister would agree that this is unacceptable and, for all the claims of great skills, I just do not accept that you need to be a rocket scientist to make a chicken biriani.
Mr Woolas: I would not say that in a rush, Mr Vaz. I think it is a highly skilled and very difficult science, but let me stay away from what I am trying to say.
Chairman: I think you are right to do so. We will be giving Mr Davies his own test as to how to make chicken biriani later! Mr Clappison has a very quick supplementary.
Q335 Mr Clappison: We are hearing lots of special pleading from the Law Society, the ballet, from curry houses about this. I want to ask you a global question about this situation. We all know that the number of resident workers in employment has fallen over the last year as we have entered into deep recession. Can you tell me whether the number of non UK and non EU workers who are controlled by the points-based system has gone up or gone down over the last year? I am asking the Minister if he knows.
Mr Woolas: This is a very important question, of course, a critical question. The answer is that it is too early to say. Our expectation and our understanding is that it has fallen. Clearly Tier 3 has fallen to zero, so overall the numbers will be down. Our estimate, as you will recall, Mr Clappison, is that there would be a fall of 12% if one had applied the current criteria under the points-based system to the 2007 figure, but, in honesty, we do not know.
Q336 Mr Clappison: What is your answer to the global question: has the number of non EU workers in the workforce gone up or down in the last year, 2008?
Mr Woolas: I thought I had just answered that. My expectation is that it has gone down. Clearly Tier 3 is zero, so that has gone down.
Q337 Mr Clappison: Can I invite you to be a little more familiar with the work of the Office of National Statistics? I know you have had some slight problems with them in the past. They seem to think that in the last year the number of non EU workers has increased by 127,000; that it has increased every quarter of the year, including the last quarter of the year. Those are statistics we received in written answers from the Office for National Statistics.
Mr Woolas: I think this shows the old adage that there are statistics and statistics. You asked me what my view was and I said that we do not yet know; and it is not that the ONS will not let me tell you, by the way, it is that we do not yet know and, therefore, out of honesty to this committee, I am not--
Q338 Mr Clappison: Are you saying that the Office of National Statistics have got it wrong?
Mr Woolas: I am saying that my experience of this job, and of life in general, is that one needs to read the caveats and the methodologies in the compilation of statistics, and I say that as somebody who is responsible for the distribution of the Revenue Support Grant to your authority, and I remember your point of view on that.
Chairman: Could you please move on, because we are actually on a different subject.
Q339 Mr Clappison: Chairman, what is that supposed mean?
Mr Woolas: It means that you are trying to have your cake and eat it and I am not going to let you.
Chairman: We can come back to this at the end, Mr Clappison, if you wish, but can we just keep the thread flowing. Mr Salter.
Q340 Martin Salter: I will move on from cake to curry, if I can, Chairman. The points-based system, Minister, has been savaged in several editions of Curry Life, a magazine which followed us around our trip to Bangladesh last year. We had a somewhat incendiary exchange, I think, with the Bangladeshi caterers and with the editor of Curry Life over this issue, but we have a substantial Bangladeshi diaspora community here in the UK, a very serious issue actually, with higher than average levels of deprivation, higher than average levels of unemployment and we have a curry industry telling us that they need workers. Does that not actually make the case? Does it not make the social case in that industry for better in-country training rather than merely shipping in experienced curry chefs from elsewhere?
Mr Woolas: I think it does, Chairman. I am not suggesting at all that the committee is making this assumption, but we cannot assume that the only people who want to work, for example, in Indian restaurants are British Bangladeshis; there may be other people; there are other people. I know, Mr Salter, in your constituency, you are very aware of this point, but, with that caveat, the answer is, yes.
Q341 Martin Salter: Can I put on the record, to counter the criticisms: it was put to us when we were in Bangladesh that the points-based system is inherently racist, and we made it quite clear that, in our view, people might not like the points-based system, but it is a system which applies equally to a white Russian, a Jamaican or somebody from South Asia, and whilst one can criticise the system, there is not an element of racism in the introduction of it. I would be interested in your comments?
Mr Woolas: First of all, it would be illegal if this system were discriminatory, and there are very many well-intended people who would make sure that that was put right. Secondly, I think Mr Clappison it was who made the point that there are special interest groups who argue the case from their point of view. I have seen no evidence that suggests that there is any discrimination on ethnic or religious grounds or in any other way. Indeed, separately, Mr Vaz, if you will allow me an operational point (it goes back to Mr Brake's point about the nature of the points-based system being based on objective criteria, a tick box if you were a critic from that point of view), that means that we apply the policy equally across the world: so what the post does in Lagos is what the post does in Washington DC, and the system does not allow discrimination on that point. Are there unintended consequences? That, of course, is something that we are always very vigilant about and why scrutiny by yourselves, by the House, by John Vine and his team, and so on, is extremely important, but I reject the accusation.
Q342 Mr Streeter: Now that financial services sector in this country has torpedoed itself rather, are major law firms, one of our most successful exports in this country, and we have heard evidence from international law firms. If you are thinking of solicitors in the high street, that is wrong - these massive firms in the City which have branches throughout every known country in the world virtually. They have given very strong evidence, I thought compelling evidence, that the points-based system is going to impact their business in moving people around from office to office, specialised skills bringing them here, and so on, and they were giving us the impression that you were not listening to their evidence and were not really responding to it, perhaps not even understanding the nature of their problem. Can you reassure us that you do understand them and you will act to make sure they are not prejudiced by the new system?
Mr Coats: Neil might want to pick this up too. You can be reassured that we are talking to a wide variety of people who we work with on the points-based system, who it affects. Intra-company transfers for global law practices are subject to Tier 2, like any other inter-company transfer, and we work very hard to make the system user-friendly. Indeed, many businesses have told us that it is much better than the old system. In terms of the legal profession, they are worried about the issue of interns, however, which is people who are learning. We are listening carefully to those concerns, have potentially got a way forward and are waiting for them to make further representations about how they would want to. So we have listened extremely carefully, and I can say that I have personally, and I know that Neil has, listened to the concerns of that sector and we are making sure that we are listening to those concerns to ensure that they are able to play a full part in the points system. Neil, do you want to add to that?
Mr Hughes: Just to say, I think if you heard the same evidence again today a lot of those concerns would have gone away. I think we are on the point, very nearly, of providing exactly what it is that they have asked of us.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr Streeter. Tom Brake.
Q343 Tom Brake: Again, on the subject of people you have been talking to, have you been talking to the universities? They are very worried that a large computer system, the Sponsorship Management System, may fail at a critical moment cancelling or not allowing visas to be issued for a quarter of a million students. Is this going to happen?
Mr Woolas: Mr Vaz, no, it is not going to happen. This point is very important, clearly. The student contribution to our country is huge. What we decided to do, on my level what we decided to do, was to try to ensure that we have got a timetable that made sense from the universities' point of view as well as from ours, so the introduction of the scheme from 31 March gives the opportunity for a good period of time before the large bulk of the students, the new students, come in. I have also, as a result of that, Chairman, been able to make a move towards the university sector, which they asked for, which is this issue of whether the visa covers the length of the student force or whether they have to renew, make strong representations in areas like medical students, and so on, and we have been able to give that decision to them precisely because the points-based system gives us better assurances about genuine student attendance, about genuine colleges, and so on. So the issue that Mr Brake has raised over the IT is, of course, critical, and I am very aware that everyone will be expecting a major Government sponsored IT system to fail, because that seems to be what the expectation is in the modern world.
Q344 Tom Brake: Often realised.
Mr Woolas: Well, never say never, but we have been working very closely with them. I do not know whether, Matthew, you want to add to that.
Mr Coats: Perhaps I could add to that. The Sponsor Management System has been live for colleges since last summer. We have had testimonials from universities that say that has worked very well for them. The way we want to introduce the rest of the system is progressively and carefully to ensure that we reduce the risk of any problems. We have drawn together a group of interested parties to make sure that, as we finish the implementation of Tier 4, everybody is involved in those decisions, including the technical ones. I think there is a group meeting over the next few weeks, couple of months, to make sure that that is properly designed and the risk is reduced still further. So we are being very careful and very measured and making sure that it is done collaboratively.
Q345 Tom Brake: What volumes is it currently coping with and, at a peak, what volume will it be expected to cope with?
Mr Coats: Neil might want to come in on that, but at the moment the IT is doing the sponsorship side with just colleges rather than the individual students themselves.
Mr Hughes: There are two ways of looking at it. In terms of the number of sponsors it is dealing with, it is dealing with a much greater volume than the university. I think we have something like seven or eight times the number of sponsors, so adding a university to the system gives a small increase in the number of users. The difference with the universities is they issue a lot, they will use the system more intensively than other users because they bring in so many students. So in terms of the number of users: very confident, a very small increase. In terms of how much traffic goes through the system, again the numbers coming through are within our estimates and we filled the pipe much bigger than it needed to be to deal with the volume, so very confident on volume.
Q346 Tom Brake: Can I come to an example of very special pleading which we have had. An example of a ballet dancer who wakes up in the morning, feels he or she cannot go to work and someone has to be flown in from somewhere else in the world at very short notice. Will the points-based system cope with that scenario?
Mr Woolas: Not at the margins of that, not at the extreme of that margin. We think we have got the balance right. Again, it relates back to Mr Brake's earlier question on the area of international performers. We have already shown that we do all we can to respond to those genuinely urgent cases, but what we will not do is compromise the system, because that would not be fair to others. Most of those people will be dealt with under Tier 5, creative and sporting categories, and so that situation is unlikely to arise that often.
David Davies: British jobs for British ballet dancers!
Q347 Mr Winnick: Minister, we have had representations, we had witnesses from the arts industry, very recently in fact, who are very concerned about the situation and have given us examples, and the rest of it. We have international standing in this particular field, which we are all proud of, and the concern is that that would be undermined by a rigid system which makes it simply impossible to bring in people at short notice, people from abroad, where there is no question of a domestic replacement. Can I ask you whether you would be willing to reconsider the difficulties which have arisen and if you will perhaps receive a deputation from the arts industry. That is more to you, Minister, rather than your officials. I think it is a political question.
Mr Woolas: I am just getting some legal advice, Mr Chairman, from Mr Coates. At the end of the day there is the discretion. If a major tournament or a major performance was jeopardised, then at the end of the day the Minister would be able to exercise discretion. The number of cases where that would happen would be, in my view, extremely limited, and there is no evidence to say that. I think the concerns of the arts sector, and I am more than willing to meet with them, of course, are exaggerated. There were some very important problems pointed out by the Football Association in relation to---
Bob Russell: That is my question!
Q348 Mr Winnick: Are you willing to receive a deputation from the arts industry?
Mr Woolas: Yes, of course.
Q349 Chairman: The committee went to the Royal Opera House and they agree they have to go through the system - they are sponsoring organisations - but they talk about the rare case, the night before a major event, where the lead singer, dancer, whatever, cannot make it. You have mentioned discretion. You are quite right, you can use your discretion, but could you look at the possibility, perhaps after you meet the delegation that Mr Winnick has described, of an emergency situation: if you say they could always come to ministers on an emergency basis and be able to get that visa when the Royal Opera House is absolutely full and they find out on the morning that the star cannot perform, that they can get somebody in at short notice. So long as there is that exception and you are prepared to exercise your discretion in a rare circumstance, that covers it, but would you look at it again?
Mr Woolas: Yes, of course, Chairman, I will do so if only because this committee asks me to.
Q350 Gwyn Prosser: Minister, in your initial exchange with the Chairman you mentioned my local newspaper, The Dover Express, and you quoted the editor as saying that a lot of the accumulation of people in Calais is a symptom of our tougher border controls, and I support that. Nevertheless, it is a serious humanitarian issue so far as the French are concerned and I have raised the matter with the Home Secretary. She says that you and others will be talking to our French colleagues. During those discussions, can you ask them, when they provide what we have been told are legal notices and legal advice to people who are living in these wretched conditions in Calais, whether that advice will give a bold, clear statement that almost de facto, because of the Dublin Convention and other rulings, they will not have asylum even if they do in rare cases reach the United Kingdom, and for those who do reach the United Kingdom, they will more likely be entered into the accelerated return process and not have an appeal process, not have residence in the UK and not become refugees?
Q351 Chairman: Could we have a quick answer to that?
Mr Woolas: It is my intention where we
are---. Of course we are having a series
of meetings with the French to handle what we see as a consequence of the
success of our border policy. We think
it is a different situation to Sangatte.
I have one meeting, which is at a serial level, with my counterpart Eric
Besson, and there are a number of intensive meetings going on. It is our intention to announce a package of
measures to move the situation on. We
are returning people to
Q352 Bob Russell: Minister, Tier 2 refers to skilled workers with a job offer to fill gaps in the UK labour force and Tier 5 refers to people coming to the UK to satisfy primarily non economic objectives. When it comes to football that really is balls, is it not, because the Government has granted a one-year exemption from the English language requirement to international footballers. Why?
Mr Woolas: Carlos Tévez, I think is the answer. I am sorry, he is a footballer.
Q353 Chairman: Does he not speak English?
Mr Woolas: Some of his colleagues say he does not. The serious point in Mr Russell's question is that the football profession is covered by international rules and the transfer window and the argument that they put to us was that the existence of the transfer window, which is not within their power to change, required a different route for their members, for the players, so we allowed a change to have "transferring country" from Tier 5 to Tier 2 in that one case.
Q354 Bob Russell: I recognise that football thinks the laws of the land do not apply to professional football on a whole range of issues, but we are talking here about the points-based system. If we accept that argument, and I think it is not a strong case you have conceded, at the end of one year they transfer to Tier 2, like other migrants. They must demonstrate they meet the required standard of English language competency. Who decides what that standard is and what happens if they fail that standard?
Mr Coats: Neil, could help with the English testing.
Mr Hughes: There is a set language standard for Tier 2, I think it is currently the Council of Europe standard A1, I think, which is an internationally recognised standard. That is tested through a number of agencies, people like IEL and the like. There are lots of places you can go to take that English test. So the person in question would have to go along, take a test and pass it and then submit evidence that they had taken the test to us.
Q355 Bob Russell: Minister, how many international footballers have failed the English language test after one year?
Mr Woolas: None that I am aware of, but it would be too early yet anyway. There is a serious effort by football clubs to teach their players English.
Q356 Bob Russell: Particularly the English players.
Mr Woolas: It rather proves the point on the cohesion and integration strategy. You cannot play a team game unless you can communicate with your fellow team members, and that is true of football teams just as it is true of communities.
Bob Russell: I think this is just another example where professional football in this country is rolled over and the Government have been allowed to get away with it.
Q357 Gwyn Prosser: Minister, this is one of the last questions in the brief but probably one of the biggest flaws, in my view, in the points-based system. You have said in the past that lawyers tend to use the appeal system for their own ends, and that is probably contributory to you taking away the right to independent appeal in the points-based system. Is there any just alternative to having an independent overseer looking at the appeals of the authority rather than allowing internal administrative review?
Mr Woolas: Most countries in the world do not allow an appeal at that stage. The points-based system is objective, as Mr Brake and others have been pointing out. We do, of course, guarantee and require an administrative review where the decision is challenged, and that must be carried out.
Q358 Chairman: This is an internal review.
Mr Woolas: That is an internal review. That process is, of course, overseen by the inspectorate, but we believe there is a balance here between getting the decisions right, getting the decisions quickly in a way that benefits our country, but I can assure you, Chairman, that the decision not to allow that old system of appeal is nothing to do with the view of the legal profession. I should say, it was before my tenure. It would have influenced me, but it did not influence Liam.
Chairman: It is the strong view of the committee that it should have an independent element and that there should be a right of appeal and that internal reviews are not a substitute. David Davies.
David Davies: I thought I was asking the previous question, which was messed up by a supplementary.
Chairman: If it was asked, you do not have to ask it.
Q359 David Davies: I will ask it anyway. If the entry clearance managers are overturning cases when they are telephoned by law practitioners, does this not indicate they are just caving in too quickly when somebody from a law firm rings them up?
Mr Woolas: Just on a general policy point, I will ask Neil to help me out on some of the other points, the management of the system, of course, is moving to the spokes and hubs and that is providing a greater consistency in decision-making across the world. The answer to your question, therefore, has to be seen in that context. There is greater management of that process than there has been before. It is part of general strengthening of the borders.
Q360 David Davies: We were spending 200 million a year on legal aid for people in the asylum system and people trying to immigrate here. Is that going up or coming down?
Mr Woolas: I have not got precise figures in front of me, but it is coming down, because the numbers have come down.
Q361 David Davies: Is it below 200 million a year now?
Mr Woolas: I would not want to mislead the committee. I do not know the exact figure.
Q362 David Davies: Could you write to me?
Mr Woolas: I will certainly, if the committee want me to, write to you on that point.
Q363 Chairman: Can I ask you two further questions. First of all, the cover arrangements. Your colleague is happily going to give birth very shortly - not Jackie Smith but Meg Hillier - and she will be off work for six months, as the law allows her to be. Members of the committee and myself are concerned about the cover arrangements, that a very, very heavy caseload is to be divided between yourself, who already is very burdened - there are 48,000 letters going into the UK Border Agency every day - and also the Minister in the Ministry of Justice, which of course is supposed to be independent of the Home Office. The whole point of taking probation and prisons away and giving it to the Ministry of Justice and giving them the appeal system is so that they are independent. Could you not look at another arrangement that will provide additional ministerial support rather than the arrangement that you have, which will put a very heavy burden on ministers, especially yourself? I am not doubting your capabilities and your devotion to your job, but to take on the work of another minister at this crucial time and the operation of the points-based system is actually going to be quite a burden, is it not?
Mr Woolas: Chairman, I am extremely grateful. It is the first time a select committee has ever worried for my welfare; but perhaps it is not my welfare that is the most important point but the proper operation---
Q364 Chairman: We do care that ministers are able to make decisions properly.
Mr Woolas: It is a matter for the Home Secretary, first of all. Secondly, we are, I hope the committee accepts, making some significant improvements, as indeed the Hon Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch reported, particularly in the tracking of Members of Parliament's correspondence and the registered cases which we are sweeping through now and getting that backlog rid of. I can only suggest, Chairman, in answer to your question, that I report it to---
Q365 Chairman: Would you raise it with the Home Secretary?
Mr Woolas: Yes.
Q366 Chairman: The Mayor for London's recent survey on illegal immigration suggests that there are 750,000 people who are illegally in this country. There is now a backlog at the IND of a quarter of a million people. That brings the total to about a million. He has suggested that there should be an amnesty for illegal immigrants. What is your view on the Mayor's latest view?
Mr Woolas: On the point that the Mayor of London has made, first of all, our policy and our public position is that, by definition, it is not known how many illegal immigrants there are in the country. The abolition/phasing out of border controls from 1994 took that information away. The reintroduction of border controls is making the situation better, which is why I was surprised that the policy of the official opposition is to oppose that border control measure.
Q367 Chairman: But you do recognise these figures? He has conducted a survey of three-quarters of a million people, he says.
Mr Woolas: I am very conscious that Professor Metcalf is behind me, and I think the figures are from the LSE, but I am not familiar with those figures. We have not done a detailed study on this for three years now, four years, so I do not know. What I do believe, and our policy is, is that if one were to do what the Mayor suggested, it would make the problem worse, not better, because the pull factor would increase and the people traffickers would make more money.
Q368 Chairman: But you would not favour an amnesty for these people?
Mr Woolas: I think an amnesty is a well-intended road to hell.
Chairman: On that issue, can I bring in Mr Clappison.
Q369 Mr Clappison: Thank you very much. Minister, on the question of the future population growth, economic migration covered by the points-based system is a big factor in net migration, and net migration is itself a very big factor in the future population growth. I think you have suggested, correct me if I am wrong, that you do not accept the prediction which has been made by the Office for National Statistics, the Government Actuaries Department and the United Nations that the population of this country is going to hit 71 billion within a different timescale in the case of those bodies. You do not accept that, do you, or do you?
Mr Woolas: No.
Q370 Mr Clappison: No; right. Those are the figures which come from the independent Office for National Statistics, the Government's own actuary. You are saying that they are not right.
Mr Woolas: No, I am not saying that they are not right, Mr Clappison.
Q371 Mr Clappison: Are you saying that the population is not going to hit 71 billion by, say, 2031?
Mr Woolas: That is my belief.
Q372 Mr Clappison: If that is your belief, it is a very unsatisfactory situation for people who are concerned about this issue, where there are statistics coming from an independent body and from the Government's own actuary and the Government itself is saying that they are wrong. Can you write to us and let us have your prediction for what the population growth is going to be, if you are saying they are not right?
Mr Woolas: No, I cannot, because you are misinterpreting, I think deliberately. The ONS figures give an extrapolation of population based on the previous number of the last few years. I think it is three from memory. Those population figures define population as being those people who are in the country for 12 months or more. Clearly, that, therefore, includes overseas students, it includes everybody who comes into the country under the points-based system. Those people are here temporarily for up to five years. So to extrapolate and to turn that into a projection is a false logic. Secondly, my view is that, even if it were a projection, not an extrapolation, the policy measures that we are taking would avoid that increase in population.
Q373 Mr Clappison: You are arguing about the definitions, but they accept the definitions and they are prepared to make a projection on that basis.
Mr Woolas: It is not a projection, Chairman, it is an extrapolation. The ONS have made that clear.
Q374 Mr Clappison: Okay, so they make an extrapolation. You are saying you do not accept, or you do not believe that extrapolation. Can you let us have the extrapolation which you believe?
Mr Woolas: No, Chairman. The point that Mr Clappison is pushing on is a fair point and a very important point of public debate, but to suggest that there is no difference between extrapolation and projection is to suggest that, because this room filled up at 11 o'clock this morning at a rate of one person per minute, the population of this is room might well be 500. That is clearly nonsensical. The population will be affected by our points-based system if one includes within the population temporary residence under five years. The population definition of the ONS is a year. Those two things are very different. Our objective, and, Chairman, this is the very serious point for the debate in this country over the next generation, I would say, is that we have never been able to show to the British public that we know how many people are here temporarily and how many are here to settle. With our policies of counting in and counting out and the Citizen Bill, should the House grant it, we will be able to do that, and that, I think, will provide a reassurance to the British public that Mr Clappison and other members of the committee, I think, would support.
Chairman: Could we have a final question from you, Mr Clappison.
Q375 Mr Clappison: I am suggesting to the Minister will he do this on the same basis as the Office for National Statistics? They were happy do it on the basis which he has described, to make that extrapolation, and, in fact, the figures for net migration have, in many cases, proved to be an underestimate and they have gone up every year for the last ten years.
Mr Woolas: And they include temporary people.
Chairman: Minister, thank you very much. Yesterday the committee went to Luna House and we were given a presentation of the work people were doing there. We are very grateful for that opportunity and, no matter how the system works, we would like to pay tribute to the staff who work in the MPs' correspondence unit, who do a great job in responding to all of us. Thank you very much for coming, Mr Hughes, Minister and Mr Coats.