Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Justice

Oral Answers to Questions

Thérèse Coffey Excerpts
Tuesday 28th June 2011

(13 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State was asked—
Thérèse Coffey Portrait Dr Thérèse Coffey (Suffolk Coastal) (Con)
- Hansard - -

1. What steps he is taking to reduce the sums spent from the public purse on repeated appeals in immigration tribunals.

Gordon Henderson Portrait Gordon Henderson (Sittingbourne and Sheppey) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

11. What steps he is taking to reduce the sums spent from the public purse on repeated appeals in immigration tribunals.

Jonathan Djanogly Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Jonathan Djanogly)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

As announced in our response to the consultation “Reform of Legal Aid in England and Wales”, published on 21 June, we are removing most immigration cases, including appeals, from the scope of legal aid. We are also removing legal aid for certain repeat judicial reviews in immigration and asylum cases, subject to certain exceptions. We expect those measures to save more than £20 million a year. The Government have also consulted on introducing fees for appeals to the immigration and asylum chamber of the tribunal.

Thérèse Coffey Portrait Dr Coffey
- Hansard - -

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Many of my constituents are becoming increasingly exasperated at the fact that some solicitors seem to exploit changes in circumstances and decisions, such as those on article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998, simply to string out cases for as long as possible. What is he doing to ensure that legal aid is spent appropriately? What conversations has he had with the Immigration Minister on the reform of the immigration decision process?

Jonathan Djanogly Portrait Mr Djanogly
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I can confirm that we are removing legal aid from most immigration cases. That will mean that the taxpayer is no longer funding those cases, which we think are relatively low priority. My hon. Friend has also spoken about cross-departmental co-operation, and we have had a number of discussions with the Home Office about our legal aid proposals, which go in the same direction as its proposals—for example, on making changes to the rules on how relatives of migrants are allowed to come into the UK. That close working will continue.