Asked by: Claire Hanna (Social Democratic & Labour Party - Belfast South)
Question to the Northern Ireland Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, what recent discussions he has had with the Home Secretary on the application process and fee for Irish citizens resident in Northern Ireland who wish to reclaim British citizenship.
Answered by Robin Walker
Officials in my Department are discussing this matter with the Home Office who are responsible for this policy.
An individual who has previously renounced their British citizenship may apply to resume it. Applications are at the Home Secretary’s discretion, and the current published policy guidance sets out expectations about when discretion should normally be exercised.
The Home Office regularly reviews the guidance in this regard to ensure that it reflects immigration legislation.
The Government firmly believes that UK nationality law is consistent with its Belfast/Good Friday Agreement obligations, including the birthright provisions that allow the people of Northern Ireland to hold British or Irish citizenship, or both.
Asked by: John Hayes (Conservative - South Holland and The Deepings)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what estimate she has made of the number of foreign national offenders in the UK; and what steps she is taking to identify and deport those offenders.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government is clear foreign nationals who abuse our hospitality by committing crimes should be in no doubt of our determination to deport them. Any foreign national who is convicted of a crime and given a prison sentence is considered for deportation at the earliest opportunity.
For non-European Economic Area (EEA) nationals, deportation will be pursued where it is conducive to the public good including where a person receives a custodial sentence of 12 months or more, commits an offence that caused serious harm or is a persistent offender. European Economic Area (EEA) nationals are deported in accordance with European Union (EU) law on the grounds of public policy or public security where relevant conduct occurred before 1 January 2021 and under the same deportation thresholds that apply to non-EEA nationals for relevant conduct after 31 December 2020.
No guarantee can ever be given that every foreign criminal will have their deportation enforced – for example, sometimes the UK’s current obligations under international law such as the Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights ultimately prohibit us from returning certain individuals despite their criminality. Legal or re-documentation barriers can frustrate immediate deportation. However, we never give up trying to deport these individuals to make our communities safer and since January 2019 we have removed 7,240 foreign national offenders.
The Home Office publishes data on individuals detained in the Home Office detention estate and HM Prisons solely under Immigration Act powers and Returns of people who do not have any legal right to stay in the UK in the ‘Immigration Statistics Quarterly Release’ and Transparency release - Immigration Enforcement data.
Asked by: Baroness Eaton (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to remove foreign national offenders from the UK.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
One of this Government’s key objectives is to protect the public by removing foreign national offenders who commit criminal offences and have no right to remain in the UK. Foreign nationals who abuse our hospitality by committing crimes should be in no doubt of our determination to deport them. Since January 2019, we have removed 6,450 foreign national offenders from the UK.
Any foreign national who is convicted of a crime and given a prison sentence is considered for deportation at the earliest opportunity. Every week we remove foreign criminals from the UK to different countries who have no right to be here. During the Covid-19 pandemic, we have continued to return and deport foreign offenders and other immigration offenders where flight routes have been available to us, both on scheduled flights and charter flights.
For non-European Economic Area (EEA) nationals, deportation will be pursued where it is conducive to the public good including where a person receives a custodial sentence of 12 months or more, commits an offence that caused serious harm or is a persistent offender. Currently, European Economic Area (EEA) nationals are deported in accordance with European Union (EU) law on the grounds of public policy or public security.
The UK’s departure from the EU means that, in future, an EEA national who commits an offence after the end of the transition period (31 December 2020) will be considered under the same deportation thresholds that apply to non-EEA nationals.
This Government’s priority is keeping the people of this country safe, and we make no apology for seeking to remove dangerous foreign criminals.
Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to remove foreign national offenders from (a) Stoke-on-Trent and (b) Kidsgrove.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
One of this Government’s key objectives is to protect the public by removing foreign national offenders who commit criminal offences and have no right to remain in the UK. Foreign nationals who abuse our hospitality by committing crimes should be in no doubt of our determination to deport them irrespective of where they live, including Stoke-on-Trent and Kidsgrove, and since January 2019, we have removed 6,450 foreign national offenders from the UK.
All foreign nationals who receive a custodial sentence are referred to the Home Office to consider removal action. Every week we remove foreign criminals from the UK to different countries who have no right to be here. During the Covid-19 pandemic, we have continued to return and deport foreign offenders and other immigration offenders where flight routes have been available to us, both on scheduled flights and charter flights.
For non-European Economic Area (EEA) nationals, deportation will be pursued where it is conducive to the public good including where a person receives a custodial sentence of 12 months or more, commits an offence that caused serious harm or is a persistent offender. Currently, European Economic Area (EEA) nationals are deported in accordance with European Union (EU) law on the grounds of public policy or public security.
The UK’s departure from the EU means that, in future, an EEA national who commits an offence after the end of the transition period (31 December 2020) will be considered under the same deportation thresholds that apply to non-EEA nationals.
We only return those with no legal right to remain in the UK, including foreign national offenders. Individuals are only returned to their country of origin when the Home Office and, where applicable, the Courts deem it is safe to do so.
This Government’s priority is keeping the people of this country safe, and we make no apology for seeking to remove dangerous foreign criminals.
Asked by: Claudia Webbe (Independent - Leicester East)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what steps he is taking to tackle (a) illegal levels of pay, (b) furlough fraud, (c) double record keeping and (d) VAT fraud in Leicester’s garment Industry.
Answered by Jesse Norman
HMRC enforce the National Minimum and National Living Wage (NMW) in line with the law and policy set out by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS).
All businesses, irrespective of size or sector, are responsible for paying the correct minimum wage to their staff. Consequences for not complying with paying NMW can include penalties of 200% of the arrears, public naming and, for the worst offences, criminal prosecution.
Breaches of NMW legislation are normally a civil matter, but the most serious cases involving obstruction, falsifying of documents by, for example, creating a second set of ‘compliant records’ or wilful failure to pay workers the minimum wage that form part of a pattern of wider criminality may be referred to HMRC’s Fraud Investigation Service and subsequently to the Crown Prosecution Service who decide whether or not to prosecute.
Since 2012-13, HMRC’s NMW team has investigated 150 textile trade employers (59 employers in Leicester), recovering over £215,000 in wage arrears for over 400 workers and issued over £325,000 of penalties to employers.
As a result of the widespread allegations about labour exploitation in Leicester this year, a new multi-agency taskforce (Operation Tacit) led by the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority (GLAA) has been set up to bring together the enforcement bodies (HMRC, Employment Agencies Standards Inspectorate (BEIS), Leicestershire Police, National Crime Agency, Leicester City Council, Department for Work and Pensions and Home Office Immigration Enforcement).
Across tax and the NMW, HMRC have a significant number of live investigations involving businesses in the textile sector (over 90 NMW investigations and over 30 tax investigations), a large majority of which relate to Leicester. In 2019/20 HMRC completed 25 separate investigations into the VAT affairs of businesses in the textile trade in Leicester alone and in doing so recovered more than £2 million of tax that would otherwise have been lost and facilitated 21 director disqualifications relating to the textile sector.
HMRC are also taking steps to counteract those seeking to abuse the COVID-19 support schemes. In line with other “payment-out” regimes, HMRC undertake pre-payment authentication and risking to identify and block fraudulent claims. HMRC also carry out proportionate risk-based post-payment compliance checks to test the accuracy of claims they receive. HMRC are able to retrospectively audit all aspects of the COVID-19 schemes, with scope to claw back fraudulent or inaccurate claims, applying their existing compliance approaches.
HMRC take seriously and review all complaints from workers referred by the Acas helpline, or received via the online complaints form, and investigate as appropriate. If anyone thinks they are not receiving at least the minimum wage, they can contact Acas, in confidence, on 0300 123 1100 or submit a query online using the link: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pay-and-work-rights-complaints.
Asked by: Stuart C McDonald (Scottish National Party - Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how many prosecutions there have been under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 in each of the last 10 years; and how many of those prosecutions related to having control of a vessel on the sea.
Answered by Michael Ellis
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) maintains a central record of the number of offences in which a prosecution commenced, including the offences charged by way of the Immigration Act 1971.
During the last 10 years, up to the end of March 2020, the number of offences charged by way of section 25 of the Immigration Act 1971 is as follows:
| Immigration Act 1971 { 25(1) } | Immigration Act 1971 { 25(2) } | Immigration Act 1971 { 25(A)(1) } | Immigration Act 1971 { 25(B)(1) } |
2010-2011 | 397 | 4 | 3 | 5 |
2011-2012 | 390 | 0 | 6 | 1 |
2012-2013 | 430 | 0 | 13 | 2 |
2013-2014 | 311 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
2014-2015 | 382 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
2015-2016 | 321 | 0 | 13 | 0 |
2016-2017 | 440 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
2017-2018 | 330 | 1 | 14 | 0 |
2018-2019 | 295 | 0 | 8 | 1 |
2019-2020 | 273 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System | ||||
There is no indication of the number of individual defendants prosecuted for these offences or the final outcome of the prosecution proceeding or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at the time of finalisation. It is often the case that defendants will be prosecuted for more than one offence in the same set of proceedings.
It is not possible to separately report whether any offences involved the use or control of a vessel at sea other than by manually examining case files at disproportionate cost.
The Law Officers have not issued any guidance, advice or instructions to Crown Prosecution Service lawyers on prosecutions under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 in the last 18 months. However, the CPS has clear and published policy guidance on the prosecution of immigration offences, which reflects the Memorandum of Understanding agreed between the CPS and Home Office Immigration Enforcement in 2016. This establishes the agreed approach and public interest factors which prosecutors must consider when reviewing immigration cases. No further recent guidance has been issued to Crown Prosecutors on section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971.
Neither the Attorney General's Office nor the CPS have received representations from the Home Office on prosecutions under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 in the last 18 months. The joint approach between the CPS and Immigration Enforcement is to consider prosecution under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 for anyone who has been involved in organising and planning the offences.
Asked by: Stuart C McDonald (Scottish National Party - Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, what representations (a) her Department and (b) the CPS has received from the Home Office on prosecutions under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 in the last 18 months.
Answered by Michael Ellis
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) maintains a central record of the number of offences in which a prosecution commenced, including the offences charged by way of the Immigration Act 1971.
During the last 10 years, up to the end of March 2020, the number of offences charged by way of section 25 of the Immigration Act 1971 is as follows:
| Immigration Act 1971 { 25(1) } | Immigration Act 1971 { 25(2) } | Immigration Act 1971 { 25(A)(1) } | Immigration Act 1971 { 25(B)(1) } |
2010-2011 | 397 | 4 | 3 | 5 |
2011-2012 | 390 | 0 | 6 | 1 |
2012-2013 | 430 | 0 | 13 | 2 |
2013-2014 | 311 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
2014-2015 | 382 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
2015-2016 | 321 | 0 | 13 | 0 |
2016-2017 | 440 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
2017-2018 | 330 | 1 | 14 | 0 |
2018-2019 | 295 | 0 | 8 | 1 |
2019-2020 | 273 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System | ||||
There is no indication of the number of individual defendants prosecuted for these offences or the final outcome of the prosecution proceeding or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at the time of finalisation. It is often the case that defendants will be prosecuted for more than one offence in the same set of proceedings.
It is not possible to separately report whether any offences involved the use or control of a vessel at sea other than by manually examining case files at disproportionate cost.
The Law Officers have not issued any guidance, advice or instructions to Crown Prosecution Service lawyers on prosecutions under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 in the last 18 months. However, the CPS has clear and published policy guidance on the prosecution of immigration offences, which reflects the Memorandum of Understanding agreed between the CPS and Home Office Immigration Enforcement in 2016. This establishes the agreed approach and public interest factors which prosecutors must consider when reviewing immigration cases. No further recent guidance has been issued to Crown Prosecutors on section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971.
Neither the Attorney General's Office nor the CPS have received representations from the Home Office on prosecutions under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 in the last 18 months. The joint approach between the CPS and Immigration Enforcement is to consider prosecution under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 for anyone who has been involved in organising and planning the offences.
Asked by: Stuart C McDonald (Scottish National Party - Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, whether she has issued guidance, advice and instructions to Crown prosecution lawyers on prosecutions under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 in the last 18 months; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Michael Ellis
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) maintains a central record of the number of offences in which a prosecution commenced, including the offences charged by way of the Immigration Act 1971.
During the last 10 years, up to the end of March 2020, the number of offences charged by way of section 25 of the Immigration Act 1971 is as follows:
| Immigration Act 1971 { 25(1) } | Immigration Act 1971 { 25(2) } | Immigration Act 1971 { 25(A)(1) } | Immigration Act 1971 { 25(B)(1) } |
2010-2011 | 397 | 4 | 3 | 5 |
2011-2012 | 390 | 0 | 6 | 1 |
2012-2013 | 430 | 0 | 13 | 2 |
2013-2014 | 311 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
2014-2015 | 382 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
2015-2016 | 321 | 0 | 13 | 0 |
2016-2017 | 440 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
2017-2018 | 330 | 1 | 14 | 0 |
2018-2019 | 295 | 0 | 8 | 1 |
2019-2020 | 273 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System | ||||
There is no indication of the number of individual defendants prosecuted for these offences or the final outcome of the prosecution proceeding or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at the time of finalisation. It is often the case that defendants will be prosecuted for more than one offence in the same set of proceedings.
It is not possible to separately report whether any offences involved the use or control of a vessel at sea other than by manually examining case files at disproportionate cost.
The Law Officers have not issued any guidance, advice or instructions to Crown Prosecution Service lawyers on prosecutions under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 in the last 18 months. However, the CPS has clear and published policy guidance on the prosecution of immigration offences, which reflects the Memorandum of Understanding agreed between the CPS and Home Office Immigration Enforcement in 2016. This establishes the agreed approach and public interest factors which prosecutors must consider when reviewing immigration cases. No further recent guidance has been issued to Crown Prosecutors on section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971.
Neither the Attorney General's Office nor the CPS have received representations from the Home Office on prosecutions under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 in the last 18 months. The joint approach between the CPS and Immigration Enforcement is to consider prosecution under section 25(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 for anyone who has been involved in organising and planning the offences.
Asked by: Abena Oppong-Asare (Labour - Erith and Thamesmead)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what her Department's policy is on deporting offenders who have grown up in the UK.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
Under the UK Borders Act 2007 passed by the last Labour Government, the Home Secretary has a duty to deport a foreign criminal who is convicted in the UK and sentenced to a period of imprisonment of 12 months or more unless an exception applies. Where the automatic deportation threshold is not met, the Home Office will consider deportation under the Immigration Act 1971 where the person is a serious or persistent offender. Currently, European Economic Area (EEA) nationals are deported in accordance with European Union (EU) law on the grounds of public policy or public security. The UK’s departure from the EU means that, in future, an EEA national who commits an offence after the end of the transition period (31 December 2020) will be considered under the same deportation thresholds that apply to non-EEA nationals.
Asked by: Lisa Cameron (Conservative - East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many (a) prosecutions and (b) convictions there have been for non-payment of the national minimum wage to garment factory workers since 1 January 2016.
Answered by Jesse Norman
HMRC enforces the National Minimum?Wage (NMW)?and?National Living Wage (NLW) in line with the law and policy set out by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS).
Breaches of NMW legislation are normally a civil (non-criminal) matter which attract penalties of up to 200% of the identified wage arrears and public naming.
Prosecutions can be lengthy and cause delays in recovering arrears for workers and do not necessarily guarantee payment. HMRC therefore balance recovering NMW arrears for workers as quickly as possible with the robust enforcement of the NMW when deciding whether to pursue prosecution. Consequently, prosecution is reserved for the most serious NMW offences involving obstruction, falsifying of documents or wilful failure to pay workers the minimum wage, and such cases are referred to the CPS who decide whether to prosecute.
There have been no prosecutions or convictions for the non-payment of the NMW to textile factory workers since 1 January 2016.
However, between 1 January 2016 and 19 October 2020 HMRC’s NMW team has investigated more than 100 textile trade employers recovering over £190,000 in wage arrears for over 400 textile workers, and issued penalties amounting to over £330,000.
HMRC recognise that there are a range of cross-agency risks in the textile sector supply chain, and have participated in a number of joint operations with other Government departments including the Gangmasters Labour Abuse Authority, Police, the Health & Safety Executive, Home Office Immigration Enforcement, Department for Work and Pensions and the National Crime Agency, to investigate all forms of labour exploitation.