---

Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill

I do not think that it does. I specifically refer to the 900 or 1,000 decisions that were looked at by the NAO, or whoever it was—if it was not the NAO, I apologise. That was done deliberately before a second sift, as I understand it, by the entry clearance manager. The paperwork that was initially submitted was examined. I absolutely accept that there are difficulties across the HE sector, but I do not accept, as I have said, that they are ultimately connected, simply put, to fee structures or to what we are doing on appeals. I cannot say loudly enough that the Government and the House, on a cross-party basis, will continue to work as closely as possible with the HE sector to ensure that those overseas students continue to get good service. I accept the point that was made by some hon. Members, who are not in their places any more, that it is about far more than the initial three or four-year experience of the overseas students. I happened to teach a number of people who were overseas students and who are still friends. There is that initial contact at, if one likes, elite level, but then there is contact at a more general level, and affection for the country where one did that initial study. None of that I refute in any way, but we think—in the context of the five-year plan, the points system and all the improvements that we are trying to make in terms of ECO decision making—that the way forward that we are suggesting, with those elements rather than simply what is in the Bill, has merit for students.