Proceeding contribution from Lord Bassam of Brighton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 13 December 2007. It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Immigration and Nationality (Fees) (Amendment) Order 2007.
Immigration and Nationality (Fees) (Amendment) Order 2007
My Lords, I accept the point that Parliament is guided by the procedure. Before we get to that point, of course, we endeavour to consult. The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, made a strong pitch on the consultation issue. The consultation with stakeholders ran from 23 October until 9 November. A consultation document was sent to more than 493 people and stakeholder groups, including Universities UK, and I am more than happy to set out the details of that in correspondence. We received 132 written responses; 92 educational establishments, 17 employers and 23 arts and entertainments responses were received. We received a further 31 responses after the official closing date for the consultation. We took the pragmatic view and accepted those responses even though they were late. We also held a number of consultation events which were attended by representatives of the education, employment and arts and entertainments sectors. We are particularly mindful of the arts and entertainments sector because we have been advised in the past of the difficulties which festivals in particular can experience when putting together their programme with foreign performers coming to this country. I cannot accept the allegation made by the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, that our visa regime and the cost-of-entry clearance put off genuine students, or that that regime damages our international competitiveness. The Home Office and UKvisas have done a great deal to support educational exports. Our visa provides working entitlements far more generous than those of competing study destinations such as Canada, Australia and the United States. The points-based system will continue to support the Prime Minister’s initiative by making the system simpler for applicants, with its online assessment process and clear entry criteria putting sponsors at the heart of the system. I am grateful to the noble Lord for drawing to my attention the Universities UK calculations on impact. We are working with key stakeholders, including Universities UK, to develop fees that are fair and proportionate. We shall continue that work, obviously to the point at which we bring forward our order. The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, asked whether there would be any changes to the visitor category requirements or other consequences for sponsorship for visitors. We will shortly publish a public consultation on visitors. That consultation will examine visitor routes in general, because that is something that the points-based system does not cover. It will include provisions relating to family visitors. Visitors will always need to satisfy the entry clearance officer of their intentions and their compliance with immigration laws at point of entry. We aim to keep migrant fees at broadly the same level as their comparative existing fees—that is our policy. The aim is that people moving from the current system to the new points-based system should not ultimately see too big a change. The noble Lord also said that we had carte blanche to charge whatever we wished: I do not agree. Those fees are set out in regulations. Where they are above cost recovery, they must be debated fully in both Houses, so there is ample opportunity to challenge our approach. He also asked for some response to the Merits Committee and its desire to see more information on sponsorship. We have published a statement of intent on sponsorship with more detail, and copies are available in the Library and on the BIA website. The noble Lord made further points about consultation. I think that I should provide the noble Lord with more details, in particular on the consultation on bids and its implementation. I will set those out in correspondence to the noble Lord and provide them also to the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham. The noble Lord also asked whether it was intended that universities should be able to increase their fees to cover sponsorship. Ultimately, it is a decision for the universities, particularly those that are mindful of their competitive position. They will decide how to set fees and whether to pass on costs. As I see it, the fees for students will be kept at a modest and moderate level—that is certainly our intention. Some of the other, more complex issues that the noble Lord raised I will deal with through correspondence, because I am not confident that I have all the answers with me.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 697 c421-2
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Fees and charges Immigration Overseas students Migrant workers
- Legislation
- Immigration and Nationality (Fees)(Amendment) Order 2008
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-06-11 12:18:35 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_430451
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_430451
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_430451