---

Immigration and Nationality (Fees) (Amendment No. 3) Regulations 2008

rose to move, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Immigration and Nationality (Fees) (Amendment No. 3) Regulations 2008. The noble Lord said: In moving this Motion, I will repeat things said recently in the other place and in this House. The Government are determined to continue to drive through the real improvements in the immigration system that we have said that we will deliver. In April 2008, we created a new force, the UK Border Agency, which brings together UKvisas, the Border and Immigration Agency and Customs at the border. We are seeing the results. I realise that I am in danger of repeating what was said to most noble Lords here just a few moments ago but, since April, we have seen the prevention of some 10,000 individuals crossing the channel; we have searched more than 500,000 freight vehicles; and we have confiscated and detected more than 1,000 forged documents. In addition, anyone applying for a visa now has their fingerprints checked against UK databases. So far, we have enrolled some 3 million sets of fingerprints. We have started rolling out the tough new Australian points-based system. Analysis has shown that, if the points-based system had been in place last year, around 10 per cent fewer skilled and temporary migrants from outside Europe would have been allowed into the United Kingdom. Since we introduced new penalties for employers to combat illegal working in February 2008, fines worth about £8 million have been issued. We have also unveiled foreign national ID cards, which will go live later this month. The problem with all this is the cost to the Exchequer and the taxpayer. This year, we will spend more than over £2 billion on securing our borders and managing the immigration system, of which £670 million will have come from fees paid by those using the system. It is right and fair to the users of the immigration system and to the general public in the UK that those who benefit most from the immigration system should contribute proportionately more to the true end costs. For the £600 multi-tier sponsor licence fee, the sponsor is a medium or large sponsor and already holds a tier 4 or 5 sponsor licence. In respect of the first fee, the facility to apply in person is highly valued by customers as an alternative to a postal application. Tier 1, post study, will be the first applicants under the points-based system able to make a premium application under the phased implementation of the points-based system. Implementing this route will generate income estimated at £2.6 million until March 2009. In respect of the reduced entry clearance fees, we propose that a 10 per cent fee reduction be offered to workers who are nationals of states that have ratified the Council of Europe Social Charter—namely, Turkey, Croatia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia—applying for entry clearance. Setting these fees at reasonable levels will minimise lost income and limit the impact of a fee exemption at posts overseas. It is within UK treaty obligations to reduce or abolish fees for workers under the Council of Europe Social Charter. We have also removed the fee exemption for workers under the 1996 Council of Europe revised Social Charter. Workers from Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine will now pay the standard entry clearance fee. We do not feel that it is appropriate to maintain a fee exemption in respect of nationals of states that are party to a treaty that the UK has not ratified and to which it is therefore not bound. Making these changes generates income estimated at £340,000 until March 2009. The sponsor licence fee is for medium or large sponsors who have previously applied to bring in students or temporary workers for a fee of £400 and who subsequently apply to bring in skilled workers. We want to charge £600 for the second application, which would mean that they pay a total of £1,000, taking them up to the cost of a stand-alone tier 2 licence fee. That is an unusual category of application, for which we expect volumes to be negligible. The fees proposed here are all fair and proportionate. They would recover the costs of considering the application and contribute to the true end costs of the system. These changes are a vital step as we deliver a fairer and more effective immigration system. I commend this instrument to the Committee. I beg to move. Moved, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Immigration and Nationality (Fees) (Amendment No. 3) Regulations 2008. 27th Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments.—(Lord Brett.)