---

Benefits: Non-British Citizens

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Roberts, for initiating this debate and to all noble Lords who have contributed. As set down, its scope was wide, although in some respects it has focused on asylum seekers, so my response will seek to cover all aspects. We fully recognise the impact that inward migration has had in boosting economic growth in the UK, in particular helping to meet previous shortages of labour and skills in the UK labour market. The diversity that this brings has enriched our culture. We also know that those suffering oppression around the world have long looked to the UK for safe haven. Against this background, and consistent with our international obligations, it is important that we provide adequate support for people entering this country, especially when they come here to work. At the same time, we need to be aware that there are people entering the UK who will seek to take undue advantage of our social security and other care and support systems, so we need to balance the support we provide for foreign nationals entering the UK with protection of our internal support systems and the taxpayer. The rules we have in place, combined with immigration controls, seek to meet these aims. They balance help where appropriate with measures to protect our financial and care systems. As my noble friend Lord Judd said, sometimes these are difficult tasks. Access to social security benefits is a complex topic which cannot be dealt with comprehensively in the time allowed for this reply. Different considerations apply for contributory benefits, income-related benefits and non-contributory benefits, such as attendance allowance. The nationality of claimants is not recorded on benefit, tax credit or child benefit data, because nationality is not typically a condition of entitlement. The noble Lord, Lord Taylor, alluded to the fact that data are collected in respect of A8 nationals, and that information goes into Home Office monitoring report. However, nationality is not included on benefit records, so information on the aggregate amounts is not available. Contributory benefits are payable to anyone who satisfies the contribution conditions and other conditions of the benefit, regardless of nationality or length of stay in the UK. Most non-EEA nationals, are excluded from income-related benefits and non-contributory benefits, because they are subject to immigration control, which includes a requirement that they have no recourse to public funds. However, vulnerable individuals with certain types of leave to enter or remain in the UK can be eligible for benefits, provided that they are habitually resident in the UK. This can include those granted refugee status and humanitarian protection. In general terms, EEA nationals with worker status have recourse to public funds and may be entitled to claim income-related benefits. This could include housing benefit and council tax benefit. Should they fall out of work but remain in the labour market, they may claim jobseeker’s allowance. However, matters are more restrictive for accession country nationals, A8 and A2. They have worker status while they are working and are registered, as appropriate, with the registration or authorisation scheme. The noble Lord, Lord Roberts, asked about the fee. The registration happens when the worker is in employment—employment has to precede it—and the fee is paid only on first application. However, workers retain this status only if they have been working and registered for at least 12 months. Should this not be the case, entitlement to JSA and housing and council tax benefit will fall. Similar considerations apply to access to child benefit and tax credits. These situations can generate some of the problems around rough sleeping, which is why we are working with colleagues in accession countries to raise awareness of the eligibility rules and discourage those unlikely to find work from coming to the UK. Asylum seekers, as the noble Lord has identified, are subject to immigration control and have no recourse to social security benefits until they have been granted leave to remain in the UK. However, those who are destitute and have children—I will come to this later—can apply through the UK Border Agency for both financial support and help with accommodation. The level of support reflects its temporary nature and the fact that supported asylum seekers do not pay council tax or utility bills. Last year, we extended support to cover facilitation of travel to medical appointments, the nutritional needs of pregnant mothers and young children, and clothing for children. The noble Lord, Lord Roberts, posed several questions, particularly about asylum seeker applications and the average times taken for decisions on asylum claims. We are making decisions quicker than before and beat our target of concluding 40 per cent of cases within six months by the end of last year. Indeed, we are on track to conclude the majority of cases within six months by the end of December 2008. We aim to conclude 90 per cent of cases within six months by 2011. The noble Lord also asked how long failed asylum applicants had to wait before they were removed. In 2007, we removed one person every eight minutes—more than 63,000 people in total. We have been clear that our top priority has been public protection, as part of a wider enforcement agenda. Most migrants are privately housed, and around 95 per cent of householders who have arrived in the UK in the past two to three years live in the private rented sector. We know that houses of multiple occupation are a key source of housing for significant and often vulnerable groups in society. We also know that sometimes the housing conditions faced by migrants are poor. The introduction of mandatory licensing in 2004 of all privately rented HMOs, and discretionary arrangements for local authorities, should help to alleviate these issues. The focus of provision of social housing is based on need. In framing their social housing allocation schemes, local authorities must ensure that ““reasonable preference”” is given to households that are homeless, overcrowded or have medical or welfare needs, including grounds relating to a disability. This applies equally to British citizens and eligible non-British citizens. Inevitably, some people from abroad slip through the net, and in some cases end up sleeping rough on the streets. We recognise that this is a particular problem in London, and, to a lesser extent, in places such as Peterborough and Reading. We are providing funding to support local authorities in helping A8 nationals find work and, in some instances, pay for travel back to their own countries. We are also supporting Homeless Link to reduce rough sleeping among EU migrants in London and, as I said earlier, are investing in an extensive information campaign in accession countries to ensure that prospective migrants are aware that they will not have immediate access to social benefits. Refugees are particularly vulnerable, and we are working with our partners to secure good housing outcomes for refugees and other migrants through developing the housing element of the UK Border Agency Refugee Integration and Employment Service and through the Housing Associations’ Charitable Trust ““Opening Doors”” initiative to improve the capacity of housing associations and refugee organisations. Healthcare, too, is an important issue for migrants, as it is for all our citizens. The rules and procedures for eligibility to free NHS care for non-British residents balance the principles of fairness, humanity and affordability with the full treaty rights of all EEA citizens, and support for the legitimate movement of people to and from the UK. EEA citizens who take up residency in the UK for a reasonable period have full entitlement to both GP and hospital care. Shorter-term visitors receive all necessary treatment free of charge while they are here. However, this does not apply to pre-planned treatment without special arrangement. We have bilateral health agreements with more than 30 other countries, including some in eastern Europe, Eurasia and many Commonwealth colonies. We have further exemptions for visiting students and workers employed by UK-based companies. The rights of EEA and bilateral country nationals are of course reciprocated, so that British nationals travelling, working or residing in these countries receive healthcare on the same priority and charging basis as nationals of that country. I should like to make it clear that we do not provide routine free healthcare for unregulated illegal migrants or other visitors who may come seeking free healthcare. However, it is important to state that urgent treatment should never be denied to, or delayed for, any person, irrespective of their legal status or financial position. They should be charged subsequently for their care and we take reasonable steps to recover the cost. Our regulations are designed to protect the NHS, a free service established primarily for British residents, from inappropriate access by overseas visitors, while providing appropriate entitlements to EEA citizens and other current residents. Asylum seekers awaiting a formal decision on their claim are eligible for both primary and secondary NHS medical treatment free of charge; and the basic humanitarian needs of unsuccessful asylum seekers continue to be met. The Department of Health and the Home Office are currently undertaking a review of the rules governing immigrant access to healthcare. I can skip the section of brief on education, except to say that under Section 13 of the Education Act 1996, local authorities are under a duty to ensure that sufficient primary and secondary education is available to meet the needs of the population in their area. That applies irrespective of immigration status or rights of residence and, of course, includes school-age asylum-seeking children. I shall pick up a number of additional questions posed. The noble Lord, Lord Taylor, asked about the comments of the Prime Minister about British jobs for British workers. As the Prime Minister made clear, we are taking action to stimulate the economy. Jobs need to be filled and we are taking action to ensure that the British workforce will have the skills that it needs to be well placed to compete for those jobs. A number of noble Lords made reference to the JCHR’s criticism of our treatment of asylum seekers. Of course, the Government responded to the committee’s 17th report on 5 July 2007. We believe that our asylum support system is fair and properly balanced. There are safeguards for supporting unsuccessful asylum seekers who are vulnerable; for example, families with minor dependents and those who have a genuine reason for why they cannot return home. The UK Border Agency is committed to working with stakeholders to continue to improve the asylum system and the treatment of asylum seekers. The recent NAO report recognises considerable success in improving the asylum system, but clearly there is more to do. The noble Lord, Lord Roberts, asked about a helpline, a pan-London strategy. Clearly, those are issues about which we could talk further with the Mayor of London and with the Minister for London. With support from communities and local government, the Improvement and Development Agency has developed a template for local authorities to prepare information packs on key information for migrants. It brings together examples of material used by local authorities in existing welcome packs and it is a rich source of expertise and ideas for local authorities reviewing their welcome packs or considering producing one for the first time. A number of noble Lords made reference to Sections 4, 9 and 95. On Section 9, the UK Border Agency is currently considering, with stakeholders, our review of asylum support under simplification and whether to repeal Section 9 will be part of that consultation. As the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, said, Section 4 is focused on temporary support. Indeed, the legislation does not allow cash to be provided, but we shall continue to work with a variety of stakeholder groups. We believe that it is important to continue to listen to any concerns that groups and individuals might have and to work together wherever possible to identify those areas where the system can be improved. The noble Lord, Lord Roberts, asked about national insurance numbers. The key management indicator target is 86 per cent of applications processed within 30 days and we are exceeding that. On Section 95, we are looking at a reform of asylum support under our simplification proposals and we shall pick up the issue in conjunction with that. The noble Lord, Lord Roberts, asked about EEA migrants claiming unemployment benefit from their home state. As we debated last week, when the noble Lord asked a Question, there are proposals to do that when workers are posted to the UK. My time is exceeded. We should be proud of the welfare system we have in this country. It provides a safety net for people in time of need and seeks a responsible engagement for individuals to access work. Meanwhile, our NHS is the envy of the world. While our humanity dictates that we share these benefits with those less fortunate, we know that the real world demands a more constrained approach. As I said earlier, we need a balance between appropriate support for foreign nationals coming to the UK, sustainability of our system and protection for taxpayers. I commend this approach to noble Lords. Sitting suspended.