Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Avebury (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 25 February 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL].


Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL]

I am afraid that I cannot take great satisfaction in the noble Lord’s reply. Although he tells us that the PACE codes of practice are to be extended to private contractors, there are certain exceptions in his comments which cause me tremendous anxiety. In relation to the private contractors who are employed in escorting duties, many complaints have been made, as the noble Lord might be aware, about assaults on persons being deported under the care of private contractors who are acting on behalf of the Immigration Service. In a recent report, it was found that some 3 per cent of all complaints by detainees related to assaults that were made on them during the process of deportation. Considering that it must be extremely difficult for someone who has been deported to formulate such a complaint, the true percentage is probably much higher. If the private contractors charged with those duties are to be excluded from the PACE codes, we would very much deplore it. However, there is a more fundamental difficulty. The noble Lord has told us that the PACE codes of practice which relate to the UKBA will be brought together, consolidated and made available to the public. However, we have not seen it and if all that is on offer is consolidation of the existing PACE codes, we know that they are inadequate. We were thinking of a set of codes that were far more similar to those that apply to the police, considering that, as I have already mentioned, so many powers that the immigration officers exercise are tantamount to police powers. Therefore, they need to be dealt with in a similar manner by the PACE codes of practice. If the Minister could let us have the consolidated PACE codes that will apply to the UKBA between now and Report, that would be extremely useful. We will then be able to take advice on them and see whether they satisfy those who are pointing us in the direction of much greater restrictions on the use of powers by immigration officers and more forceful scrutiny by outside agencies. Meanwhile, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 30 withdrawn. Amendment 31 not moved.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
708 c268 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Complaints Disclosure of information Conditions of employment Data protection Databases Codes of practice Crime prevention Asylum Detainees Arrests Cooperation Devolution Body searches Customs officers Customs Cybercrime Citizenship Borders Cross border cooperation Association of Chief Police Officers Finance Evidence ICT Inspections Immigration Undocumented migrants Human trafficking Excise duties Functions Languages Immigration officers Independent Police Complaints Commission Misconduct Private sector Personal records Northern Ireland Police Powers Public appointments Standards Training Smuggling Revenue and Customs Detention centres UK Border Agency Independent Chief Inspector of the UK Border Agency
Legislation
Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill (HL) 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk