Download Free The Work Of The Uk Border Agency October December 2012 Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online The Work Of The Uk Border Agency October December 2012 and write the review.

The Committee examines the work of the UK Border Agency (UKBA) on a three monthly basis. Following the abolition of the Agency it will continue to monitor the Home Office UK Visa and Immigration service on a three monthly basis. The Committee found a further backlog of 190,000 cases in the temporary and permanent migration pool that were never revealed to the Committee before. The total figure for the backlog has reached over half a million. The Committee feels it is unacceptable that new backlogs are revealed in Committee evidence sessions. The UK Border Agency had a troubled history. Many of its problems predate the establishment of the Agency. Ministers must now explain how those problems will not outlive its demise. To see a change in the culture in the new organisational structure and management it must be complemented by the ability for a wholesale restructuring of the employees of the organisation. The newly appointed Directors General must have the ability and resources necessary to implement this change. The Home Office should outline exactly how they propose to bring about this change in culture. In evidence the Committee were told the immigration service would never be fixed. This surprised the Committee since reducing immigration is a priority of this Government. What the immigration service needs desperately is stability, the resources necessary to clear the backlogs and a wholesale change in culture
The Agency's backlog is growing at an alarming rate-it has increased by over 25,000 cases since the first quarter of this year. The backlog consists of: the Migration Refusal Pool which contains records of individuals without leave to remain in the UK, who cannot be traced and has grown by 24,000 records since the first quarter of this year-it now totals 174,000; ex-Foreign National Offenders with 3,954 ex-FNOs living in the community whilst deportation action against them proceeds; the so-called 'controlled' archive with cases the Agency has no control over, it does not even know where the applicants are -there were 95,000 cases in archive' at the end of June this year and senior management promised to clear it by 31st December which would mean writing off 81,000 files; Asylum and migration live cohorts where the UKBA has managed to trace an applicant thought to have been lost and is working to close their case- with 29,000 cases in the live cohorts at the end of June this year. The UKBA must adopt a transparent and robust approach to tackling the backlogs instead of creating new ways of camouflaging them. Until the entire backlog is cleared the Committee does not believe that senior staff should receive any bonuses. The Committee also doubts that the Agency is adequately equipped to deal with the increase in asylum applications. Cases waiting for an initial decision after 6 months have risen by 36% since June 2011. The Committee is further concerned about the quality of decision making. Poor decision making may result in people being returned home when they face persecution and torture
For the first time the Committee has collated the backlog of outstanding cases in the various areas where the UK Border Agency deals with casework. This report criticises the Agency for failing to conclude the total backlog of 276,460 cases. The Committee makes a number of key recommendations: a team should be established to examine why the 3,900 foreign national offenders living in the community as of 4 April have not been deported; deportation proceedings for foreign national prisoners must begin at the time of sentencing; a list of those countries refusing to accept the return of their own criminals who have committed offences in the UK must be published; the Agency should expand its checks to include a wider range of databases in order to assist with tracing of those in the controlled archive; students should be removed from net migration target; face to face interviews for all foreign students must be compulsory; the Agency must be represented at 100%, not 84%, of all tribunal hearings; all inspection visits on Tier 4 must be unannounced; the Agency must inform the informants as to possible illegal immigrants of the outcome of their tip-off and provide a breakdown of the outcomes of its enforcement visits. The Committee reiterates that Senior Agency staff should not receive bonuses until the Agency's performance improves and bonuses paid in the past contrary to the Committee's recommendations should be repaid
The Border Agency backlogs, by the time it was wound up, had fallen to 432,000. However, most of the 70,400 reduction was achieved by simply loading pending cases onto the computer, and in some categories-such as those applying for further leave to remain on the basis of marriage or civil partnership-the backlog had actually grown. The Committee has no objection in principle to the introduction of a charge for access to the National Health Service for those who are in the UK only temporarily. However it expresses concerns about the possible application of the scheme to vulnerable people who have been trafficked into the country and recommends that the Government should pilot an alternative option for visa applicants to take out private health insurance instead. This has been a chaotic summer for immigration policy. First we had the controversial AdVans which were rightly ridiculed, and then it was revealed that Capita had botched the contract to clear the migration refusal pool by asking British citizens to leave their own country. Finally we saw a u-turn on visa bonds, however the uncertainty has already done damage. A more effective and less menacing message would be that the Government is willing and able to support those who are here illegally to return home if they want to. Tough enforcement action should be taken against those who are determined to remain here illegally, but for the target audience of potential voluntary returners, the effectiveness of the carrot is potentially undermined by the ostentatious brandishing of the stick
The threat of a cyber attack to the UK is so serious it is marked as a higher threat than a nuclear attack. One can steal more on the internet than they can by robbing a bank and online criminals in 25 countries have chosen the UK as their number one target. Astonishingly, some are operating from EU countries. If we don't have a 21st century response to this 21st century crime, we will be letting those involved in these gangs off the hook. After a 10 month inquiry the Committee concluded that: a dedicated state of the art espionage response team should be established so that attacks can be immediately reported; Banks must be required to report all e-crime fraud to law enforcement; it is alarmed that CEOP is having its budget cut by 10% over 4 years, its experienced Chief Executive is leaving and it could lose its laser-like focus when merged with the National Crime Agency; it is still too easy for people to access inappropriate online content and those responsible need to take stronger action to remove such content - the Government should draw up a mandatory code of conduct with them to remove material which breaches acceptable standards; the DPP should review sentencing guidance and ensure e-criminals receive the same sentences as if they had stolen the same amount of money or data offline; the Government should look at setting up a similar organisation to the Internet Watch Foundation focused on reporting and removing online terrorist content
This report is the Home Affairs Committee's response to the House's invitation of 15 July 2013, together with the Justice and European Scrutiny Committees, to submit a report by the end of October 2013 relevant to the exercise of the block opt-out of pre-Lisbon Treaty EU police and criminal justice measures, before the start of negotiations between the Government and the European Commission, Council and other EU member states on measures which the UK wishes to rejoin following exercise of the block opt-out. The Government has given notification of its intention to exercise the block opt-out. Its right to do so, and the conditions attached to the exercise of that right, are contained in Article 10 of Protocol 36 annexed to the EU Treaties. The block opt-out covers 130 EU police and criminal justice measures which had been adopted prior to 1 December 2009, the date of the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. The Committee has also set out: (i) That there are many problems with the European Arrest Warrant, in its existing form, in particular that it is on a system of mutual recognition of legal systems which in reality vary significantly; (ii) The Committee welcomes and supports the Government's reform package for the arrest warrant; (iii) The Committee recommends separate votes on the arrest warrant to the rest of the opt-in package at an early stage to provide a parliamentary mandate for the Government's negotiations.; (iv) The Committee concludes that if the Government proceeds with the opt-in as proposed, it will not result in any repatriation of powers. Indeed, the increased jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice may result in a net flow of powers in the opposite direction.
In order to monitor the effectiveness of its Reports, the Home Affairs Committee maintains a colour-coded grid of its recommendations. Recommendations are coded green if, in it's view, the Government has accepted them, red if they have been rejected, and yellow if they have been partially accepted, or if the Government has undertaken to give them further consideration. This Report covers the Committee's work in the 2012-13 Session. The Committee will use the grid to inform its choice of inquiries over the course of the Parliament, returning to earlier recommendations where it appears that there may be some merit in doing so, but avoiding reduplication of earlier work where it appears unlikely to prove beneficial
The asylum system is overburdened and under severe pressure. The backlog of asylum cases that should have been cleared by 2011 has reached 32,600, with some people waiting up to 16 years for a decision. Thousands appear to be living in a sub-standard level of housing as part of the COMPASS contract supplied by the private contractors G4S, Serco and Clearel. These companies must be held accountable. The quality of decision making is also of great concern as 30% of appeals against initial decisions were allowed in 2012. The impact of decisions are grave - if asylum is not granted when it should be then the UK is failing to protect a vulnerable person. If asylum is granted when it is not deserved then the UK may well end up harbouring war criminals and terrorists. Those who apply for asylum should be checked against national and international law enforcement agency and security databases to ensure that we are not harbouring those who intend us harm. The Home Secretary has to give assurance that any anomalies in the process, which have allowed decisions such as this to take place, are addressed immediately. The are also oncerns about the level of support available to those who seek asylum in the UK. The Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 section 4, which provides a reduced support system for asylum seekers who had had their claim refused but were unable to return to their country of origin through reasons that were no fault of theirs, is not a solution.
The Home Affairs Committee has criticised evidence given by both the officers subject to the disciplinary investigation and their Chief Constables. The individual officers gave evidence which the Committee found to be misleading, possibly deliberately so, and lacking in credibility. The Committee has decided to recall both Sergeant Jones and DS Hinton, next Tuesday 5th November 2013, to apologise for misleading it and has reserved the right to recall Inspector MacKaill should it be found that he too has misled the Committee. Both DS Hinton and Sgt Jones have been referred to the IPCC. The apologies given by Chief Constable Shaw (West Mercia), Sims (West Midlands) and Parker (Warwickshire) were welcomed although the decision taken by Chief Constables Parker and Sims not to redetermine whether their officers should face a misconduct panel was criticised. Mr Parker has also been criticised for seeking to correct the evidence of DS Hinton in a manner which suggested that he lacked impartiality. Assistant Chief Constable Cann (West Midlands) has been criticised for attempting to access the final report of the misconduct investigation prior to it being signed off by the IPCC. The Committee regretted an absence of leadership by all three Chief Constables at a critical time which could have, if utilised earlier, prevented reputational damage to the police service. The Committee believes that the IPCC should have carried out an independent inquiry in this case although it recognises that resource constraints which would have prevented it for completing an investigation quickly were the main factor behind the decision not to do so
The numbers coming from Bulgaria and Romania since the end of transitional controls appear rather more a trickle than a flood. The Government's failure to commission an estimate of these numbers has led to unnecessary anti-immigrant. It is essential that for future enlargement of the EU the Government commission research on the impact of migration to the UK. The Migration Advisory Committee should be tasked by the Government to provide an estimate of the numbers arriving in our country. The Government must also not sell citizenship to the highest bidder. Those who seek to acquire British citizenship should be fit and proper. The Warnings Index and our borders controls are still not fit for purpose and there is a real possibility that dangerous criminals have been able to enter the UK without the authorities knowing. The verdict in the Baksim Bushati case described UK's defences to illegal immigration to be "leaking like a sieve" and Border Force as "powerless" and as "hopelessly undermanned". The Migration Refusal Pool also remains a concern. Capita have found over 34,000 cases where the person has left the UK. Apart from the fact that we have a system where the Home Office cannot know where over 30,000 people are, we then pay a private company, Capita, to clarify that they have left. Capita appear to get paid for just finding out they aren't here, not actively having to do anything to remove them. This work could have been undertaken by the Home Office directly