Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 21 March 2016 to Question 30132, on repatriation: EEA Nationals, how many of those people who were served with administrative removal papers in 2014 are still in the UK; and how many of those people who were forcibly removed have since returned to the UK.
Answered by James Brokenshire
The Home Office does not hold data on the number of people who are still in the UK having been served administrative removal papers in 2014. After an EEA national has been served with administrative removal papers, they have 30 days to leave the country. This period is set out in the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006.
All those served with administrative removal papers are given a 12-month re-entry ban. Currently, this re-entry ban can only be lifted if the EEA national can provide evidence that their re-admission will not lead to a further abuse of free movement rights and/or that they will be immediately exercising Treaty Rights upon their return. Of the 1,019 individuals who were forcibly removed in 2014, 163 sought re-entry and only 19 were granted re-admission to the UK.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 7 March 2016 to Question 29272, how many of the 2635 EEA nationals upon whom administrative travel papers were served in 2014 have left the UK.
Answered by James Brokenshire
After an EEA national has been served with administrative removal papers, they have 30 days to leave the country. They do not have to inform us of their departure. This period is set out in the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006.
Following this 30-day period, if the EEA national has not voluntarily left the UK Immigration Enforcement officers can and do forcibly remove these individuals. Out of the 2,635 EEA nationals who were served administrative removal papers in 2014 1,019 were forcibly removed.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many EU migrants left the UK because they had been on job seeker's allowance for three months and had not found a job in the last year.
Answered by James Brokenshire
We do not hold the information requested on EU nationals who have departed. We only hold data on EU nationals who have left following immigration enforcement action.
We have been clear that EU job seekers will not be supported by UK taxpayers, and can be removed if they have not found work within six months. In addition, the new EU settlement negotiated by the Prime Minster confirms that we do not have to pay Universal Credit to EU nationals who come to the UK as job seekers.
From January 2014 to December 2015, we have served over 6,000 administrative removal papers to EEA nationals for a variety of free movement abuses, from non-exercise of Treaty Rights to participation in sham marriages, (2,635 papers were served in 2014, and 3,480 in 2015).
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when she plans to reply to the letters dated 11 December 2015, 14 January and 10 February 2016 from the Dorset Police and Crime Commissioner on port security and border controls; and if she will place a copy of her responses in the Library.
Answered by James Brokenshire
The Home Secretary sent a response to the letters dated 11th December 2015 and 14th January 2016 on 22nd February 2016. She has not received a third letter. Responses will not be added to the library, this is not usual practice for private correspondence.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the status is of the 2003 Le Touquet Treaty in international law.
Answered by James Brokenshire
Juxtaposed Controls were introduced for short sea crossings by the “Treaty Between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the French Republic Concerning the Implementation of Frontier Controls at the Sea ports of Both Countries on the Channel and North Sea”, signed at Le Touquet on 4 February 2003.
This bilateral agreement between the UK and France provides for immigration controls to be conducted by the country of arrival in designated control zones in the country of departure at both French and UK sea ports on the Channel and North Sea, including Calais and Dunkirk in France, and Dover in the UK.
The Le Touquet Treaty is an agreement concluded between the UK and France under international law.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 21 January 2016 to Question 22948, whether her Department has recorded all EU countries other than Greece as complying with the Dublin Convention.
Answered by James Brokenshire
The Dublin Convention no longer governs the determination of responsibility for examining an asylum claim: it was replaced by the EU “Dublin II” Regulation in 2003 for all EU Member States apart from Denmark, which implemented the Dublin Regulation in 2006. An updated “Dublin III” Regulation has applied since 2014.
The European Commission is the body responsible for overseeing the correct implementation of EU Regulations. All EU Member States, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein use the Regulation to make requests to take responsibility for asylum applicants.
As noted in the Answer of 21 January to Question 22948 it is not possible to return asylum applicants to Greece. The Government is satisfied that it remains lawful to transfer to and from all other countries bound by the Regulation asylum applicants who qualify under its provisions.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 19 January 2016 to Questions 22594 and 22595, whether it is her Department's policy that an applicant for international protection who enters the UK from France clandestinely but had not made an application for international protection in France should be returned to France in accordance with the Dublin Regulation.
Answered by James Brokenshire
In order for the Dublin Regulation to apply an application for international protection must be lodged in one of the participating States.
A person who has arrived in the UK clandestinely from France who then claims asylum in the UK can be returned to France under the terms of the Dublin Regulation even if they have not claimed asylum in France as long as the criteria in the Regulation demonstrate that France is the responsible state. For example, asylum seekers can be returned if they have close family members in France, a visa or residence permit has been issued to them by the French authorities or if they have been in France illegally for a period of 5 months or more.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, which EU countries her Department has recorded as not complying with the Dublin Convention in their treatment of asylum seekers and other claimants for international protection.
Answered by James Brokenshire
The Government accepts that the European Court of Human Rights’ ruling in the case of MSS v Belgium and Greece (21 January 2011) prevents the return of asylum seekers to Greece under the Dublin Regulation until the situation there has improved.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when the guidance on how to make a request for revocation of a deportation order will be republished; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by James Brokenshire
The process of reviewing and revising the guidance is nearing completion, and I anticipate that an updated version will be made available in the Spring of 2016.
In the interim, current guidance covering various aspects of deportation order revocation can be found online as below:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules/immigration-rules-part-13-deportation - paragraphs 390-391 of the Immigration Rules set out the current rules for revocation of a deportation order, and how criminality impacts on this.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chapter-13-criminality-guidance-in-article-8-echr-cases - where family and/or private life considerations are relevant to an application for revocation, this guidance explains how these are considered under Paragraphs 398-399D of the Immigration Rules.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 13 January 2016 to 21399, what assessment she has made of whether the French government is meeting its EU and international obligations in respect of registration of non-EU citizens in France who are in need of international protection.
Answered by James Brokenshire
As informed in the response to 21399 the Government continues to work closely with France on a range of migration and security issues and we have no plans to change this constructive approach. The French Government remains committed to meeting its EU and international obligations and the opening of new places in its asylum system for those that claim asylum in Calais demonstrates this. The UK and French Governments are unified in their response to the migratory phenomenon and both governments recognise the importance of close partnership and collaboration to reach a long-term solution.
A person requiring international protection should claim asylum in the first safe country that they reach, a principle which is reflected in the Dublin Regulation. Any migrant currently in France who wishes to seek international protection should do so in France. The UK will consider a request from France to take responsibility of an asylum applicant on the basis of the family unity provisions contained in the Dublin Regulation if there are grounds to do so. A person must claim asylum in France before a responsibility request can be made and considered.