Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Justice

Oral Answers to Questions

Gordon Henderson Excerpts
Tuesday 28th June 2011

(12 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Thérèse Coffey Portrait Dr Thérèse Coffey (Suffolk Coastal) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

1. What steps he is taking to reduce the sums spent from the public purse on repeated appeals in immigration tribunals.

Gordon Henderson Portrait Gordon Henderson (Sittingbourne and Sheppey) (Con)
- Hansard - -

11. What steps he is taking to reduce the sums spent from the public purse on repeated appeals in immigration tribunals.

Jonathan Djanogly Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Jonathan Djanogly)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

As announced in our response to the consultation “Reform of Legal Aid in England and Wales”, published on 21 June, we are removing most immigration cases, including appeals, from the scope of legal aid. We are also removing legal aid for certain repeat judicial reviews in immigration and asylum cases, subject to certain exceptions. We expect those measures to save more than £20 million a year. The Government have also consulted on introducing fees for appeals to the immigration and asylum chamber of the tribunal.

Jonathan Djanogly Portrait Mr Djanogly
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I can confirm that we are removing legal aid from most immigration cases. That will mean that the taxpayer is no longer funding those cases, which we think are relatively low priority. My hon. Friend has also spoken about cross-departmental co-operation, and we have had a number of discussions with the Home Office about our legal aid proposals, which go in the same direction as its proposals—for example, on making changes to the rules on how relatives of migrants are allowed to come into the UK. That close working will continue.

Gordon Henderson Portrait Gordon Henderson
- Hansard - -

Does my hon. Friend agree that the coalition Government inherited an immigration appeals process that is slow, unwieldy and routinely abused by applicants and their legal advisers? Does he further agree that the system needs a root-and-branch overhaul to make it fit for function?

Jonathan Djanogly Portrait Mr Djanogly
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

A number of the consultations did address this issue, including those with the judges, so we are acting to contain an avenue for abuse which my hon. Friend identifies. The Government intend to remove legal aid for immigration and asylum judicial reviews, where there has been an appeal or judicial review to a tribunal or court on the same issue or a substantially similar issue within a period of one year, as well as for judicial reviews challenging removal directions, subject to certain exceptions.