UK Borders Bill - UK House of Lords Debates Biometrics
The House of Lords in the UK parliament is continuing its scrutiny of the proposals for new immigration legislation in the UK, the UK Borders Bill.
Much of the debate in the Grand Committee of the House of Lords has been about proposals that people given leave to enter (a visa) or remain in the UK should carry a biometric identity document. The UK currently does not have a system of identity cards for nationals, although it has passed a law, the Identity Cards Act 2006, that would allow it to introduce such a system in the future.
The Lord Bassam of Brighton, speaking for the government, said that at the moment foreign nationals can produce any one of around 60 types of document to evidence their entitlement to be in the UK, to work or to receive State benefits. He explained that it was the government’s intention to phase out existing documents and endorsements over the coming years and to replace with them a biometric immigration document. He explained that the UK government’s current plans are to phase in the use of these documents, saying:
‘First off, it would be best to include students from outside the EU, those seeking to settle in the United Kingdom having completed a five-year qualifying period, those applying to extend their work permits, and those seeking leave to remain on the basis of marriage to a UK citizen...We do not wish to jeopardise the success of the document when its value to border control and employers alike is very clear. It is therefore our intention from 2008 to roll out progressively biometric documents to qualifying foreign nationals subject to immigration control who are already in the United Kingdom and reapplying to stay here. This will allow us to trial the biometric recording and card production processes. These will need to be thoroughly tested to ensure that a robust and reliable system is in place, and it is then our ambition to cover by 2011 all new in-country applications for permission to stay in the United Kingdom.’ (Hansard, HL, 5 July 2007, col. GC147)
Members of the House of Lords expressed concerns at the fallibility of biometric techniques, giving examples from the commercial sector such as the use of fingerprint recognition to access first class lounges at airports.
Particular concerns were expressed about whether a biometric identity document would be used to deny people access to health care. The Lord Bassam stated:
‘At present foreign nationals may in certain circumstances be charged for using the National Health Service. We would never be in a position where someone suffering from a life-threatening condition would be denied healthcare as a result of their immigration status. That would never be the case.’ (Hansard HL, 5 July 2007, col. GC139)
In practice, the situation is complex. The law says that hospitals must charge for health services to people, whatever their nationality, who are not “ordinarily resident” in the UK or who do not come within a category qualifying for free health treatment. The categories qualifying for free treatment include nationals of countries with which the UK has health agreements.
People living in the UK lawfully and on a settled basis, regardless of nationality and immigration status, although they may not be “ordinarily resident” here, can obtain free primary health care. In addition, treatment is free if it is emergency treatment given at a GP surgery, in the accident and emergency department of hospital (but not emergency treatment given elsewhere in the hospital), in a walk-in centre providing similar services to those of an accident and emergency department of a hospital and for certain communicable diseases (but excluding HIV/AIDS where it is only the first diagnosis and connected counselling sessions that are free of charge). For more information click here.
The Lord Bassam was questioned closely on the human rights implications of the proposed biometric identity document. He said:
‘I offer the assurance that the Government are clear that neither the biometric immigration document nor its implementation should give rise to de facto racial profiling. An amendment was made to the Bill in another place that there would be no requirement for the biometric immigration document to be carried at all times…. In the illegal-working context, the Secretary of State will issue a code to assist employers to conduct document checks so that there is a proper verification process, without recourse to any form of unlawful discrimination where public officials require the document. They, as I have already said, are subject to race relations legislation and it would not be lawful to require a BID to be produced based on appearance. (Hansard HL, 5 July 2007, cols. GC147-149)
The reference to ‘another place’ is a reference to the other part of the UK parliament, the House of Commons, which is never named directly in the House of Lords (and vice versa). The UK Borders Bill will continue to be debated in Grand Committee in the House of Lords. The Committee will then report back to the full House of Lords. Changes made to the Bill in the House of Lords will subsequently be considered by the House of Commons. The Bill seems unlikely to be passed until the Autumn. It will not necessarily come into force as soon as it becomes an Act of the UK Parliament.
