Skip to main content

Undocumented Workers

Question for Home Office

UIN HL5291, tabled on 20 January 2016

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the letter by Lord Bates to Lord Rosser on 8 January (DEP2016–0028) and the remarks by Lords Bates on 18 January (HL Deb, col 624), how they arrived at their assessment that in-country seizure could double with the use of the extended powers enabled by the new illegal working offence.

Answered on

28 January 2016

The Government arrived at this assessment based on the impact of the court’s judgement in the case of Nuro on the ability of Home Office Immigration Enforcement to use Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) cash seizure powers which were conferred on immigration officers by section 24 of the UK Border Act 2007. The courts have held (Nuro v Home Office [2014]) that as it is not a criminal offence for an illegal immigrant who is not subject to immigration conditions to be self employed in the UK, there is insufficient causation between the offence of illegal entry to the UK and obtaining the earnings to apply POCA powers. The creation of the offence of illegal working will address this judgment and provide a broader basis for cash seizure.

Answered by

Home Office