1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160 
Home Office withholds data on 'fence jumpers'
Page 13
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
By Chris Tindall THE HOME OFFICE is refusing to release figures showing the number of so-called 'fence jumpers' that have been caught and detained at UK ports, because it claims it would compromise security controls.
According to instructions for ports, 'fence jumpers' are "people who have bypassed the UK-juxtaposed control point to conceal themselves in a vehicle in the ferry lanes".
If an operator can prove this, they do not have to pay a civil penalty for unknowingly bringing illegal immigrants into the country.
Under the Freedom of Information Act, CM requested to know how many fence jumpers have been caught by UK Border Agency officials and how drivers are supposed to prove the status of stowaways. Tom Bowdall, Home Office European operations director, says: "We hold statistics regarding ur6, o detections and those of agents 11, working for us, however I have decided not to communicate this . information to you.
3 "It could substantially prejudice the operation of our immigration controls. This is because disclosure may enable potential immigration offenders to obtain detailed and sensitive information on the security at each port."
Transport lawyer Mike Oliver, consultant to Aaron and Partners, says knowledge of which ports present the greatest risk from fence jumpers would help hauliers decide which ports to use and what additional precautions may be needed.
He adds: "If you don't know a greater risk exists in one place over another, how can steps be taken to deal with that increased risk? It also appears in the general public interest to know whether detection rates vary from one port to another and, if so, how this is being addressed."