Migration Policy

STATES OF JERSEY

r

MIGRATION POLICY

Lodged au Greffe on 8th July 2003 by the Policy and Resources Committee

STATES GREFFE

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

(a ) to agree, in principle, that having regard to paragraph  2.1 of the attached report of the Policy and

Resources Committee dated 8th July 2003, all inward migration by persons wishing to establish themselves by living or working in the Island, and who do not have links with the Island which would enable them to qualify currently under Regulation 1(1)(a)-(h) of the Housing (General Provisions) (Jersey) Regulations 1970, as amended, should be monitored and regulated;

(b ) to charge the Policy and Resources Committee, in consultation with the Housing, Home Affairs,

Economic Development and Employment and Social Security Committees; and with other committees as appropriate, with reviewing the Housing (Jersey) Law 1949, the Housing (General Provisions) (Jersey) Regulations 1970, the Lodging Houses (Registration) (Jersey) Law 1973 and the Regulation of Undertakings and Development (Jersey) Law 1973, together with other related legislation, with a view to giving effect to paragraph (a) above by bringing forward proposals for a new Migration Policy and supporting regulatory system(s) by the end of 2003;

(c ) to agree, in principle, that such new Migration Policy and supporting regulatory system(s) should

be developed to meet the basic objectives outlined in paragraph  5.5 of the report of the Policy and Resources Committee dated 8th July 2003.

POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE

REPORT

1. I n t roduction

1. T h e Policy and Resources Committee, as previously constituted, published an interim report on Population in June 2001(RC.21/2001).In that report the Committee set outthe main factors that needed to be weighedinassessingoptionsforpopulationpolicy', including sustainability, the workingofthe Island's economy, the implications of an ageing population, issues concerning the Regulations of Undertakings Law and the HousingRegulations,legal considerations relating to immigration and a best estimate (based at that point on oldcensus data) of the size and projected future profile of the Island's population. R.C.21/2001 was presented as an interim document because information from the 2001 Censuswasnotyet available andeconomic analysis commissioned from the University of Strathclyde and OXERAwas still in progress. At that time,theCommittee stated its determination not to come forward with any recommendations on population policy', in whichever direction they might point, before it was sufficiently confident that therewasenough information available, about the implications and consequencesofgiven policy choices, to ensure that anyeventual decisions on such an important matter would be well founded.
2. O n 11th June 2002, in the clear belief that sufficient good quality information was available for a satisfactory debate on population policy' to be held, the Committee published its Projet entitled "Population Policy" (P.101/2002). This report did not aim to repeat the main factors set out in R.C.21/2001 butsought to buildon that earlierwork and both R.C.21 and P.101 were to beconsidered together. P.101 was debated over a three-day period of2ndto4th July 2002 and, as a result oftherebeing an equality of votes, and the Presidentinforming the Assembly that she had neither an original nor a casting vote, the question [the proposition] wasdetermined in the negative and thus the proposition was rejected.
3. R e flecting the belief that therewas –

• a h i gh degree of consensus in the States during the debate, that it was essential to tackle the inequities that were arising from the two-tier' housing market and that work therefore needed to be put in hand on a new, single licensing scheme to govern all newly-arrived persons who seek to occupy property or work in the Island, but also that there was;

• c l e a rly a degree of unease on the part of some Members about the proposal to introduce an assumption of allowing, for policy planning purposes, an average annual net inward migration of

up to 200  persons,

t h e Committee lodged a new Projet on 5th November 2002 entitled Population Policy Report

(P.205/2002)' which, with a much shorter summary statistical report, proposed that the most immediate task was to seek agreement in principle on the strategic objective of ending the two-tier housing market over time and to get endorsement by the States for a start to be made by the new Housing and Economic Development Committees on detailed work on a licensing scheme to facilitate that objective.

4. A l though it was clearly recognised that the questionWhat, if any, givenmigration assumption should eventually underpin a licensing scheme?' – would eventually have to beaddressed, it wasalso recognised that that debate should take place within the context of the licensing schemeproposals when they were brought forward.
5. In submitting the proposalsnowcontained within this report, the Policy andResourcesCommittee has had careful regard to the work undertaken by the previous Committeeandhasconcluded, as it believes the majority of States membersconcluded in July lastyear, that muchofwhatwas proposed previously still has considerablemerit.
6. H o wever, it hasalsoconcluded that the proposalswent too far and that a more measured approach to

introducing overt population management' systems and procedures should be adopted. A step-by-step approach

would not only ensure that new proposals could be developed to be more effective and transparent, if sufficient time is allowed for broad consultation and the gaining of consensus at each step, but would also allow the States to consider proposals, as part of a developing package, on an individual basis as they are brought forward. This is not to say that this work should be delayed or that the length of time taken need be excessive. What the Committee does commend to States members, however, is a parallel working' approach, with streams of work and proposals being developed concurrently. This approach is explained more fully later in this report.

7. T h e Committeewishes to make it absolutely clear that theseproposalsdonotseek to divert attention away from the populationissue'. Quite the contrary: the Committee fully recognises that population' remains a majorareaof concern within the Island and that the States will need to address again the various population issues in order to establish population parameters and policies within which the Island is prepared tooperate.However, it has become clear to the Committee that –

• g i v e n the legal constraints (see below) within which the Island must work, where it is not possible, in the short to medium term, to introduce any kind of meaningful border controls'; and

• i n t h e absence of such controls mechanisms, the regulatory systems that are in place are neither sufficiently focussed nor tight enough to provide regulation of the vast majority of inward

migrants – let alone accurate information on them,

a n e w system needs to be put into place, supported by sound underlying principles, which will not only

provide accurate information on all inward migrants, but will also provide a robust mechanism for monitoring and regulating the large cohort of persons, with no previous Island connection, who are at present able to come and go at will.

8. T h e Committee, therefore, is proposing what will be, in effect, the first real and substantive step towards the introduction of a comprehensive range ofpoliciesand regulatory systems which will enable the States, within the current framework, to positively influence the structure and size of the Island's population.
9. T h e Committee will also, of course, be taking forward theseideason population and migration regulation and building them into the developingStrategic Plan for the States; thereby ensuring they are linked with and are interdependent with other relevant social, economic and environmental policies.

2. L e g alcontext

2.1 D e velopment of a migration policy has to be seen against the current legal position in relation to the rights of persons to enter and remain and establish themselves in the Island under United Kingdom law[1] as [2]

extended to Jersey and under the relevant current Community law .

• A ll B ritish citizens and, certain Commonwealth citizens have the right of abode in Jersey and are free to live in and come and go into and from Jersey without let or hindrance, except as may be required under the Immigration Act1 or as otherwise may be lawfully imposed on any person.

• A ll nationals of other E.E.A. Member States (E.U. member States plus Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein), do not need leave to enter or remain in Jersey – if they do so in circumstances in

which they would be entitled to enter or remain in the U.K.[3]

• T h e s e rights are not currently infringed by existing housing and job controls.

• I f a new migration policy were to amount to control over these rights, it would be inconsistent with the law, as presently in force. (i.e. a control of immigration at point of entry could not be

introduced for British, certain Commonwealth and E.E.A. nationals without change to existing international law,

which would be extremely difficult and would require the agreement of all affected parties).

• A  n y new migration policy must be applied equally, and in a non-discriminatory manner, to both U.K. and other E.E.A. nationals.

3. D  is cussion

1. C a refulanalysisof the Censusandother data indicates that the Island's population isnot rising "out of control". Although it is true that there hasbeen a modestriseover the lastdecade, this was due, in aggregate, almost entirely to natural factors – of which a reductionin the death rate is probably the most significant. The total population figure recorded in the 2001censuswastheoutcomeof this natural growth andcomplex and large ebbsandflows into and out ofthe Island, of people of all ages and backgrounds.However,it should benoted that in thelastfive-yearperiod the actual netmigration flow has been outward atan average rateof150perannum. Furthermore, whilethe latest estimate for the total population, at87,500, is some 300higher than that of the 2001census; natural growth accounted for 93% of this increase.

A t t h e same time, there is evidence that the population of working age is at best static and perhaps falling

and this is a very different trend from that of the 1970s and 1980s. The Committee is therefore convinced that it is wrong to characterise the gradual change over the last decade or so as indicating some kind of crisis.

2. T h ere are many aspects of this matter over whichthe States have nocontrol,orat best only very indirect means of influence. The States have virtually noinfluence over whoisborn,who marries andwhodies, although the birth rateand longevity may to anextentbe influenced byincomelevels net of taxation and spending on (public orprivate) health care.Nor have the States any direct meansof influence over the arrival ofpeoplewith previous connections to the Island (that is, essentially thosewith (a) – (h) housing qualifications) and the manner in which those people choose to assimilate themselves into the local economy, including the housingmarket.As a significant numberof persons with housing qualifications leave the Islandeachyear, to train or follow career paths elsewhere, the externalpool' of residentially qualified potentialreturners' is sustained and the States has nomeansof stopping those persons from returning. Indeed, in other related policy areas, the States is actively seeking to encouragesuch persons to return.
3. C o nsiderableresources are currently expended on controlling' residentially qualified people actually to prevent, or at leastinhibit,thoseclassedasnon-qualified' from gaining access to housing which is reserved for locals'. Such resources are applied to managing and enforcing the Housing and the Regulation of Undertakings and Development laws, and it is contended that these resources instead should berefocused so that itisthecohortofnon-local' people who are insomewaycontrolled'.
4. It isnoteworthy that, as far as the Housing rules are concerned,thereisnomeaningful control of the majority ofthosearriving,who have no Island connections,exceptto oblige them tooccupyunregulated accommodation. It is also recognised that a principal outcome of those rules, while originally implemented in good faith and in response to the needs, principally, of the tourism and agriculture sectors, is that manypeopleoccupysub-standardaccommodation for long periods until they qualify'. A very largegroupofpeople, resident for many yearsandmaking an importantcontributiontotheIsland's success, may face the prospect of up to half a working life in insecure and at times unsatisfactory accommodation conditions. The Committee agrees strongly with the Housing Committee, and many others suchas the Eradication ofPovertyGroupwhohavecommentedonthesubject, that this stateof affairs is fundamentally wrong and that the outcomes to which it hasgivenrise in termsofunsuitable, inferior accommodationandpersonalhardshipformany people, including families, is unacceptable in a modern,liberal,open society.
5. B y contrast,extensive regulatory attention is paid tothe relatively small "(j)" category group, currently averaging about 240 per year, and whichbyandlargeoccupies the top endof the skills spectrum and

turns over relatively quickly and, of whom some 40% are employed in the public sector, mainly in Health and

Education. The Committee is concerned that the main regulatory effort in respect of arrivals of persons not previously connected with the Island is focused on about 60% of this already small group – that is "(j)" category persons in the private sector – while the largest cohort of arrivals is effectively not within the housing regulatory system at all.

6. T h e 2001 Census data about the composition of inward migration, and its size relative to outward migration, has shown,together with the analysis of the HousingNeedsSurvey, that the greatest problem in the housing market has notbeendemand from immigrants' but a failure over many years to build sufficient dwellings to meetdemand from thosewho are residentially qualified and to take sufficient account of changing patternsofhouseholdsizeandformationamong that group. This has not only led to an increase in the sizeof the unregulated sector, buthasalsopushedup the priceofhousingandimposed heavy burdens of debt upon younger people anxious to get onto thehousing ladder. These are factors which not only have a damaging economicimpact upon the whole Island butwhichalsomust lie behind the sentiments expressedby residentially qualified respondents, in theHousing Requirements survey, about desire or intention toleave the Island.
7. W hile net outward migrationmightseem attractive, onthesurface,as a wayof solving' the population problem', such incentives mightalsoencouragethose with the kind of skills the Islandmostneedsto retain to leave. That would simply compound the problem the Island has to face up to, that as the population agesthedemand for labour in the wealth-producing sectors and, indeed, key public service sectors such ashealthcare, continues to fall shortofsupply.Itisimportant to note,too, that peopleof pensionable agewho left the Island would in any event normally continue to retain theirrightsto pensions paid from publicfundsin Jersey.
8. T h e Committeeisof the view that it is impossible to escapethe conclusion that,as the population ages, the Island needsto ensure that it continuestohavean appropriate balance betweenan appropriately skilled andsizedworkforceandthosewho are insomewaysupportedby that workforce, in orderto maintain wealth generation,thepublicrevenuesandpublic services, andhencethe sustainability of the community itself as a whole.TheCommitteealso recognises that this particular challengeisnotuniqueto Jersey, but is one beingfacedbymosteconomies in the western world.
9. In all ofthese considerations, sustainability is obviouslyof vital importance. This is not just in terms of the environment but also about the economyand social policy. Thethreeare necessarily interlinked. The Brundtland Commission's 1987 report Our Common Future', widely regarded as the key text on sustainable development,makesclear the need for economicsystemswhich can generatesurplusesand technical knowledgeon a self-reliant and sustained basisas an integral part of sustained development. It has been demonstrated that, as the population ages, the Island'scurrent living standards,basedon current tax and spending patterns, are almost certainly unsustainable. Thisis a structural problem in the Island's economywhich will, if not addressed, impacton the delivery ofenvironmental and social policy, and therefore requires a structured and sustained response.
10. It is evident that muchofrecent concern about the populationlevel in the Island starts from peoplehaving seen the effectsof significant increases in net immigration in the 1970s and1980s.Somememories will go back even further. However,not only is that inthepast,itmustalsonotbe forgotten that population growth in, say, the last 30 yearshas coincided with unparalleled economic prosperity for Jersey. Indeed, it has been the engine of that economic prosperity and we are whereweare,today,mostlyas a result of that growth.

0. C o nclusions
1. T h ere is no doubt that population' has been a dominant issue of debate in the Island for many years and, without going too far back, it is clear that the rising population of the 1970s and 1980s fuelled concern at the end of the 1980s about the size of the population that had by then emerged. This concern was expressed despite the significant economic growth that had accompanied that population increase.

2. C o ncernsaboutthepopulationissue were voiced in"Jersey into the Millennium: A Sustainable Future". The main view emerging from that particular process was that maintaining a permanent resident population the same orless than the present wasseenbythose involved as central to the environmental, economic and social objectives discussed during the process of strategy formulation in relation to sustainability. Despite recognition of the economic implications of a constrained population (e.g. wage inflation in a restricted labourmarketand the need togenerateadequate tax revenuestomeet future requirements as the population aged), there was a strong feeling expressedbymanyofthose involved that many ofthe characteristics that they considered madeJersey"unique" were beingerodedatan increasing rate as a consequenceofpopulationgrowth.Itwasseenas essential that economicgrowthshouldnotbe at the expense of negative social and environmental consequences. The Committee is able to wholeheartedly support this general view.
3. T h e Committeealsoacknowledgestheconsiderableconcern that has been expressed by employers,and others, abouttheadverse economic implications of seeking to constrain populationnumbers. Particular focus of such concerns has been on the impactonbusinessoflabour shortages, a lack of appropriate skills within the workforce, and the impactofthesetrendsuponbusinesscostsandcompetitiveness, and hence profitability. Similar concern has been voiced in relation to parts ofthepublic sector.
4. O p inion will no doubt always differ to a degreebetweenthetwo poles of the argumentaboutpopulation, and the answer probably lies, as with the1995 strategic objectives, in an appropriate balance between all the different perspectives on the problem.
5. H o wever,theCommitteeurgesthe States torecognise that, notwithstanding the deeply-heldviews that have emerged from the various consultation exercises over the yearsand the circumstances that gave rise to them, the position inwhich the Island now finds itself in 2003 is rather different, and potentially problematic.
6. N e t inward migration averagedoverthewholeof the lastdecade has been low. Birth rates have fallen, longevity hasincreased, and thepopulation is beginning to age quite significantly. As the population of the Islandages, the dependency ratio of those who are of workingageto those who are not will worsen. Thesetrends,which as has already been said, are notunique to Jersey, are nowbeginning to create a new set of problems for the sustainability oftheIsland'seconomy and its public services and, therefore, for the maintenance of the living standards that flow from those.
7. W h at is important is to put a range of policies into place which,whencombined, will try to ensure that the current dependency ratio isatleast maintained and that maximum benefit is derived from whatever is the current population composition.
8. A n y new policiesmust certainly endeavour to provide for better mechanisms to encouragelocalpeople to train and gain experience,possibly (but not necessarily) away from the Island, and return orstayto fit these skill shortages. However, it will alsoremain a feature of Island life that some skills will continue to have to be supplied in the short, medium and long term through inward migration. In the past, the "(j)" category housing consent applied only to those considered essential to the Island with rare skills or to cover the short term while a localpersonwastrained, but thereisnowgrowingrecognition that a much widerrangeof skills is essential tosupport the Island community and that the bearers ofthose skills ought to be able to participate in our society onan equitable basis, once here.
9. In considering the wayforward,theCommittee recognises that a system to monitor and regulateinward migration should befocused, in a non-discriminatorymanner,onthose arriving, or who wish to arrive, whodonot have previous connection with the Island.
10. T heCommittee believes that the best policy option would be to try to ensure that, as far as possible, the cohort ofinwardmigratingpersonswithoutprevious connections with the Island is regulated and that it exhibits an appropriate skill mix required inthe Island.

T h is would necessitate –

• c h a n ging the way in which the Island currently attempts to regulate the inflow of people through separate housing and labour market rules; and

• g r e a ter and consistent understanding of the Island's skill-mix and skill- shortfall;

a n d t he aim should be balanced employment in a range of sectors including, for example, tourism, light

industry and electronic commerce as well as finance.

11. T his is wherethe parallel working'arrangements arise. TheCommittee intends that the following strands of work will be undertaken, although they need not all begin simultaneously –

• a f u ll review of the existing population' controls and the development of an alternative and integrated system of migration regulation;

• a p r oject to develop a greater and consistent understanding of the Island's skill-mix and skill- shortfall, and current and likely future skills requirements for both public and private sectors;

• t h e d evelopment of existing and new polices which would encourage the employment within the Island of persons who have benefited from the Island's education system; and

• a n o ngoing project to identify best market practices in relation to any specific incentives which might be needed in the future in order to attract those the Island needs most, over and above

current special arrangements for people such as teachers or health professionals.

12. T heCommittee feels, however, that thefirstof the abovework streams is the most vital and therefore the purpose of this Projet is, beforework is commencedwhichcouldproveabortive, to seekthe approval of the Statesnowtotheproposeddevelopmentof a Migration Policy' and supporting regulatory system(s). The other strands ofwork can bedeveloped further in the interim period and firm proposalsforeachcan be brought forward when ready.

0. T h e wayforward
1. T h e objective of achieving a population at or below the figure reported in 1995 remains in existence but now, as in 1997 when the target was established, the States does not have sufficient control mechanisms in place to achieve this objective. The Committee therefore believes that debate about population ceiling numbers and whether the population should be decreased or increased is a debate which should be set aside for the time being. It is further contended that the discussions on population numbers need to move away from consideration of the overall number to a much more constructive debate about the overall population mix and, in this context, the numbers' debate' should be properly aired if and when the States consider the detail of a proposed new migration licensing scheme'.
2. T h e Committee is recommending that work should begin immediately on the development of a new Migration Policy' and supporting regulatory system(s) which will enable all inward migration by persons without previous Island connections to be monitored and, as necessary regulated. Of course, once the detail is ready the whole issue will be brought back to the States for full and open debate.
3. T he Committee intends that the regulatory system(s) will be supported by the introduction of smartcards', which will, subject to Human Rights and data protection issues being properly addressed, and to such uses being agreed, bring the added benefit, over time, of being able to be used for other purposes such as or access to public services. In using the smartcard system in this way, as a first step tied initially to simple registration, the Committee believes that public acceptance of such cards will grow and that the advantages of using the system will, in time, outweigh any perceived disadvantages.
4. It i s proposed that, subject to the States giving its in-principle approval now, work on the development of

the proposed migration policy and regulatory system(s) should be completed by the end of this year and that the

whole package could be debated early in 2004. Part of that debate will, of necessity, return to the issue of overall population numbers, as limits of some kind may need to be established for regulation of inward migration purposes.

5. In asking the States togive its in-principle approval to the developmentof a newMigrationPolicyand supporting regulatory system(s),the Committee proposes that any such policyand system shouldbe developed toachievethefollowing basic objectives –

T h e p roposed new policy and system should ensure that –

• th er e should be definitions of persons who are considered to be residents' which

differentiate between those persons who are entitled' (by virtue of familial or other connections with the Island) and those who may be licensed' (as essential persons) to live or work in the Island;

N o t e s: In s im ple terms, what is proposed here is along the lines of: (a)-(h) = entitled' and (j), (k)

and others' = not-entitled'.

T h is p ro p o s a l does not (unless otherwise determined) affect those from countries outside of

the European Economic Area (E.U. countries, Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein) who will continue to have to apply for a work permit under the Immigration Act 1971.

• th e r e should be regulation by licence of all non-entitled' persons wishing to establish themselves by living or working in the Island;

N o t e : A l l persons not already entitled' or licensed' would have to register' to either have

entitlement approved or apply for a licence.

• s u b j ect to initial registration, all entitled' residents' should be free from ongoing regulation;

N o t e: A l l entitled' persons would have only to be registered once and once registered would, by

simply showing their proof' of entitlement be able to move accommodation (within defined categories?) or apply for other jobs without needing to be registered/checked again.

• t h e r e should be a licensing scheme which can be operated effectively and efficiently by a single authority through a one-stop-shop' access point;

N o t e : A lt h ough a new licensing scheme' may (or may not) be based on the existing Housing

Regulations or Regulation of Undertakings and Development Law, it should be capable of being operated by a single States (or non-States) authority.

6. It i s proposed that the workof developing this new policy and regulatory system(s) will becarried out by a workinggroupof senior officers from the Policy and Resources, Housing, HomeAffairs,Economicand Development and Employment and Social Security Departments, whose work will be overseen and directed by a SteeringGroup, consisting ofmembersofthe respective Committees, and led by the Policy and ResourcesCommittee.

6. T w  o-tier housingsystem

1. T h e term two-tier housing system' describes a very complex set of issues. There is a two-tier' housing system in that there is a stockof controlled housing and a stockofuncontrolled housing. There are also two groupsofindividuals;thosewho qualify under the housingregulations and thosewho do not. In general terms(althoughnot exclusively) people with a housing qualification reside in accommodation

available to persons with that qualification. The real issue is social disadvantage created by the interaction of the

employment rights and housing of the majority of those people occupying uncontrolled accommodation. This  results  in  relatively  low  incomes  for  people  living  in  a  constrained  stock  of  unmanaged  and unregulated housing.

2. M  embers will have noticed that theseproposals exclude specific mention of an aim of the previous Committee; seeking  to  eradicate the so-called two-tier' housing  system. This  is not  because the Committee  has  moved away from  this  strategic  objective.  Rather it is because  the  Committee has recognised  that  the  proposal  to  regulate inward  migration is aimed, primarily,  at addressing  the demographic and fiscal challenges byensuring that the skill-mixoflicensedpersonsmeets the needsof the Island.
3. W  hile it is proposed that in the newsystem,the occupation of suitable accommodation will be linked to the issuing of a licence, the immediate effect of this on thehousingmarketwouldbe minimal. Overtime, the licensingschemecouldleadto a significant structural change in the housing market.
4. It is also recognised that a proportion (of a size yet to bedefined)ofaccommodationin the Island may have to remain un-controlled' so as not to inhibit the rights of British, certain Commonwealth and European Economic Area nationals beingfree to live in and come andgo from Jersey withoutletor hindrance (See paragraph  2.1 above).
5. T h e Committeeremainsof the view that the eradication ofthesocialproblemsandtheawful inequities caused  by the existing  Housing Regulations and the permitted, if not encouraged, extended use of accommodationwhichisdesignedand registered for shortterm use only,must remain one of the States' principal objectives over the comingyears.
6. T h e Committee recognises andacknowledges that muchworkindevelopingthe approved Island Plan and the Housing Committee'sStrategy has also been aimed very much atachieving this long term objective. The Committee will therefore be bringing forward policy proposals;within the new Strategic Plan itis developing with others, toensure that this major objective is a core feature within that Strategic Plan and that policies which currently supportthedevelopment of uncontrolled accommodationare,asnecessary, amendedto achieve a better balance in the housing stock.
   7. F i n ancialandmanpower implications

T h e r e are no financial or manpower implications as a direct result of this proposition. Although the

intention is to develop a one-stop system, and hence there could be savings made by combining staff and other resources which are currently deployed to manage the Housing and Regulation of Undertakings and Development Law, such savings can only be identified during the proposed next phase of detailed work.

8th July 2003

[1]

Immigration Acts 1971 as extended to Jersey by the Immigration (Jersey) Order 1993. [2]

Article 4 of Protocol 3 to the United Kingdom's Act of Accession to the Treaty of Rome. [3]

Immigration Act 1988 as extended to Jersey by the Immigration (Jersey) Order 1993.