David Davis: We need to know what they knew, and when

I took no personal delight in the resignation of Beverley Hughes. Nevertheless, it had to happen. The failures in the Home Office's Immigration Directorate had become so extensive, and the evidence of ministerial incompetence so compelling, it was impossible for her to remain in office.

However, this episode went beyond simple administrative failure. What we exposed was not a one-off slip in normally rigorous migration procedures. Instead, we revealed a seemingly widespread policy of allowing migrants into Britain on the back of fraudulent claims. It was so widespread, it was impossible not to conclude that it had been officially sanctioned.

The dossier I presented to Parliament on Tuesday revealed that senior civil servants in the Home Office had been warned this scam was taking place. It stretched credibility to breaking point to claim that ministers had not been told.

The terms of the inquiry are far from satisfactory. An internal Home Office inquiry, by a Home Office civil servant, is grossly inadequate. We need a full and independent inquiry, which not only looks at this particular scam, but at the Government's failure to tackle illegal immigration in its totality. Furthermore, if the Government wants to remove the stench of a cover-up, we also need to know what ministers knew, and when.

David Blunkett is far from being in the clear over this affair. As he told the House of Commons on Tuesday, "I am responsible and accountable even when I have not devised the policies, because that is our constitution." He was the Home Secretary when the documents I revealed last week were written. Unless he accepts responsibility, a key element of democratic accountability breaks down.

His role in this affair could be more extensive than we have hitherto imagined. The political pressure to bring down the number of fraudulent asylum-seekers and cut the immigration backlog must have been immense. After all, the Prime Minister had made a high- profile pledge to halve the number of asylum-seekers.

Was the Home Secretary really unaware that civil servants were being ordered by their superiors to allow bogus migrants into Britain? It's surely legitimate to ask whether the Home Secretary was willing to allow civil servants to soft- pedal on illegal migrants if it had the twin results of cutting the number of people seeking asylum and the immigration backlog.

What we have seen this last few weeks may just be the tip of the iceberg. How many other memos have been issued, ordering civil servants not to carry out routine checks into the validity of asylum and immigration applications? How many other emails have been sent to senior civil servants or ministers warning them what is going on? Just what did David Blunkett know?

Much has been made of whether I have received any more damaging emails. I do not know. I have received dozens of emails, but it is too early to say what they contain. Some are clearly expressions of anger with the Government, but which show no special inside knowledge. Others, though, appear to be politically very potent, in that they appear to come from inside the Immigration Service and from other parts of the Civil Service and from colleges and registrars, by people able to shed light on immigration and sham marriages.

They have contacted me because they are worried that if they go public they will lose their jobs.

David Blunkett must promise an amnesty for anybody with important information. If he grants a full, independent inquiry, I will send him my emails.

David Davis MP is the Shadow Home Secretary