The Nationality Immigration and Asylum Bill  2002

Last week was Refugee Week. Across the country local and national organisations came together to celebrate the concept of sanctuary, and to highlight the contribution which refugees have made to the UK over many years. At the House of Commons a report by the Refugee Council was launched, 'Credit to the Nation', which showed the huge range of talent and ambition which refugees have brought. Famous names from fields as diverse as physics, literature, architecture, music, and internet development were listed as examples of refugees in the UK. But the contribution of those who have not achieved fame was also celebrated. A school headteacher explained how the motivation and desire for success of refugee children had lifted the school, and directly contributed to improved standards.

There was another aspect to the report. It reminded us of the myth so often repeated that this country has always held out the hand of welcome to those who have been persecuted. In 1902 a Royal Commission on Alien Immigration was established, after demands for control. This lead to the introduction in 1905 of the Aliens Bill. According to the report those opposing the Bill argued that it was an attempt to capture votes for the forthcoming election. "Refugees, so they argued, were used as scapegoats for avoiding the real issue". Sounds familiar? Even in 1938, following the Nazi annexation of Austria, a visa regime was introduced to restrict the arrival of refugees.

So there's nothing new about the current wave of xenophobia and demands for tough action to keep people out of Britain and Europe. What is of concern is the direction in which Government policies across the EU are moving. Britain is no exception, and is seen as making much of the running in the EU on this issue.

The Nationality Immigration and Asylum Bill is now in the Lords, having completed its Commons stages. It's the fourth Bill in 10 years dealing with asylum, and each has been tougher than the last.

In this current Bill there are proposals which Labour derided during debates on the Tory legislation in 1996 to take away appeal rights within the UK for those whose asylum claims are judged to be 'manifestly unfounded'. Such people would have to somehow try to conduct an appeal from another country to which they had been returned. Nobody who regularly deals with asylum claimants believes for one moment that the Home Office gets every decision right, and cases are won on appeal which had been certified as unfounded. Yet we are now prepared to risk sending back people whose lives could be at risk without an appeal.

The fundamental errors are first to try to find legislative solutions to what are not really legislative problems, and secondly to believe that legislation will have a major impact on the numbers of people seeking asylum.

If we had put a fraction of the effort going into devising new and more draconian legislation, or some of the millions to be spent on accommodation centres, into the mundane task of getting the Home Office systems to work we would reap far greater rewards. Nobody seems to disagree that we need decision making systems which are efficient and fair. Everyone agrees we are nowhere near that goal. Yet instead of making that our priority it is sending tough messages via new laws that consume effort. The most effective deterrent against fraudulent claims would be the knowledge that such claims would be dealt with efficiently and the decisions enforced.

The assumption that legislation in itself will deter claims is simply not borne out by evidence. Why is it that the countries which have supplied the largest number of asylum claimants in recent years have been Afghanistan, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Iraq, the former Yugoslavia. It isn't rocket science to work out that people desperate to escape conflict and persecution will not be deterred by tough laws, and nor should they be. We do claim to subscribe to international Conventions for the protection of such people.

A dangerous turn to the debate across Europe is the view that in order to stop voters being tempted by the extreme right we must show that we are being tough on immigration and asylum. The truth is that the far right will never be appeased by such action and will always push the arguments further and demand more.

Recent opinion polling shows an encouragingly large number of people believing that refugees should be helped. They also show how myths about asylum seekers being given Council housing and large amounts of money to live on have taken hold, as well as grossly exaggerated views of the numbers. We should be paying attention to these findings, and realising that there is actually support there to be built for policies which genuinely help refugees, provided we set out to demolish the propaganda which seeks to vilify them.

June 2002

Home Page     |     News & Views     |     Press Archive