Migration Watch UK: News

60th Anniversary of the Refugee Convention

The following comment can be attributed to Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK.

 

"The situation has changed beyond recognition since the Refugee Convention was signed 60 years ago. There is now widespread abuse. Over half of all applicants in the UK only claim when detected. Nearly two thirds (60%) of all cases decided in the last five years were rejected after a long and expensive legal process but less than half of them are being removed. Those, like ourselves, who are serious about genuine refugees must be equally serious about removing asylum seekers who turn out to be bogus if public support for the system is to be sustained."

 

Notes to Editors:

1  Claims when detected

2  Outcome of cases

3  Numbers Removed

A Quarter of a Million Failed Asylum Seekers Granted Amnesty

Summary

1 The latest (and largest) exercise in granting settlement to failed asylum seekers is the continuation of a sorry tradition of amnesties that has resulted in over 250,000 failed asylum seekers being granted settlement since the early 1990s. Once settlement is achieved additional dependants can then join the person in the UK so the total number is likely to be much higher. It is now essential for the integrity of the immigration system that no more backlogs are allowed to develop.

Current Amnesty

2 During the late 1990s and early 2000s the Home Office allowed the build up of a backlog of around 400,000 cases. The exercises to clear these legacy cases resulted in 161,000 grants of settlement (ILR)…

See the full Briefing Paper No 11.25.

North African Crisis Could Test the Asylum System to Destruction

The recent instability caused by revolutionary change and military conflict in some Arab countries in North Africa has the potential to generate substantial flows of migrants into the EU. EU Ministers will meet on 11 May to consider what might be done.

Some migrants will be genuine refugees but many will be economic migrants. Anyone who sets foot in the UK and claims asylum has the right under the 1951 Refugee Convention to have his or her case heard and also has a right of appeal if refused. Applicants are supported by the taxpayer throughout the process which takes months, and often years. The UK's record in removing those whose cases eventually fail is extremely poor.

In theory, the UK can return economic migrants who claim asylum to the EU country in which they first arrived but that requires proof of their point of arrival which is often impossible to obtain.

Read the full Press Release and research document Briefing Paper No 9.29

---

The Immigration Appeals System Revised - 2010 Version

This Briefing Paper 8.30 substantially amends and brings up to date the previous version dated March 2005 (now deleted), taking account of recent changes in the law

Introduction

1 The immigration appeals system has undergone major changes twice in recent years. Until April 2005 there was a two tier system, the first tier consisting of adjudicators sitting alone and the upper tier being the Immigration Appeal Tribunal. The Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004 [Referred to hereafter as “the 2004 Act”] created the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, which was in essence a single tier tribunal and began operation on 4 April 2005. This Tribunal has itself now been abolished and superseded by further reforms which took effect from 15 February 2010. The hearing and disposal of asylum and immigration appeals has been taken over by the unified tribunal service created by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. Please refer to Briefing Paper 8.35 for details of the new tribunal.

BBC Today programme: asylum seekers, Calais

Sir Andrew Green was interviewed on the Today Programme at 8.35 this morning about the asylum seekers' camp near Calais, together with Donna Covey, the Chief Executive of the Refugee Council.

Sir Andrew said that the reason for people queueing up in Calais must be that Britain was perceived as a "soft touch". The official statistics suggested that this might be the case as anyone reaching Britain and claiming asylum had a nearly 80% chance of staying, often illegally.

He suggested that the government should take three steps:

1 Double the resources for removal.

2 Clamp down on employers of illegal labour.They had started to do this.

3 Take on the absurd arguments for an amnesty which could only make a bad situation worse.

You can hear the discussion on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme web site.

Migrationwatch media information

Migrationwatch website has been revamped and updated. This should make it easier to find any information on immigration and asylum issues you may require. In particular, two overview papers: "What is the problem?" and "What can be done?" may prove to be useful.

Legislative Developments

In September 2008 Briefing Paper 8.28, summarising the contents of the Draft (Partial) Immigration and Citizenship Bill, gave an account of the Bill’s contents and of the views on it which we submitted to the Home Affairs Committee of the House of Commons……

… There is now before Parliament a Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill, which received its first reading in the House of Lords on 14 January and will have its second reading in that House on 11 February. The main purpose of the Bill is to give legal effect to the merger of immigration and customs functions in the UK Border Agency. It contains also certain new provisions on the acquisition of citizenship by naturalisation and on immigration. It does not cause Migration Watch any great concern, but it will bring to 11 the number of Acts of Parliament since 1971 and make ever more pressing the need for consolidation.

Read the full text of this Briefing Paper 8.33

Asylum seekers - a serious case of misunderstanting

Summary

Confusion continues to reign over the distinction between an asylum seeker and a refugee. In the period 1997 – 2007 three quarters of asylum applications were refused after a process with a reduced burden of proof and opportunities to appeal. Asylum seekers should not be confused with genuine applicants who are, rightly, granted refugee status. Claims that asylum seekers do not get a fair hearing are unjustified

Conclusions

...Our concern about correct use of these expressions is no mere legal quibble. We have always made it clear publicly that we support asylum for genuine claimants who are able to show that they have a well-founded fear of persecution, but we stress the word genuine. However, the overwhelming majority of asylum seekers are found not to have a genuine claim and are using the asylum process simply as a means of gaining entry to Britain which is otherwise not available to them by any lawful channel...

Read the full text of this Briefing Paper No 32

Immigration: BBC Radio 4: Beyond Westminster

Radio 4's Beyond Westminster (1100 hrs – 1130 hrs Saturday, 10 January 2009) discussed whether the record levels of immigrants are something to be celebrated or deplored and how far things will be changed by the looming recession

The BBC's Andrew Rawnsley first questioned Migrationwatch's Chairman, Sir Andrew Green, about why his organisation is alarmed at the projections for a British population of 70 million by 2031. He then spoke to Tim Finch of the left-of centre think tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research about IPPR's views on the Government's immigration policy. Finally, he talked to Simon Darby, Deputy Leader of the British National Party who explained why the BNP wants immigration stopped.

Mr Rawnsley then explored the arguments with three politicians: Phil Woolas, (Lab) Immigration Minister, Damien Green (Cons) Shadow Minister for Immigration and Chris Huhne, LibDem's chief spokesman on Home Affairs.

It is possible to Listen Again to the programme.

Consultation on Immigration Appeals

Migrationwatch Briefing Paper No 8.28 summarised some of the main features of the government’s recently published Draft (Partial) Immigration and Citizenship Bill and appended a copy of the submissions made by Migrationwatch to the Home Affairs Committee of the House of Commons. The draft is described as partial because some important topics have been omitted, with the intention of adding them later so that a complete Bill can be laid before Parliament in the next session. The government has now issued a consultation paper on proposed changes to the immigration appeals system, one of the omitted topics. For a summary of how the present system, introduced in April 2005, works, you are referred to our Briefing Paper No 8.2 (Please note that the reference in paragraph 2 of that paper to the Immigration and Nationality Department of the Home Office should now be read as a reference to the UK Border Agency, the new name of the former Department.) The content of our submissions is inevitably technical in places, but the subject is important. Asylum and immigration appeals are appeals to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal against decisions of the UK Border Agency which are adverse to the applicant. Appeals are heard by some hundreds of immigration judges at hearing centres in London, Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow and other major cities. The most recent figures available show that between April 2007 and March 2008 the Tribunal disposed of over 165,000 appeals.

To see this full document go to Briefing Paper No 8.29 on Migrationwatch web site