UK: Immigration and Asylum Bill: no real changes (feature)
01 May 1999
Despite the enormous efforts of immigrant and refugee groups and campaigners, very few concessions were wrung from the government in the House of Commons, and the Bill completed its Commons stages virtually unchanged.
Campaigns focused largely on the support provisions. The Big Issue ran a strong campaign against the provision of vouchers, citing examples of stigmatisation and degrading treatment of those using them. These included a supermarket telling an asylum-seeker she could not spend her vouchers on "luxury" items such as yoghurt and ready-made sandwiches, and the arrest of a man who bought "too much rice" on suspicion that he was selling it on. The only concession made as a result was the promise to increase the cash "pocket-money" element of provision (which covers clothing, shoes, phone calls, stationery, travel and recreation) to a likely sum of £1 per day for children and £1.17 per day for adults.
Below is set out the changes made in the Commons, under the headings used in the last issue (Statewatch Vol 9 no 2, pp16-18):
Preventing asylum-seekers' arrival
The proposals to give overseas staff the right to refuse entry to the UK will be subject to a positive resolution procedure so as to allow a full debate in Parliament before they are passed.
Refugees and those granted exceptional leave to remain as torture victims will not be made to suffer for their leave to be renewed.
"Safe" third countries
All EU member states are to be regarded as "safe" for the purposes of removing asylum-seekers to "safe" countries of transit. This new clause has angered refugee groups and their lawyers who argue that it violates the Geneva Convention. There is still considerable disparity between EU member states over their interpretations of the Convention and their treatment of particular groups. Germany returns many Turkish Kurds to Turkey, despite documented evidence that returnees have been detained and tortured; Italy and Germany do not accept refugees fleeing from non-state persecution.
Apartheid "support"
People will not be excluded from support unless they have substantial assets enabling them to live for a substantial period (a reference to the possibility canvassed by commentators that asylum-seekers would have to sell their wedding rings to obtain support). They will not be excluded from support automatically because they have relatives here; the relatives or a charity must be willing and able to support them in order to disqualify them from support.
Sponsors who are unable to continue support or have a reasonable excuse for stopping support will not be criminalised. (This reflects the clause in the Bill providing that sponsors who stop support are guilty of a criminal offence.)
The support provided to children will reflect the provision of the Children Act.
The government has promised an increase in the cash element of subsistence provision (see above). Separate payment of fares to travel to asylum interviews may be made.
Funds may be made available to voluntary organisations to support rejected asylum-seekers who are irremovable because of conditions in their countries of origin, or who are applying for judicial review. As the Bill stands such people will be in limbo, unremovable but with no official existence and ineligible for any support.
Accommodation offered will take account of asylum-seekers' circumstances including religious needs, community support, safety and special needs, although not their preferences. There will be a review system to allow complaints about inappropriate allocation of accommodation.
The government will consult relevant organisations about the provision of good quality legal advice in 'dispersal centres' around the country.
Asylum-seekers who are harassed in their accommodation will not be penalised for leaving by withdrawal of support and will be rehoused.
Detention
The government will "consider