Howard: Immigration must be controlled
Annual quotas for both immigrants and asylum seekers should be introduced to “control” immigration into the UK, according to the Conservative leader Michael Howard.
Mr Howard insisted that it was “not racist” to talk about controlling immigration, but said the current level of immigration was unsustainable with communities unable to absorb the current 160,000 people a year settling in the UK.
As well as introducing a quota system to limit the number of asylum seekers that were allowed to come into the country, Mr Howard said that the Conservatives would introduce a points-based system for work permits, similar to the system in Australia.
The Conservatives are also promising a 24-hour watch on ports, airports and other places of entry.
But his plans have drawn heavy criticism from refugee groups. Maeve Sherlock, chief executive of the Refugee Council, described the proposals as “dangerous, ill thought-out and hugely irresponsible”.
She stressed that the actual number of refugees arriving in Britain is far lower than people realise, adding: “Are we seriously going to tell someone fleeing torture at the hands of [Zimbabwean president Robert] Mugabe’s secret police, ‘Sorry, we’ve filled our quota for this year. Come back next year’. Apart from the moral issues, this policy will be deeply impractical, hugely expensive and of dubious legality.”
But Mr Howard said he accepted that the UK had a “duty” to accept a “fair share” of refugees fleeing from torture and persecution, and that a quota system would produce “a fairer, more humane asylum system”.
“There are literally millions of people in other countries who would like to come and live here,” Mr Howard said. He added: “Britain cannot take them all.”
He stressed that the current system meant that refugees had to arrive in the UK before claiming asylum, encouraging human trafficking. The Conservatives’ policies would “break the link between arriving in Britain and claiming asylum” and in doing so would tackle and “smash” the people smugglers.
He accused Tony Blair of presiding over an “unprecedented rise in immigration”, claiming the numbers have “more than doubled” since 1997. The sheer numbers, Mr Howard argued, were undermining Britain’s tradition of integrating immigrants into wider British society.
Britain, he said, had “reached a turning point” where a “substantial reduction” in the number of people settling in the UK was needed.
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said that the Conservatives would pull out of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees, derogate from certain aspects of the European Convention on Human Rights and introduce legislation to allow the Home Secretary to sanction the “immediate removal of unfounded cases.”
These would include anybody who arrives from a “safe third country”, people who claim asylum when discovered by the authorities, those who have committed a serious offence either in Britain or abroad and those who are not being persecuted by a state.
He added that the clear goal was that “a British Government would no longer consider asylum applications in the UK” and would take only genuine refugees who are in the care on the UN. Those who attempt to claim in Britain would be taken to reception centres near to their country of origin.
The Liberal Democrats called on Mr Howard to clarify two “key questions” on his policies.
Home affairs spokesman Mark Oaten, said: “Michael Howard must say which immigrant populations he believes are undermining community relations, and why. Is he talking about people from America, Canada, Australia, Eastern Europe, Asia or Africa? Which nationalities is he proposing to cap?
“And will he confirm that under his policy, genuine refugees arriving from Bosnia, Kosovo, Zimbabwe and Iraq would have been turned away?”
He said the Lib Dems would “defend the principle of asylum” and set immigration levels “according to our economic needs, not according to the latest newspaper headlines.”
