Is the UK in the midst of a migrant crisis? – Reaction Briefing

As the numbers of migrants crossing the Channel continue to break records, calls to deal with the “crisis” have intensified within the Conservative Party.

Around 430 migrants crossed the English Channel to the UK on Monday – a new record for a single day. On Tuesday, 287 migrants reached the UK in 12 boats, taking this year’s total to 8,474, breaking last year’s record of 8,420 crossings.

This new record was set on the same day MPs backed new laws to clamp down on illegal immigration and people smugglers. They voted through the Nationality and Borders Bill by a majority of 366 to 265.

The Home Secretary, Priti Patel, said: “The British people have simply had enough of illegal migration and the exploitation of migrants by criminal gangs […] The government is addressing the challenge of illegal migration … through comprehensive reform of our asylum system, which will enable us to go after the gangs exploiting people, deter illegal entry into the UK, introduce new and tougher criminal offences for those attempting to enter the UK illegally and strengthen our ability to remove those with no legal right to be in the UK.”

Critics such as Bridget Chapman of Kent Refugee Action Network have said: “The focus should be on providing a safe passage for asylum-seekers who were arriving “traumatised” and called instead for the introduction of a humanitarian visa. “This would allow asylum seekers to make a safe passage – they could just get on a plane, ferry or train and we would know exactly who is arriving.” Is the UK really in the midst of a crisis? And why is the Bill proving so controversial? Here’s what you need to know.

Is the UK at crisis point with the number of people seeking asylum?

Despite the new records being set, it’s important to note that applications have reduced and the UK receives only the 17th largest intake of any country when measured per head of population. Indeed, in the year ending March 2021, the UK received 26,903 asylum applications, 24 per cent fewer than the previous year. This included 2,044 applications from unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, down 42 per cent over the period. This fall contradicts the narrative that this is a spiralling crisis.

Source: How many people do we grant asylum or protection to?

The highest number of applicants received in the EU was by Germany (122,015 applicants) and France (93,475 applicants). In the same period, the UK received the 5th largest number of applicants (36,041).

How many applications were approved?

Up until March this year, there were 12,968 initial decisions made on asylum applications, and 48 per cent of these were grants of asylum, humanitarian protection or alternative forms of leave. There were 3,663 appeals lodged on initial decisions in March. Of the appeals resolved over the period, 47 per cent were allowed (meaning the applicant successfully overturned the initial decision).

How many asylum seekers or refugees are in detention in the UK?

A total number of 12,967 individuals were being held in detention at the end of March this year. This is up from 895 when compared to March 2020, but the figures must be viewed in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic in which crossings and applications dropped.

Why is the Nationality and Borders Bill proving controversial?

The Bill has proved controversial and is facing a significant backlash, not just from opposition political parties but an array of humanitarian organisations and human rights activists.

Dan Sohege, Director of Stand for All, a human rights advocacy and support organisation, told me: “These latest plans will only increase the number of asylum seekers detained and placed in limbo. Priti Patel’s bill will do nothing to “deter” those seeking asylum. It will, however, mean that victims of gangs are less able to seek assistance from the authorities, emboldening gangs and increasing exploitation.”

According to its detractors, the Bill will create a two-tier system of refugee protection. Under the new regime, the government’s focus will be on treating each new arrival according to how they came to be here, not based on their needs. Essentially, those making their way here via “irregular” means, such as by boat, will be deemed not deserving of the same protection as those who come through official resettlement schemes.

The Free Movement organisation claims that these schemes are difficult to access, which leads to many people being turned away from overcrowded camps where they can apply for the UK’s programmes. The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants has said these inadmissibility rules create a six-month “long stop” on all claims made by people coming through irregular means, during which time the government tries to make a deal to remove them to any other country that will take them. This has led to questions as to what backdoor deals the government is conducting to facilitate this, and fears that people will be sent to countries with poor human rights records.

If the government cannot remove the “inadmissible” applicant, it will then consider the asylum claim. Under the new legislation they will be granted a new, less generous, “temporary protection” status, rather than the refugee status they are entitled to according to international law. This gives them only limited right to remain, and makes them subject to “no-recourse-to-public-funds” conditions and restrictions on family reunion. Many families send one person on the risky journey in the hope that the rest of their family will then be able to join them. Closing off this route is intended to lower the number of refugees, with 3,500 fewer people able to come, 90 per cent of whom will be women and children.

Among the most controversial elements of the new Bill is that it allows for off-shore processing. The Home Secretary has already suggested Ascension Island, a remote British territory in the middle of the South Atlantic Ocean, as an option. There has also been the suggestion floated that decommissioned ferries and abandoned oil rigs could be used, a proposals which has raised human rights concerns.

A clause within the Bill redefining the offence of “facilitating” illegal immigration has been so vaguely worded so that some suggest this would criminalise the RNLI for saving lives at sea.  It has been pointed out that such a concept of facilitating would have prevented the heroics of Sir Nicholas Winton who rescued hundreds of children from the Holocaust on the Kindertransport.

MPs backed the new laws, but with serious domestic opposition. Even the United Nations Commissioner for Refugees warns that the Bill risks breaching the 1951 Refugee Convention. The Bill as it stands is likely to result in years of litigation.

Maria McCloskey, an immigration solicitor at the Children’s Law Centre, told me in no uncertain terms that: “Approximately 90 per cent of my cases – I represent unaccompanied asylum-seeking children- would have been considered ‘inadmissible’ under the new Bill as it currently stands.”