Outlining her New Plan for Immigration in parliament this week, Patel said people who enter the UK ‘illegally’ [not through the government’s official programme] and whose asylum claim is successful would be given ‘temporary protection status’, as opposed to settlement rights, and would be regularly reassessed for removal. Their access to benefits and family reunion rights would also be limited, even after their asylum claim succeeded.
She said the authorities would deem claims inadmissible where people had entered the UK ‘illegally’ after travelling through a safe country. In contrast, those who arrive through the government’s resettlement programme would be given indefinite leave to remain on arrival.
Life sentences would be given to leaders or facilitators of organised crime gangs trafficking people to the UK.
A fast-track appeals process would be established, and action taken to ‘tackle the practice of meritless claims which clog up the courts with last minute claims and appeals,’ Patel said.
Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said: ‘Proposals to hike the standard of proof for asylum claims could mean far fewer would qualify under the new regime, significantly reducing the protection the UK offers those fleeing persecution.
‘We will want to look at how the proposed two-tier system―which would treat refugees differently depending on how they arrived in this country―reflects the UK's obligations under international law. Any expansion of safe, legal routes for people fleeing persecution would be good news, but these must be established and shown to work, particularly as many legal routes ceased at the end of the Brexit transition period and have not been replaced.
‘We would also be very glad to see increased legal support for people claiming asylum as well as more access to early advice.’
Boyce said there was a backlog of asylum cases, with 67% of claimants having to wait more than six months for an initial decision. Home Office decision making needed improvement, she said, as a high proportion of appeals are upheld by judges (44% of asylum appeals as of December 2020).
‘Errors and delays are a huge waste of public resources, as well as unfair to applicants who may have had to wait years for a decision,’ she said.
‘What is needed is to reduce the growing backlog of claims and improve Home Office decision-making.’
