The report also contains details of the government's asylum bill. The most heated debates have centered on the provision that children of those denied asylum will be placed in children's institutions if the applicant refuses to return home.
Once, people fled to England mainly because of the Iron Curtain. Today, however, they mostly arrive from Somalia, China and Iran, fleeing civil conflicts or persecution by the authorities. According to statistics, the British government is succeeding in keeping out so-called economic refugees seeking a better life in the West. But, as Home Secretary David Blunkett assured, Britain will accept anyone who needs asylum, provided, of course, that they have not already tried their luck in other countries.
"If you came here through other safe countries, you should apply for asylum there. We will show you hospitality if you were threatened with death or torture. But I will be intolerant of those dishonest people who board a plane somewhere with passports and, upon arrival here, destroy their documents and demand asylum," said David Blunkett.
The head of the British Home Office mentioned the favorite trick of traffickers in human cargo, who deliver people to Britain from countries that cannot be identified. Such emigrants cannot be deported because it is unknown where they came from.
Only 5% of applicants receive refugee status, but not all of the rest return home. Some continue to live here without documents, without work permits or other rights; others find loopholes in the law that allow them to stay. Most such emigrants are dependent on the state. But the Home Secretary wants to ensure the full repatriation of illegal refugees. He proposes, for example, to deprive such people of benefits.
Since many come with families, their children are correspondingly deprived of their means of subsistence, and therefore the state must take them into its care. The scheme for expelling undesirable elements looks rather cruel: if you don't return home willingly, we will take your children away.
Unsurprisingly, the liberal intelligentsia was outraged. Speaking in parliament, opposition leader John Howard did not miss the opportunity to strike at the vulnerable spot in the government's plan. "They have gone further than a civilized state can go. Children of asylum seekers will be taken into shelters to force their parents to leave the country. The Prime Minister and the Home Secretary should be ashamed of themselves," John Howard remarked emotionally, who himself, when he was home secretary, cut benefits for potential refugees.
He managed to sting the government, and David Blunkett had to clarify that taking away children is an extreme, exceptional measure. He said he did not want to look like King Herod, who went down in history for the massacre of the innocents.
Nevertheless, observers note that the government's asylum policy will be heavily criticized from various platforms, but the bill will certainly be approved by the government. As BBC correspondent Norman Smith notes, most MPs support the adoption of the bill because voters demand that they legislatively limit the flow of immigrants who, in their opinion, make too much use of free services and generally abuse British hospitality.