MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: Feebleness that plays into the hands of the people traffickers
Does the Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, know what is being done in her name by British immigration officials?
Who wrote and approved the guidelines which The Mail on Sunday publishes today, which are used in the questioning of those who seek asylum in this country? What did they hope to achieve? Well, we know what they have achieved.
It is often pointed out that the UK approves a much higher proportion of asylum applications than other European countries, such as France which in 2021 refused 75 per cent. In the same year the UK did almost the exact opposite, allowing 72 per cent. Yet, before the Covid crisis, the UK granted permission to remain to only one third of applicants. What is going on? When we look at the guidance, it is not such a mystery.
Obviously a civilised and free country such as ours must treat applicants for asylum with respect and a desire to do justice. But the goal these applicants are aiming for is no small thing. If they succeed, they are well on the way to the full rights of citizenship, free to live and settle in one of the most prosperous and civilised nations on the planet. They will, once admitted, be granted a level of trust simply not available in most places. In most cases they will, at least to begin with, benefit from the taxes paid by UK citizens, out of wages they have striven hard to earn. So it is more than reasonable to expect that they deal honestly with us. In what other area of life would the uttering of a proven lie not disqualify the applicant? What happens to those who lie on applications for passports or driving licences, or for university places? What about jobs? Would a person hoping to join the Home Office as a civil servant be appointed if he or she had been shown to have lied during the process? It seems unlikely. Yet Home Office staff have been told not to reject asylum claims from people who have actually been caught lying. This is not just bending over backwards.
MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: Does the Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, know what is being done in her name by British immigration officials?
This is contorting justice so as to favour the applicant beyond reason or sense. As our report shows, civil servants are not even allowed to express or show doubt about claims made by applicants, even if they have actually arrived here from safe countries and cannot claim to be in immediate danger. To make the point even more obvious, would-be UK residents are assured that they need not answer questions they view as ‘upsetting’. Claims of persecution on the grounds of sexual orientation must be accepted without hesitation.
What sort of procedure is this? The whole point of a civil service is to be dispassionate, forensic and impartial in investigating cases and taking decisions. If its rules are as skewed as this, it cannot possibly do its job. As asylum expert Alan Mendoza rightly points out, this is institutional feebleness, ‘scandalously weak’, and it will make the problem worse, not better. Unless this policy is reversed, more will drown at the hands of people-smuggling gangsters. The Home Secretary must act immediately to reform this absurd guidance.
Lionesses lit up a dreary summer
The cool winds blow and the rain pours down, and the dreariest summer for years plods towards its end. But we don’t care, because, after years of sporting disappointment, England’s footballing Lionesses have captured the nation’s heart and enthusiasm in a way nobody could ever have predicted.
May they be rewarded tomorrow with the triumph they deserve. But even if they are not, we owe them our thanks for cheering us all up when we needed it.
MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: May they be rewarded tomorrow with the triumph they deserve
Source: Read Full Article