Post
by ezh » Tue Mar 21, 2006 2:32 pm
I don't think that realy highly skilled immigrants need to fear much:
II. CONSERVATIVE PARTY
(a) Track Record
20. For the last fifteen of the Conservative years (1982- 1997) immigration was not a significant political issue. Their declared policy was “ to restrict severely the numbers coming to live permanently or to work in the United Kingdom.”
21. In fact, net immigration continued steadily. The average annual figure was 59,000 over the period 1988 – 1997.
22. Through much of the 1980s work permits were issued at a rate of 20-30,000 a year, rising to 42,000 in 1997. By comparison, 156,000 were issued in 2004.
23. The settlement of spouses ran at about 30,000 per year.
24. The weakest part of the record is asylum where the response to a surge in claims to 43,000 was inadequate. The introduction of a computer system (which failed) combined with a reduction in staff left an extremely difficult situation for Labour to inherit.
25. Overall, acceptances for settlement (which lag several years behind immigration numbers) ran at about 50–60,000 a year compared to the present level of some 140,000.
(b) Proposals
(i) Work Permits
26. The Conservatives propose that there should be two types of work permit – temporary permits that would not lead to settlement and permanent ones that would. The former would be primarily for transfers within international companies but would be subject to strict conditions. Employers would have to post a bond to guarantee departure and there would be no switching to other types of visa. Applications could be made for a settlement permit but within the quota.
27. Settlement permits would be subject to an annual quota and would be allocated on a points based system. Points would be given for work skills, age, English language competency etc.
28. This system, similar to that in Australia, has the advantage that it is not entirely employer driven. It also takes into account the wider impact of immigration on society, public services etc.
(ii) Asylum
29. The Conservatives propose a fundamental reform of the asylum system. They would withdraw from the present EU and international legal framework, attempt to negotiate fresh international agreements and pass national laws to implement a tighter and swifter asylum system. Those who destroyed their documents or who claimed only on discovery would be refused. The use of detention would be expanded. The effect of these changes would be to facilitate the return of failed asylum seekers. The long term aim is to end the present system whereby you have to get to Britain to claim asylum here. The Conservatives regard this as an incentive to people smugglers. The proposals involve setting up centres overseas where claimants could be sent to have their claims assessed. There would be an annual quota.
30. This outcome would not be easy to achieve. The later stages depend on finding suitable sites overseas and there would be considerable legal and practical difficulties to overcome. The shift of processing of claims to offshore centres could be expected to deter many asylum seekers, 70% of whose claims failed in 2003. However, it might also result in a significant increase in illegal immigration by people who are determined to enter the UK despite the tightening of the asylum system. It could, however, improve the climate for the reception of those who are genuine refugees. They have said that no genuine asylum seekers will be refused simply because the quota is full – although they might have to wait for a place.
(iii) Family reunion
31. The Conservatives have undertaken to consult on proposals involving raising the minimum age for spouses to 21 and tightening the rules on accommodation and support.
32. This is an important area on which neither of the main parties has produced an effective policy.
(iv) Other matters
33. The Conservatives have proposed full medical tests for those coming to Britain for more than 12 months. Only TB will automatically preclude entry. Other conditions will be dealt with on a case by case basis. Applicants will pay their own costs. Asylum seekers will not be affected.
34. The Conservatives’ main proposal is that there should be an annual limit to immigration, agreed by Parliament. Within this there would be quotas for the three main streams of immigration – work permits, asylum and family reunion. They have not said what that limit should be but have spoken of “a substantial reduction” in immigration.
35. This last is of cardinal importance. It will not be easy to achieve but it is feasible. Each major category would have to be managed downwards in the light of circumstances. Whatever the pace of progress, it would have the major advantage of transparency. If the limit was exceeded the government would have to explain why. The effect could well be to reduce substantially the widespread concern about the scale and pace of immigration into Britain.
