The Home Office and the UK Border Agency (UKBA) completed the review into the asylum seekers legacy backlog ahead of
schedule at the end of last month. 450,000 case files have now been closed and the government is as pleased as punch. Earlier in the summer, Damian Green heralded the achievement as one of
“three fundamental changes to the asylum system.”
Not everyone shares his enthusiasm and serious concerns about UKBA remain. First, the review is incomplete. An as yet unidentified number of cases have been granted ‘temporary leave to remain’ for up to 3 years, which merely defers the decision to grant asylum or deport. The Home Office concedes that there are a “minor” number of such cases; but a spokesman at the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association says that the figure is likely to run into the “tens of thousands”, based on anecdotal evidence from UKBA officials and immigration lawyers. The exact figure will be revealed in the autumn when UKBA reports to the Home Affairs Select Committee.
This is just one instance of UKBA’s figures being unsatisfactory. In a recent appearance before the Home Affairs Committee, UKBA said that 51 per cent of reviewed cases up to 31 January 2011 had been concluded without asylum or deportation ensuing. The Committee asked for more detailed information, which was eventually provided and the results can be seen below.
The phrase ‘not fit for purpose’ was revived when UKBA conceded that it had made 129,000 errors, and the administrative horror-show did not end there. The ‘controlled archive’ was created to house those cases which could not be physically traced, a reasonable ploy considering that some cases dated back to the mid-‘90s . However, since the publication of the graph above, in the rush to complete the review, a further 34,000 cases have gone into the controlled archive. Those cases are now closed, which poses the question: what happened to those people and why was their designation left so late?
One possible explanation is that border control is not as rigorous as it should be. For instance, the ‘Common Travel Area’ allows a person to move freely between Crown dependencies, the UK and Ireland without carrying electronically monitored identification such as a passport: a boarding pass purchased in one those territories is often all that’s required. It can therefore be difficult to track someone who wants to remain hidden, the security implications of which are obvious.
The agency also apparently struggles to maintain contact with asylum seekers who obtain employment, especially when their leave to remain expires. Not all of these migrants are engaged in nefarious work, hidden from view: the level of chaos is such that UKBA lost contact with a technically illegal immigrant who found work as an MP’s researcher.
Speaking of MPs’ caseworkers (who handle these issues at a constituency level), they invariably complain that UKBA is slow to process claims, which congests the system and can encourage applicants to try their luck outside legal boundaries, where they are easily exploited by the unscrupulous. The latest Home Office data suggests that the problem may be getting worse, with initial decisions down by 17 per cent despite a 9 per cent rise in applications on the previous year.
In view of all this, it is unsurprising that a new backlog of asylum claims has accumulated since 2006. The Home Office and UKBA will not reveal its size or even hazard an estimate, but rumours suggest the figure may exceed 25,000. The Home Affairs Select Committee has demanded a full report from the new head of UKBA, Rob Whiteman, in the autumn. It is something to watch for in the next parliamentary session.
Comments