DEFINITIONS
Officially, an "asylum seeker" or "asylum applicant" is someone who has claimed "refugee status" within the meaning of Article 1 of the UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as amended by The New York Protocol of 31 January 1967.

Most asylum seekers are not recognised as refugees. Most are considered bogus. For example, in 2002 there were 84,130 applications, of whom 8,270 (10%) were recognised as refugees, 20,135 (24%) were "not recognised as a refugee but granted exceptional leave", and the remainder "refused asylum and exceptional leave". (Asylum Statistics: United Kingdom 2002. The annual Home Office Statistical Bulletins Asylum Statistics: United Kingdom and Control of Immigration: Statistics United Kingdom are available free from the Home Office, Research Development and Statistics Directorate, Room 264, 50 Queen Anne's Gate, London, SW1H 9AT, Tel: 020 7273 2084, or at www.homeoffice.gov.uk)

Below, we use the term "Asylee" to include all those asylum seekers -- that is, principal applicants, excluding dependants -- who have been accepted for settlement, whether officially recognised as "refugees" or not.

OUR PROPOSALS
Recognising that Westminster should be the sole law-making authority on immigration and asylum issues in Britain and recognising that outside the EU we will regain control of our own borders, enabling us to carry out the following programme of reform, we propose:

• Abolish Automatic Right to Asylum
  So long as Britain is signed up to the Convention, we are required to admit whoever claims asylum, and keep them here, pending a lengthy legal process to determine their claim to refugee status. As open-borders advocate Nick Cohen wrote in the New Statesman of 7 October 2002, "The convention has nullified the efforts of successive governments to close Britain's borders." Therefore it is necessary to…

• Withdraw from the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, as amended by the 1967 New York Protocol.
  As Matthew Parris wrote in The Times of June 29, 2002: Sometimes, something is so plain that we dare not acknowledge it. At the root of all our difficulties over immigration lies a simple cause, and nobody in mainstream politics has the guts to admit it. It is the Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees. It is unsustainable and it must go. If we cannot reach agreement internationally to wind it down, then Britain should unilaterally withdraw. ("This foolish convention on refugees must be scrapped")

  The 1951 Convention is outdated and is being abused. It was not intended as a means to move economic migrants around the world, nor for those who are merely dissatisfied with life at home.

  It will not be possible to "amend" this international document, therefore we need to withdraw from it so we are no longer bound by it, and if necessary institute our own Convention, addressing our own needs.

  As our Declaration of Moral Principles (Sovereignty, Nov 02) makes clear, we believe everyone has a moral obligation to work to make things better where they live, and to involve themselves in the important work of restoration at home. Those who struggle to change things at home should be esteemed over those who simply run away.

• Legislate to ignore specific aspects of the European Convention on Human Rights
  which prevent implementation of asylum reform, such as Article 3 which prevents deportation of foreign nationals judged to be a risk to security.

• Quota of 2,000 Asylees a Year
  This is 2,000 "principle applicants", accepted for settlement, excluding dependants. "Dependant" is defined by sec 2(4) of statutory instrument, Asylum Support Regulations 2000, (No 704).

  Note: A "refugee" is technically an asylum seeker who has been granted asylum status. However, most asylum seekers are accepted for settlement under the category "Not recognised as a refugee but granted exceptional leave". Hence we use the term "asylee" to include all those asylum seekers -- that is, principal applicants, excluding dependants -- who have been accepted for settlement, whether officially recognised as "refugees" or not.

  For the latter part of the 1980s, when the world was just as dangerous as it is today, arguably more so, asylum applications were stable and few. "Asylum" applications started to rocket from 1989 onwards, although still well below numbers today, as above.

  For example, in the 5-year period from 1984-1988 the average annual number of principle applicants "recognised as a refugee" or "not recognised as a refugee but granted exceptional leave" was 1,934.

  Over the following 6 years the average annual number accepted almost quadrupled to 7,621 (See Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Asylum Statistics, United Kingdom 1994, which also details the previous 10 years).

  We aim to bring numbers accepted down to 2,000 a year in order to approximate the historically precedent, annual average for the relatively stable 5-year period, 1984-1988, before "asylum" applications rocketed and before the system became discredited.

• Maintain Safe Country List
  from which an asylum claim will not be granted. Labour initially abolished this, but has restored it.

• No Asylum for citizens from countries internationally recognised as Democratic

• No Asylum for citizens of countries hosting British, NATO or UN Peacekeeping Troops

• Asylum Applications to be lodged in Country of Origin
  at the British embassy, which would be best placed to understand the situation on the ground.

• An Asylum Visa Required
  J K Maunder suggested the following in a letter in The Independent, 27 March 2000: One solution to asylum-based immigration would be to place it on the same visa-based footing as settlement in Britain and make a refugee visa issued abroad mandatory. This would scupper 80% of undocumented arrivals. All those without documents would be returned forthwith.
  Eric Nichols suggested the following in a letter in The Daily Telegraph, 1 September 1998: We should judge an asylum seeker in the British consul in the country concerned. No one should be considered for asylum unless he can produce a special visa, which the British consul would provide only on two conditions being verified: that the applicant was in serious danger of death, torture or persecution, and that there was no country nearer than Britain in which he could reasonably expect to be free of such dangers. To avoid visas being traded, the consul would send a copy with fingerprints and photograph, to the UK Immigration Authorities. This important policy would cut the levels of bogus asylum seeking to very small levels, meaning that the Reception Centres would not be overflowing.

The Conservative Party claims its objective is to take an annual fixed number who have already been deemed refugees, and in need of relocation worldwide, from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). This is a risky proposition, which gives the UN the authority to decide.

It might only work if Britain accepted a quota of no more than 2,000 from the UNHCR a year, and abolished entirely asylum seeking into the UK via any other method.

However, the UNHCR has suggested it may not co-operate with Britain if it withdraws from the 1951 UN Convention, as above.

Therefore, in the absence of the UNHCR programme and the abolition of asylum seeking via any other method, we would need to continue with our plan, as above. That is, there would be no asylum granted without a Visa.

If the monthly quota is filled, there will be no asylum offered that month.

In the interim, and even when the Visa Requirement is in place, we are still likely to have some who arrive in the UK via other ways, and without a Visa.

In general, the following will apply:

• No Asylum for those who have travelled through a Safe Country to reach the UK.
  However, we acknowledge there will be some who arrive at air or sea ports.

• No Asylum for those who have destroyed their documents
  or fail to co-operate in re-documentation.

• Claims for Asylum allowed at official ports of entry only.
  If discovered outside of these ports, they will be held securely and returned forthwith.

• Asylum Seekers Compelled to Stay in Secure Reception Centres
  until their cases are settled. This will see a vast decrease in applications. The bogus will not want the hassle. Applications will plummet to their pre-1989 figures. The few who are genuine will be grateful to be staying safely and securely under the protection of the British government. Families to be kept together, and entitled to full education, leisure and health facilities.

• Decisions reached within 2 Weeks
  The time spent in these centres will be short because the aim will be to reach a first decision within 2 weeks. Many new jobs will be created in the Immigration Service, to ensure this goal is met.

• Self-harming and hunger striking to Lead to Automatic Disqualification
  from further asylum consideration.

• Recognise that Asylum Seekers are not British Citizens
  and therefore are not eligible for the full range of benefits which accrue to a British citizen, until such time as citizenship is granted. Granting such people the full range of benefits enjoyed by British citizens undermines the concept of national citizenship.

• Asylum Seekers Prohibited from Working
  Some claim we should permit asylum seekers to work so we can remove benefit entitlement. However, we aim to speed up the process between application and decision. Therefore, unless they have been granted refugee status, an asylum seeker should not be in the country long enough to have the chance to work. Allowing asylum seekers to work would only encourage more economic migrants to come seeking work under the guise of "asylum". To stop the flow of bogus seekers, we need to prohibit them from working, cut back on benefits available, and above all, speed the process of decision, and where appropriate, removal.

• Shorten the Appeals Process
  seeking to have the second hearing within a further 2 weeks, while the asylum seeker remains in Secure Reception.

• Asylum Appeals not subject to Judicial Review

• No Appeal to the European Court

• Fast-track Back Failed Asylum Seekers
  If an applicant loses a case, he or she, and their family will be kept in Secure Reception, until escorted back, with the full cost of their stay and removal deducted from that country's Foreign Aid allocation -- which demonstrates that those countries which allow their citizens to come here under false pretences, must pay for them. A Removals Agency will be instituted whose duty will be to ensure swift departure. Presently, those whose applications are rejected can remain, because the authorities often don't know where they are.

• Granting of Refugee Status Probationary
  upon good behaviour. Any asylum seeker, refugee, or legal immigrant who is not a British citizen, and is convicted of a criminal offence, immediately deported to country of origin and banned for life from re-entry.

An appendix to this Asylum Policy, which deals with some of the commonly heard objections, can be found here.