We believe that many of the measures in the Bill will have a serious deterrent or preventive effect that may bring the UK into contravention of its international obligations. . . . . Some of the debate has centred on the notion that this country is a soft touch and is deliberately sought out by asylum seekers who should be applying elsewhere. Again, the figures do not bear that out. The UK was ninth of the 13 European countries in the rate of asylum seekers per 100,000 population in 1998. Switzerland, the Netherlands and Germany are dealing with far more applications, proportionately. . . . .
Life is already tough for many asylum seekers.
Living on benefit in urban Britain, far from their own home, often without their family, and knowing that violence continues to plague their homeland is not an especially joyful existence. . . . . The ethos of the Bill is that because some people abuse the system, it should be made tough for everyone. It is like a teacher giving the entire class detention because someone who cannot be identified stole the chalk. . . . . The Government's argument for not taking that approach is that the benefits system acts as a great incentive for people coming to claim asylum. That overstates the delights of life on benefit, as politicians often do, by contrast with the experience of many people who survive on that basic level of support. . . . .