Recently we pointed to an explosive revelation that there had been a ‘recently.Increase in Abuse ‘ of the asylum system.
This sparked the open border industry. Obviously we hit a nerve.
We cited June 2020 as the source Report of the National Audit Office (NAO) to enforce immigration laws, which is a request from the Home Office for a “Increase in Abuse” the asylum system as a result of an increase in the number of applications related to “false late challenges in elimination”.
This revelation (from those who know) of what we have known for years is welcome and timely.
The questions that need to be answered in this post are:
- In its report, did the NAO state that the Home Office (as some claim) had no evidence to back them up?
- Is the abuse of the asylum system a fantasy, as some in the open borders lobby suggest?
1. In its report, did the NAO state that the Home Office had no evidence to support their belief?
No. The NAO referred to an allegation by the Home Office that abuse had taken place and that backlogs “could be caused by the associated delaying tactics” (on page 38 of the report).
However, the guard dog added that he had seen no evidence of this:
- The Home Office analyzed whether it could have done more in earlier stages of the asylum process to remove potential obstacles.
- That some of the transformation changes introduced by the Home Office inadvertently created new problems elsewhere in the system.
- That it tried to actively understand and overcome these challenges.
The NAO added that the Home Office appeared to have too ‘No strategy about the work of the Immigration Service and the rest of the department too Reduce frequency‘ posed by the “challenge” of the “false late challenges for distance”.
What the NAO are doing Not It appears to be saying that the Home Office has no evidence to back up its allegation of abuse.
In summary, the NAO is not doing enough to address or understand the various challenges identified in its report.
2. Is the abuse of the asylum system an invention of the imagination? (as some claim)?
No. The Home Office’s claim has been partially corroborated by similar findings from the independent chief inspector for borders, who wrote in 2017 report (see page 7): “There is … significant evidence that people who have been issued deportation orders are making last-minute asylum applications … to thwart planned moves. ‘
Separately, David Wood, a former director general of immigration control, wrote the following in a Civitas report published last year:
“For illegal immigrants you meet The asylum procedure offers a standard way of delaying and often avoiding deportation. Individuals attempting to abuse the UK immigration system that immigration officials encounter would routinely raise various forms of legal challenge, including asylum claims, as the evidence is clear that the longer the person stays in the UK, the more likely it is to avoid deportation. “
It is clear that abuse of the asyum system has taken place and is taking place. Is it increasing? Indeed, the NAO report recognizes evidence of an increasing number of claims for removal late in the process. Questions remain as to the reasons for the increase, but the fact that the Home Office sees this as the result of an “increase in abuse” is in itself worrying.
The open borders lobby seems to deny the abuse and shortcomings of the asylum process.
This is despite the fact that such issues have been extensively documented by former Home Office executives, the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and even the BBC.
Now they have been confirmed by the Interior Ministry itself.
Instead of arguing about semantics, it is time to work together to find out how to combat this abuse.
It is right that Britain should offer protection to those who really need it. The abuse of the asylum system can lead to real refugees being displaced by false asylum seekers. This is wrong and needs to be addressed quickly.
Note: We are not the author of this content. For the Authentic and complete version,
Check its Original Source