Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Accounting for the Dominance of Control: Inter-party Dynamics and Restrictive Asylum Policy in Contemporary Britain

  • British Politics: Beyond the Mainstream
  • Published:
British Politics Aims and scope

Abstract

This paper charts the development of restrictive asylum policy since New Labour came into power in 1997, and assesses party political responses to asylum during this period. It considers how far a discourse of control has become dominant across the political spectrum over recent years, and develops an account of the flourishing of restrictive asylum policy in contemporary Britain. In so doing, the paper challenges conventional interpretations that perceive restrictive policies to be a direct result of rising numbers of asylum applications and ‘abuse’ of the asylum system. It also challenges interpretations that perceive restrictive policies to result directly from popular pressures to intensify controls. Instead, the paper argues that restrictive policy is conditioned by inter-party dynamics, which need to be understood in relation to a wider discourse of control. This discourse of control, the paper suggests, has become increasingly dominant both in political and also in public or popular discourse, and is evident both at the domestic as well as the European levels.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The author would like to thank the anonymous referees, as well as David Howarth, John Bartle, David Owen and Jason Glynos who provided comments on earlier drafts of this article. The research in this article was undertaken as part of an ESRC funded project at the University of Essex, and is reproduced in part from Vicki Squire's The Exclusionary Politics of Asylum (forthcoming, Palgrave Macmillan), with permission of Palgrave Macmillan.

  2. It also reflects a wider intergovernmental and supranational agenda that remains beyond the scope of this paper, but which is briefly discussed in the final section.

  3. The Commonwealth Immigrants Act of 1968 is a key case in point. The history of Twentieth Century immigration legislation is one marked by the intensification of selectively restrictive measures, whether against ‘alien’ Jews in the early part of the century (e.g. Cesarani, 1996); ‘new’ Commonwealth immigrants in the 1950s and 1960s (e.g. Spencer, 1997), or asylum seekers in the 1990s and beyond (e.g. Bloch and Schuster, 2005). The Labour Party has historically played a role in setting up restrictive policies against each of these groups.

  4. This, of course follows a history of party political division over European developments in the Conservative party, which UKIP has explicitly tried to capitalise on in electoral terms.

  5. This follows the UK's re-affirmation of its commitment to the Convention alongside over 80 other states in December 2001.

  6. Indeed, the extreme right-wing party, the BNP, was alone in calling for ‘…an immediate halt to all further immigration’ in 2005.

  7. The party claims that migration is a right only ‘as far as is practical’ (Green Party, 2005b).

  8. The Green Party have a more developed approach than the RESPECT coalition, although as minor parties they inevitably do not develop such a detailed policy approach as the major parties.

  9. The critical distance that such an approach fosters is evident in the work of Liza Schuster (2003a, 2003b), whereby she challenges dominant interpretations regarding the steady increase of asylum applications in the EU throughout the 1990s. Schuster argues that asylum statistics in the 1990s are more adequately interpreted as fluctuating (2003b, 236). She also problematises the assumption that an increase in the rate of failed asylum applications can be interpreted as directly reflecting increased numbers of ‘welfare seekers’. In so doing, Schuster highlights the way in which asylum statistics have been politically articulated in terms that construct asylum as a ‘problem’ of increasing numbers and of increasing ‘abuse’ (2003b, 244).

  10. The Trevi group was set up in 1975 in order to facilitate the coordination of policing and security activities in Europe. As police forces and security agencies extended their remit across the Schengen area, the Trevi group focused on all policing and security aspects of free movement, including illegal immigration, visas, asylum seekers, and border controls. See Bunyan, (1993, 195–196).

  11. The future of this pillar-based system is unclear at present.

References

  • Bigo, D. and Tsoukala, A. (eds.) (2006) The Illiberal Practices of Liberal States, Paris: L’Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, T. (2001) ‘Prime Minister's speech on Europe’, presented to the European Research Institute (Birmingham University) 23 November, p.6, http://www.pm.gov.uk, (accessed 2 August 2002).

  • Blair, T. (2005) ‘I wouldn’t call Howard's Tories racist. Merely absurd, laughable opportunists’, The Times, 7 February, www.timesonline.co.uk, (accessed 7 February 2005).

  • Bloch, A. (2000) ‘A new era or more of the same? Asylum policy in the UK’, Journal of Refugee Studies 13 (1): 29–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloch, A. and Schuster, L. (2005) ‘Asylum policy under New Labour’, Benefits 13 (2): 115–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • British National Party (2005) ‘What we stand for: immigration — time to say ENOUGH’, BNP Policy report, http://www.bnp.org.uk/policies/policies.htm, (accessed 9 March 2005).

  • Bunyan, T. (1993) Statewatching the New Europe: A Handbook on the European State, London: Statewatch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castles, S. and Miller, M. (1993) The Age of Migration, Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cesarani, D. (1996) Citizenship, Nationality and Migration in Europe, London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Conservative Party Manifesto (2001) http://www.conservative-party.net/manifestos/2001/2001-conservative-manifesto.shtml, (accessed 10 March 2005).

  • Davis, D. (2005) ‘Controlled immigration and a firm but fair asylum system’, http://www.conservatives.com, (accessed 9 March 2005).

  • Dobrowolsky, A. and Lister, R. (2006) ‘Social Exclusion and Changes to Citizenship: Women and Children, Minorities and Migrants in Britain’, in E. Tatsoglou and A. Dobrowolsky (eds.) Women, Migration and Citizenship: Making Local, National and Transnational Connections, Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council on Refugees and Exiles (2008) statistics fact file, http://www.ecre.org/factfile/Comparative%20Statistics_Asylum%20Applications.xls, (accessed 15 January 2008).

  • Fekete, L. (2001) ‘The emergence of xeno-racism’, Race and Class 43 (2): 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, D. (2005) ‘New borders, new management: The dilemmas of modern immigration policies’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 28 (3): 463–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geddes, A. (2003) The Politics of Migration and Immigration in Europe, London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gibney, M. (2004) The Ethics and Politics of Asylum, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Green Party Manifesto (2001) www.greenparty.org.uk/files/reports/2004/2001%20General%20Election%20manifesto.pdf, (accessed 10 March 2005).

  • Green Party Manifesto (2005) http://manifesto.greenparty.org.uk/site/downloads/file1301ManifestoSection10a.pdf, (accessed 10 March 2005).

  • Green Party (2005a) ‘Greens call for attack on asylum “push factors”’, Green Party report, 4 March, http://www.greenparty.org.uk/index.php?nav=new&n=1838, (accessed 9 March 2005).

  • Green Party (2005b) ‘Briefing from Jean Lambert MEP “EU & UK policy, Green positions and Jean Lambert's work”’, http://www.greenparty.org.uk/files/reports/2004/What%20is%20the%20EU.html, (accessed 9 March 2005).

  • Guild, E. (2003) ‘International terrorism and EU immigration, asylum and borders policy: the unexpected victims of September 11’, European Foreign Affairs Review 8: 331–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, R. (2000) Citizenship and Immigration in Post-War Britain, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, R. and King, D. (2000) ‘Illiberalism and the new politics of asylum: Liberalism's dark side’, The Political Quarterly 71 (4): 396–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayter, T. (2000) Open Borders: The Case Against Immigration Controls, Pluto Press: London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Home Office (2005) Controlling Our Borders: Making Migration Work for Britain, “Five year strategy for immigration and asylum”, February 2005, Norwich: HMSO.

  • Howard, M. (2005) ‘I believe we must limit immigration’, The Telegraph, 23 January, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2005/01/24/ntory24abig.jpg, (accessed 24 January 2005).

  • Huysmans, J. (2006) The Politics of Insecurity: Fear, Migration and Asylum in the EU, Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, W. (2005) ‘Responsive risk regulation? Immigration and asylum’, in Risk and Regulation, No. 9, http://lse.ac.uk/resources/riskAndRegulationMagazine/magazine/summer2005/pdf/magazineNo9.pdf, (accessed 15 January 2008).

  • Kaye, R. (1998) ‘Redefining the Refugee: UK Media Portrayal of Asylum Seekers’, in K. Koser and H. Lutz (eds.) The New Migration: Social Constructions and Social Policy, Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaye, R. (1999) ‘The politics of exclusion: The withdrawal of social welfare benefits from asylum seekers in the UK’, Contemporary Politics 5 (1): 25–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koser, K. (2001) ‘New approaches to asylum?’, International Migration 39 (6): 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostakopoulou, D. (1998) ‘Is there an alternative to Schengenland?’, Political Studies 46 (5): 886–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krieger, J. (2004) ‘New Labour adrift — the retreat from multiculturalism and multilateralism’, Ethnicities 4: 295–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavanex, S. (2006) ‘Shifting up and out: the foreign policy of European immigration control’, Western European Politics 29 (2): 329–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layton-Henry, Z. (2001) ‘Patterns of Privilege: Citizenship Rights in Britain’, in A. Kondo (ed.) Citizenship in a Global World: Comparing Citizenship Rights for Aliens, Houndmills: Palgrave, pp. 116–135.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Liberal Democrat Manifesto (2001) http://www.libdemmanifesto.com/2001/2001-liberal-manifesto.shtml, (accessed 10 March 2005).

  • Liberal Democrats (2005a) ‘Policy Briefing 12 “Safe havens”’, January, www.libdems.org.uk, (accessed 9 March 2005).

  • Liberal Democrats (2005b) ‘Conference agenda, F16 asylum and immigration’, http://www.libdems.org.uk/conference/agenda.html?id=497&navPage=conferenceagenda.html, (accessed 9 March 2005).

  • McNevin, A. (2007) ‘The liberal paradox and the politics of asylum in Australia’, Australian Journal of Political Science 42 (4): 611–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MORI (2003) The MORI poll Refugee Week 2003: A Survey of 15–24 Year Olds, http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/2003/asylumseekers.shtml, (accessed 15 January 2008).

  • Morris, L. (2002) Managing Migration: Civic Stratification and Migrants Rights, Oxon: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Oaten, M. (2004) ‘Speech by Mark Oaten MP on the Asylum and Immigration Motion’, Conference News, September 2004, http://www.libdems.org.uk/conference/conferencedoc.html?id=7496&navPage=conference.html, (accessed 13 March 2005).

  • Oxfam (2005) Foreign Territory: The Internationalisation of EU Asylum Policy, Oxford: Oxfam.

  • Peers, S. (2003) ‘Statewatch analysis: EU immigration and asylum discussions’, http://www.statewatch.org/asylum/obserasylum3.htm, (accessed 6 June 2003).

  • RESPECT (2005a) ‘Civil liberties and asylum seekers’, http://www.respectcoalition.org/index.php?ite=511, (accessed 9 March 2005).

  • RESPECT (2005b) ‘Establishment parties slammed over cruel and inhuman immigration policy’, RESPECT coalition report, 15.2.2005, http:///www.respectcoalition.com/?ite=541, (accessed 9 March 2005).

  • Sales, R. (2005) ‘Secure borders, safe haven: A contradiction in terms?’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 28 (3): 445–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster, L. (2003a) The Use and Abuse of Political Asylum, London: Frank Cass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuster, L. (2003b) ‘Common sense or racism? The treatment of asylum-seekers in Europe’, Patterns of Prejudice 37 (3): 233–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster, L. and Solomos, J. (2004a) ‘Race, immigration and asylum’, Ethnicities 4: 267–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster, L. and Solomos, J. (2004b) ‘Making sense of New Labour on race and immigration: A reply’, Ethnicities 4: 298–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, I. (1997) British Immigration Policy Since 1939: The Making of Multi-Racial Britain, London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, S. (2002) ‘Migration Policy Dilemmas: The Case for More Openness’, in New Economy, Institute for Public Policy Research 9 (4): 224–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, S. (2003) ‘Introduction’, Political Quarterly 74 (1): 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Squire, V. (2005) ‘Integration with diversity in modern Britain: New Labour on nationality, immigration and asylum’, Journal of Political Ideologies 10 (1): 51–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Squire, V. (forthcoming) The Exclusionary Politics of Asylum, Basingstoke: Palgrave.

  • Straw, J. (2001) ‘An effective protection regime for the twenty-first century’, speech to IPPR, 6 February.

  • Zetter, R., Griffiths, D., Ferretti, S. and Pearl, M. (2003) ‘An assessment of the impact of asylum policies in Europe 1990–2000’, Home Office Research Study 259, Home Office, London, www.homeoffice.gov.uk, (accessed 1 October 2004).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Citizenship, Identities and Governance, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, UK

    Vicki Squire

Authors
  1. Vicki Squire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Squire, V. Accounting for the Dominance of Control: Inter-party Dynamics and Restrictive Asylum Policy in Contemporary Britain. Br Polit 3, 241–261 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1057/bp.2008.4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/bp.2008.4

Keywords

Search

Navigation