CONCLUSION
This paper has tried to understand and explain the rationale of
the use of
deterrence measures against asylum seekers in England, a country
proud to be a
sanctuary for refugees. For a better understanding, I first
looked back at the origin of
immigration to England before and after the two world wars. It is
useful to notice that
at that time, asylum seekers and refugees were seen and dealt
under the term of
immigration. This retrospective glance revealed that refugees
were welcome even
invited in this country by the government for political,
economical and traditional
reasons. It was a political propaganda to receive refugees as a
civilised and
democratic country among other European countries. The end of two
wars, with their
corollaries of destruction of the economy and infrastructures
coupled with the
shortage of labour force, made the English government invite in
England European
Volunteer Workers, Commonwealth citizens and refugees on the
basis that they
would fill the void, work to rebuild the economy and boost it.
Besides that, the
tradition of shelter for refugees based on the liberal system of
the country favoured
the acceptance of many asylum seekers and refugees. But the
massive flow of
refugees and asylum seekers would have in the long run an impact
on the society and
the economy.
Under the influx of refugees and asylum seekers coming from
different continents
and countries, the English society initially white turned to a
multiracial and
multicultural one. But this transformation did not easily happen
because of white
racist groups backed up by prominent politicians who openly
expressed xenophobic
and racist opinions. Asylum seekers and refugees were victims of
attacks, violence
and murders. At the economic level, the presence of asylum
seekers put a huge
pressure on the government budget and the welfare system because
of their access to a whole range of benefits.
Face to the financial cost and the growing feeling of hostility
among the host
population towards asylum seekers, the state, in response ,
implemented deterrence
measures to curb their number. The response of the state was
built on restrictive and
dissuasive powers. Legislation was the key element to undercut
the right to seek
asylum by preventing people from reaching England, to strip
individuals of their
citizenship and deny entry. While the dissuasive powers were
based on detention as
punishment for seeking asylum, visa requirement to keep England
unreachable and
the removal of benefits to impoverish asylum seekers.
Do asylum seekers deserve such mistreatment from England? Even if
they are bogus
refugees or economic migrants, is a fight for economic survival
less worthy?
I have come to the sad conclusion that England has never been a
welcome door to
asylum seekers because the acceptance of refugees in the post-war
period was purely
for economic motivations not humanitarian ones. Therefore,
England as sanctuary for
asylum seekers is a myth.
| 
