Abstract
In analyzing parliamentary asylum debates, we have moved from the most straightforward case to the most complicated one. Large-scale migration into Switzerland in the post-war era has only involved asylum-seekers and guest workers. Switzerland treats the asylum issue as distinct from the guest-worker issue, and asylum is covered mainly by one specific piece of asylum legislation that has undergone several revisions since the late 1970s. The asylum issue in Germany is more complex because of the addition of the Ubersiedler and Aussiedler and because the government has used a large array of legislation and administrative decrees to deal with the asylum issue. While both Switzerland and Germany deal with asylum-seekers and guest workers through two separate federal ministries, in Britain asylum is closely intertwined, both legislatively and ministerially, with immigration, an issue that itself is remarkably complicated because of Britain’s views on race, citizenship, and the Commonwealth.To understand British asylum, we must therefore understand British immigration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Rosemary Ashton, Little Germany: Exile and Asylum in Victorian England (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986).
Cited by Bernard Porter, The Refugee Question in Mid-Victorian Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), pp. 75, 77, 22.
Hans-Ulrich Thamer, “Flucht und Exil: Demagogen’ und Revolutionacre,” in Deutsche im Ausland–Fremde in Deutschland, ed. Klaus Bade (Miinchen: C. H. Beck, 1993).
Cited by Bernard Porter, The Refugee Question in Mid-Victorian Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), p. 7.
Bernard Porter, The Refugee Question in Mid-Victorian Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), p. 124.
Bernard Porter, The Refugee Question in Mid-Victorian Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), p. 119.
Bernard Porter, The Refugee Question in Mid-Victorian Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), p. 218.
Ari Joshua Sherman, Island Refuge: Britain and Refugees from the Third Reich 1933–1939, 2nd ed. (Essex: Frank Cass, 1994), p. 267; Michael R. Marrus, The Unwanted: European Refugees in the Twentieth Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), p.154; Colin Holmes, A Tolerant Country? Immigrants, Refugees, and Minorities in Britain (London: Faber and Faber, 1991), p. 31.
Tony Kushner, The Persistence of Prejudice: Anti-Semitism in British Society during the Second World War (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1989), p. 152.
Bernard Wasserstein, Britain and the Jews of Europe 1939–1945 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979), p. 345.
Zig Layton-Henry, ‘The Politics of Immigration: Immigration, ‘Race’ and ‘Race’ Relations in Post-War Britain (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992).
Zig Layton-Henry, The Politics of Immigration: Immigration, ‘Race’ and ‘Race’ Relations in Post-War Britain (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992).
Helene Lambert, Seeking Asylum: Comparative Law and Practice in Selected European Countries (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhof f, 1995).
Ian A. Macdonald and Nicholas Blake, Immigration Law and Practice in the United Kingdom, 4th ed. (London: Butterworths, 1995).
Zig Layton-Henry, The Politics of Immigration: Immigration, ‘Race’ and ‘Race’ Relations in Post-War Britain (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992), pp. 192–3.
Tom Rees, “United Kingdom I: Inheriting Empire’s People,” in The Politics of Migration Policies: Settlement and Integration, ed. Daniel Kubat, 2nd ed. (NewYork: Center for Migration Studies, 1993), p. 106.
Ronald Kaye, “Defining the Agenda: British Refugee Policy and the Role of Parties,” Journal of Refugee Studies 7, 2/3 (1994), pp. 144–59.
Anne Ruff, “The United Kingdom Immigration (Carriers’ Liability) Act 1987: Implications for Refugees and Airlines,” International Journal of Refugee Law 1, 4 (1989), pp. 481–500; Erika Feller, “Carrier Sanctions and International Law,” International Journal of Refugee Law 1, 1 (1989), pp. 48–66. See also Antonio Cruz, “Carrier Sanctions in Four European Cornmunity States: Incompatibilities between International Civil Aviation and Human Rights Obligations,” Journal of Refugee Studies 4, 1 (1991), pp. 63–81.
Ronald Kaye, “Defining the Agenda: British Refugee Policy and the Role of Parties,”Journal of Refugee Studies 7, 2/3 (1994), pp. 144–59.The fact that “refugees” face even greater resentment than “immigrants” in these polls is surprising, although one wonders whether the questionnaire actually asked about “refugees” or whether it in fact asked about “asylum-seekers” in which case the finding would be less surprising.
Richard Dunstan, “Playing Human Pinball: The Amnesty International United Kingdom Section Report on UK Home of fice ‘Safe Third Country’ Practice,” International Journal of Refugee Law 7, 4 (October 1995), pp. 606–52.
Richard Dunstan, “Playing Human Pinball: The Amnesty International United Kingdom Section Report on UK Home of fice ‘Safe Third Country’ Practice,” InternationalJournal of Refugee Law 7, 4 (October 1995), p. 644.
Michael K. Addo, “The Legal Condition of Refugees in the United Kingdom, “Journal of Refugee Studies 7, 1 (1994), p. 105.
Ronald Kaye, “Defining the Agenda: British Refugee Policy and the Role of Parties,”Journal of Refugee Studies 7, 2/3 (1994), pp. 144–59.
Copyright information
© 2000 Niklaus Steiner
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Steiner, N. (2000). Britain: The 1987 and 1993 Parliamentary Asylum Debates. In: Arguing about Asylum. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780312299422_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780312299422_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-38603-1
Online ISBN: 978-0-312-29942-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)