The Conservative Party leader Michael Howard has outlined his plans for a radical overhaul of the immigration system. In a speech he said Britain had reached a turning point. He would cut the number of immigrants allowed into Britain and impose a quota for asylum seekers.
He claimed it wasn't racist to talk about controlling immigration but "plain common sense". However, Refugee Council Chief Executive Maeve Sherlock has warned that lives could be put at risk if refugees were turned away once the quotas were filled.
What do you think of Michael Howard's plans to change the UK's policies on immigration? Will it affect your vote? What message does it send to other countries?
This debate is now closed. Thank you for your comments.
The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we received:
 | SUGGEST A DEBATE This topic was suggested by Brennig Jones, UK/Spain:  Is Michael Howard right to adopt a quota based system of immigration for the UK?  |
I live in the city that statistically has the highest rate of immigrants and asylum seekers in the UK, and yet I don't feel in any way threatened or disadvantaged by immigrants. The fact is there will always be bitter discontented people around who will use foreigners as scapegoats for their own problems and inadequacies. But they will never be satisfied with any quota since their views are based not on facts but on tabloid hysteria. By pandering to these people the Tories just look desperate.
Tim, London
We should be careful when discussing asylum and immigration at the same time. To aim to limit immigration might be one thing but to limit the number of asylum seekers is meaningless - by international law it is never illegal to apply for asylum and the 1951 UN Convention obliges us to take them all seriously. If the UK withdraws from this convention then the wider consequences may be far worse as has been hinted by other replies here.
Stuart, Colchester, UK
Asylum and immigration will be at the top of most people's list of priority issues come the next General Election. From a security issue alone Michael Howard's proposals will be very popular and will affect the way a great number of people vote, they will certainly get mine. What other countries may think of these proposals is of no importance as it is the security and best interests of the UK that matter most to the majority of the population.
John T, Derbyshire, UK
This country's prosperity has been built on the back of successive generations of immigrants. Each generations drive and ambition for their children has helped us maintain a leading position in many areas of life. Mr Howard and his party offer a retarded view on immigration. With falling birth rates and an ageing population we need these people to help secure our future.
John Power, Maidenhead UK
| The proposals seem sensible and will hopefully focus help on those that are genuinely in need |
The proposals seem sensible and will hopefully focus help on those that are genuinely in need of sanctuary rather than those that can afford to pay the people smugglers.
Carl, Cambridge Genuine Asylum cases must be heard. We have, as a civilised country, the responsibility of ensuring those suffering persecution are offered the hand of sanctuary. However, Howard is right in his cause. How many of the persecuted are left to suffer because they cannot beat the rushing hordes of the 'bogus' seekers? We cannot, and should not, take in those who are not in need. However, Howard's proposal has one flaw and that is the 'quotas' - we shouldn't need quotas if we repel the bogus.
Tim, Colchester
For those who agree with Howard, one question. Are any of you naive enough to believe he will do what he promises?
Kosh, Reading
This is a policy designed to win votes, not address a real problem. Just 3% of all the world's refugees come to Europe, and the UK is 8th on the list of European countries taking asylum seekers in. There simply is no immigration problem, but there is a problem of bigotry and prejudice among our popular press and many voters. It appears Mr. Howard is happy to pander to them.
Alan, London, UK
I'm a work permit holder myself. I find all this talk from Mr Howard quite irritating. I have been in the UK for 2 years, working hard and my story has been nothing but a hard earned success. We are not begging here. If the English are so annoyed because of the immigration then why don't you deport all immigrants and their decedents, and in exchange take back in all those who migrated from the UK to the rest of the world ?
Muhammad, UK
I have a big enough challenge providing for my own family, let alone anyone else's. If house prices, fuel duty, council taxes, etc, were lower in this country, I'd like to think I'd be feeling more charitable towards asylum seekers, but right now I feel that provision for them is a luxury I and I am sure many others simply can't afford. So Mr Howard gets my vote.
Steve C, Dorset UK
| What an unspeakably vile, racist policy |
What an unspeakably vile, racist policy, and the only reason he can put it forward is because there's zero chance of his winning the next election.
Daniel M, London This is yet another example of politicians proposing new laws when all we really need to do is enforce the current ones properly.
Melanie, London, UK
Control the numbers of immigrants and stop them using the race card as a means of staying on this island and draining what little resources we have. Skills and contributions are a benefit to all of us but we do not need seekers of an easy life paid for by hard working tax payers. The balance is completely wrong and needs to be sorted but not at the detriment of genuine asylum seekers.
Mary Irvine , Northants
It would be interesting to know what percentage of those making up the total number of immigrants every year are white Americans, Canadians, Australians, South Africans, etc. Then we'd know what we were really talking about here.
Adrian, London, UK
| It is simply a case of sensible immigration management |
I readily identify myself as a Liberal Democrat voter, and still do - but on this issue, I believe Howard has got it right. I have experienced the kind of immigration proposals he has put forward elsewhere in the world, such as New Zealand. It is simply a case of sensible immigration management, which seems to me to aid race relations, rather than hinder or dirty them.
Charles Croft, Luton, UKHow can anyone take Howard's comments seriously? The Tories desperately jump on a different bandwagon every week to get at the government. The main mistake this government made however, supporting the Iraq invasion, was the only one the Tories backed. Let's just pat them on the head and smile nicely.
John, UK
I agree with DR. in East Midlands. Immigration and asylum issues are sensitive political elements especially in a country that embraces multiculturalism. Howard himself is a descendant of immigration and asylum. He should stop using the British public for his own political interests. In every nation where the going gets tough, immigrants become the targets for political gain. It happened in France, Germany and even in Africa. This is a disgrace to Howard he should avoid mentioning immigration issues if he really wants to win the heart of the many.
AO, London, UK
It may be that Britain's asylum policy needs to be reviewed, but it is highly irresponsible of Michael Howard to make this into an election issue. Doing so only makes racists feel that their views are mainstream and legitimate. The extreme nature of many of the views you've published make me ashamed of my country.
Andrew Johnson, Manchester, UK I strongly disagree with Andrew Johnson of Manchester. Many people are concerned about the volume of people coming into the UK. This is not a racial issue or one to be ashamed of, but one of physical capacity. Britain is, after all, a relatively small country, but at the same time, is one of the most densely populated countries in Europe. Michael Howard has identified this concern and has explained his ideas on how to deal with it. Although he may be electioneering, I do not think that people with solutions should be stifled on the basis of political correctness, and I do not think there is just cause to feel squeamish about this.
AB, Cheshire, UK
It's about time somebody accepted that this country CANNOT keep taking more and more people in! Howard is right-our country is full! It's not racist it's an obvious fact! Australia don't get accused of being racist and they have a tough entry system. He gets my vote and a lot of my friends agree. It is affecting everything in this country. It is time to sort it out once and for all!
Val Ellery, Cheltenham, UK
So, it seems that many people will give Michael Howard and the Tories their votes purely because of their paranoia and xenophobia. They seem happy to have a government to the right of Blair and give the go-ahead to even more privatisation and cuts in public services! I'm ashamed and dismayed by my fellow Brits. You are barking up the wrong tree once again.
Gerry, London
It is about time too. The Tories are trying to balance an out of control system. We will all be winners.
T Roberts, Lincoln
| This smacks of racism and pure electioneering |
Mr Howard is jumping on a bandwagon releasing a populist proposal that will appeal to all who do not fully appreciate the importance of international emigration and immigration. This smacks of racism and pure electioneering. He might as well have stated that his proposal was "Keep Britain White". This is an odious and disgraceful proposal.
Gavin, Hull, UK Even if they got into power (which they probably won't) and implemented this policy and the 'quota' was reached, it's not as if there isn't anywhere else to go. France, Germany and Italy all accepts asylum seekers as we do! I still think we shouldn't have a quota though. But we do need to find a way of separating the genuine people who are being persecuted from those that simply want a better life. I'm sure many of the asylum seekers that come to the UK would rather work than sponge off the state. They are simply not allowed to work under current rules. Not everyone in the world are like the British (i.e. want paying for doing nothing). Some people simply want to come here to improve their lives, and to live without fear of being killed. Many asylum seekers are well-educated people who held a prominent profession (e.g. teacher) in their origin country.
Ben Doyle, Manchester
Britain is already overpopulated, with not enough affordable housing. So we simply can not take in, all the worlds waifs and strays.
David, London England
| The portrayal of the immigrant population as an amorphous mass of bogus would be cheaters and scroungers does nothing for any serious debate |
For this debate to be of value, distinction needs made between migration and asylum. Foreign, non EU nationals, working and living in the UK do not qualify for state benefits but pay taxes just like a British national would. We do not receive council houses, but have to live in privately rented accommodation, or buy a house on the open market. The portrayal of the immigrant population as an amorphous mass of bogus would be cheaters and scroungers does nothing for any serious debate. Please, all the people making vitriolic remarks here try and get some facts before picking easy targets.
IV, UKIt is interesting to note that those who accuse Mr Howard of playing the race card, offer no alternative solution to the problem of asylum seekers. According to the government's own figures, many who come are not genuine. The accusation of racism is never levelled at those other countries who make efforts to control their immigration. Where we have a skills shortage, workers will be welcomed to fill the gap and will contribute. Unskilled economic migrants of any nationality creed or colour are a drain on our existing resources.
Paul, UK
Mr Howard would do well to think about tackling the black economy, which is the real reason the immigrants come. Ironically he could upset some of his supporters form the business world because wages would have to rise.
Andrew M, Walsall, UK
| A sensible debate is long overdue |
Mr Howard's intervention is to be welcomed. A sensible debate is long overdue. For far too long this country has been brow beaten by a liberal agenda which does not reflect the views of the person in the street nor the realities of daily life for the inner city dweller..
Barrie, Canterbury, Kent We need to bring this debate out from the murkiness of the tabloids to avoid misrepresentation and false hysteria. This country has a shrinking tax-paying population. This is why our pensions are in such a mess as there are fewer individuals paying taxes to support the ever increasing pensionable population. Therefore we need immigration or else will all face increased poverty with old age. This kind of policy is a huge boost for the racist parties out there as it adds some degree of authority to their paranoid and wholly ignorant ramblings.
Dino, Poole, UK
The facts show that asylum claims in the UK are already dropping fast. Last year only half the number of claims were received compared with 2002. And even at their peak, the UK was only 7th in Europe in terms of the number of claims we received. It's interesting to see how little the facts influence the debate on this issue.
Tim Parkin, London
Immigration is no longer the problem. With the expansion of the EU, millions more have the right to come here. The problem now is migration and, thanks to Maastricht there is not a thing Howard can do about it. Well, he could do the democratic thing and pledge to withdraw from the EU.
Avril King, Poole England
| These derogatory statements harm race relations |
I am Kenyan Asian I arrived here from Kenya in the late sixties as a young boy and we had Enoch Powell to greet us. I regards myself as British as I have spent the last forty years here and this is my home. I create jobs , work hard employ many people and continue to do so. I have not taken one penny of social security (or for that matter most people I know) from this country. I feel I have played an impeccable role in helping the economy of this country. Each election they make this into a "voting grabbing" subject, and each time this makes us feel like second class citizens. I think the Conservative need to wake up and smell the coffee! We all know that most of these statements are directed towards non-white immigration. These derogatory statements harm race relations .If we have problems lets resolve them in away from the media limelight - nobody minds just don't make it into an issue each time.
Bharat, Gerrards CrossThe UK immigration/asylum system is a disgrace. When will we learn that we must manage the system better? The Australians have a simple and transparent system that seems to work - why can't we? It is utterly ridiculous to believe Britain can accept everybody who wants to come to the UK. For the good of everybody let's develop a fair system that helps those who need it most. In that way we can be proud of our immigration controls rather than be ashamed to talk honestly about the real problems we have.
Rob, UK
A long overdue stance to save our nation's identity (to name but one) but, in reality an empty gesture. If the Conservatives come to power with these immigration control measures in their in their manifesto they'll buckle to EU pressure. Then they can deny all responsibility for nothing changing.
Ian C, UK.
| Immigration needs to be more strictly monitored and controlled, but not at the expense of genuine potential asylum seekers |
Am I the only Brit who is proud to offer succour and safety for those in genuine need of asylum from persecution? A strict limit on refugees worries me - what if they let in their quota and the next person applying is in genuine danger? I'm not talking about economic "asylum" seekers or the masses of other immigrants, but those, like Michael Howard's own parents, who genuinely needed protection and safety. I quite agree that immigration needs to be more strictly monitored and controlled, but not at the expense of genuine potential asylum seekers.
Jenni, UK Most countries seem to have balanced asylum/immigration systems. Unfortunately in Britain those whose voices are mainly heard want either zero immigration, or believe that all asylum applications should be granted. Why can't we have a balanced, pragmatic, sensible approach?
Tim, Birmingham, UK
I find it sickening to here Mr Howard use his family's history to justify horribly intolerant policies directed at refugees. I would be ashamed to be a citizen of a country that considered the plight of refugees as nothing more than an unnecessary expense.
Katherine, London
It is blatantly obvious why we have become the "dustbin of Europe" - our government refuse to accept that there is a problem and whenever it is put up for discussion you can guarantee there'll be the usual ill-informed few calling it a disgrace on our society. As a fellow British citizen I'm ashamed of their inability to support what's best for our country, merely resorting to pathetic "race card" and "human rights" arguments. And as for relating it back to Auschwitz, please, whatever next?
Rebecca, West Mids
| If we were stricter about dealing with the bogus asylum seekers, we would have more time and resources to help the genuine one |
We should never turn away anyone in genuine need. The difference is in the numbers. In the 1960s, asylum applications were below a hundred a year. We could afford an open-door policy then. These days, the numbers are around 200,000 a year - and those are the ones we know about. Sadly, I have come to the conclusion that the infrastructure and the social fabric cannot cope, and that a quota system is necessary. If we were stricter about dealing with the bogus asylum seekers, we would have more time and resources to help the genuine ones. And it might prevent the drift of votes to the BNP. Having voted Labour all my life, I will now be voting for Mr Howard.
Dick, Wales, UKI am horrified at the number of responders who are themselves playing the race card. There is nothing racist about immigration controls. I have close knowledge of how immigration controls at ports work and it is a disgrace, the poor immigration officers are never allowed to do their job properly. All someone has to do is say the magic works and the immigration officer is told they have to come in. Once in all the dishonest ones disappear. Any honest asylum seeker would not be afraid of an honest and open system such as the Conservatives are suggesting. To talk about Auschwitz in the same breath as this topic is alarmist, unfair and an insult to all who suffered in these terrible places.
Anon, UK
Don't be swayed by people trying to play the race card every time a politician tries to get a discussion going on immigration. This subject is too important to let sound bites drown out sense. More power to Mr Howard for opening up the platform with apparently sensible suggestions. I await Mr Blair's response.
Dave, Poole, UK
This is just typical of Howard. Pandering to the lowest common denominator. If Britain really was a "soft touch" then we'd end up with more refugees than our other EU countries, but the statistics prove that's simply not the case. The reason that the other politicians have called this quota racist, is because it truly is.
Simon Watkins, Cardiff, Wales, UK
I think you will find that the suggestion is to curtail economic migrants not asylum seekers, well done Mr. Howard for saying what everyone else is thinking
John, Birmingham UK
There is nothing wrong with having a reasoned discussion on immigration issues, as long as that discussion is not defined by hyperbolic statements and inflammatory language. Unfortunately the Conservative Party seems incapable of doing so. This leaves them open to accusations of playing the race card in the run up to the general election, something they have done before and, on recent evidence, are quite happy to do so again.
Sam Mawson, London, UK
The UK immigration/asylum system is a disgrace. When will we learn that we must manage the system better? The Australians have a simple and transparent system that seems to work - why can't we? It is utterly ridiculous to believe Britain can accept everybody who wants to come to the UK - for the good of everybody let's develop a fair system that helps those who need it most. In that way we can be proud of our immigration controls rather than be ashamed to talk honestly about the real problems we have.
Rob, UK
It's about time someone stood up and stopped all this asylum seeker nonsense. Enoch Powell was right we (British people) are becoming second class citizens in our own country. I am currently unemployed but cannot claim benefit because I got 60 days notice. If I was an asylum seeker I would get a house and benefit.
Peter, Manchester
I too am pleased to see a firm proposal which would both ease the burden on Britain's infrastructure, and ensure genuine refugees can be received. The connection some people seem to be making to the anniversary of Auschwitz's liberation is entirely spurious and talk of the race card simply tiring.
Rob, Leeds
Before this policy was announced by the Conservatives the British voter had no choice between the firmly left wing immigration policies labour and the Lib Dems, who want lightly controlled open immigration and the extreme far right BNP who want no immigration and deportation of anyone who is descended from them too. It only makes sense that there is a moderate right wing immigration option. Whether I will vote for it is an other question.
Matthew Freedman, London, UK
Michael Howard's plans for immigration? Brilliant. It might not win him the election but it is what the majority of hard working British people want. I was fed up with paying for handouts to bogus asylum seekers so I left!
Richard Westwell, Thailand
| I don't like the way asylum gets lumped in with immigration |
Firstly, I don't like the way asylum gets lumped in with immigration, thus giving the impression that all immigrants are asylum seekers or vice versa. They are two separate issues. Secondly, when talking about the number of people coming into the country, we never hear any figures on the numbers who have left in the same time period. Are we in a net-gain or a net-loss situation? We are never told, yet the response to the state of affairs depends crucially on this very point. If we are gradually losing people overall, then there isn't a problem (or, at least, the problem is the reverse of what is being portrayed). Let's see some proper statistics about the net effect of immigration and emigration before we start getting paranoid.
David Hazel, Fareham, UK
As a work permit holder, I have first-hand experience of the UK immigration process. I agree that there are certain aspects that need refining, but I think it is a system that works. I find the Conservative policy very draconian. Why should the large majority of honest legal immigrants and workers have to pay such a heavy price for the actions of the few who break or abuse the law?
I read recently that legal migrants make up only 8% of the population, but generate 10% of Britain's GDP. Surely, political parties (and people) need to start looking at the facts and stop generalising and playing the race card.
DR, East Midlands, UK
As a second generation British Asian - I say well done Mr Howard. It is about time someone stood up for the silent majority. I know that the asylum system is manipulated by bent lawyers due to the naivety of judicial system. Look at the number of asylum seekers in the last 15 years who have changed their names and date of birth so that they can enter the UK.
Romesh, UK
It's about time something was done. Perhaps then we wouldn't have to keep building vast new towns to accommodate all these people. You only have to look at the white paper for the south east to see how vastly overcrowded we already are.
Bill, Great Dunmow
| More power to Howard's elbow! |
To those who make ridiculous references to the holocaust - these people are not desperately fleeing persecution, otherwise they would have stopped in the first safe country they came to, rather than crossing the whole of Europe to get to the country which is the softest touch. Labour is fully aware of this, but hide behind the race card when anyone criticises them over it. More power to Howard's elbow!
Dave, NottinghamHe is willing to throw away membership 1951 United Nations Convention on refugees which ensures those fleeing persecution will find a country that will help them. This in itself is an outrage - but to talk of quotas is nothing but playing the race card in my opinion. Under his party's proposed legislation his family may well not have been allowed into this country - which thinking about it, isn't such a bad thing!
Jock, Blackwood, Gwent
There's no reason why a measured and transparent system of control can't work. In Australia the points system has the backing of all the major parties. What we have in the UK is a shambolic lack of control handing votes to racist fringe parties - this sort of policy would prevent that.
James, London, UK
Britain has a long history of immigration which has helped to make our rich culture and society what it is today. I would be ashamed to live in a country whose government turned away a genuine asylum seeker because a political number of immigrants had been reached. He won't be getting my vote.
Helen Scott, Long Eaton
A comment heard often here in France is that the UK has become the dustbin of Europe. The UK is considered a soft touch, and those who would abuse it are very well informed on the benefits they can acquire.
If people are genuinely looking for asylum why be worried about an Australian system, this should help generate places for refugees whilst limiting economic opportunists who should only be allowed in if the government considers that they are a benefit to the nation. The UK needs to defend its capability to welcome those who are persecuted and show that rather than being a dumping ground that it is a bastion of liberty.
Ben, France
The Tories chose a brilliant day to launch their anti-immigration campaign, the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. In terms of semantics the Conservatives seem nothing but clueless... next.
Aris, UK
Well done Mr Howard. It is about time we have a leader who is willing to stand up and talk about a difficult subject. Other parties will hide their heads in the sand and play the race card. We need more people like this to rise up and stand up for what they believe in. I may become a Tory voter as they are saying the right things. Well done.
S Davies, Cardiff, UK
It is about time that someone spoke up for the majority of people in this country who are genuinely worried about the impact of immigration on the very fabric of or society. For too long, anyone who dared challenge the immigration system was shouted down as a racist, but it isn't about racism, it is about protecting the way of life of this country, and providing a safe future for our children. After all, it is our children that the future is all about. He has now got my vote.
Richard Dixon, Herts, UKFinally, one politician has courage to tackle the immigration and asylum issue. And typically he is accused of playing the race card. What is so bad about restricting the number of people applying asylum in the UK? Everybody knows that only a small fraction of the asylum seekers are in real need of help. The bogus applications and illegal immigrants make the life of true asylum seekers a misery. Howard is on the right track, let him show what he would do!
Jan, Bonn, Germany
Great plans, it's just a shame the Tories still don't have the attractive front bench to back it and make the plans appeal to the electorate.
Paul, Oxford
| I have yet to see any statistics to show that our economy is suffering from the current level of immigration |
With regard to asylum, the fact that Michael Howard announces the plan to limit refugees at a time when we are commemorating the end of the holocaust shows that he hasn't learnt any lessons from history. It is our duty to welcome people who are fleeing persecution. With regard to immigration in general, the UK does not take a disproportionate number of immigrants and I have yet to see any statistics to show that our economy is suffering from the current level of immigration.
Natalie, London, UKAs an immigrant to the UK, I think it was a fair process and it took into consideration my experience, ability to integrate, taxes paid and obeyed the law. It is wrong to drum up controls against immigration based on a few criminal elements. Dare I say, tighten up the borders and control human trafficking, the problem of asylum will sort itself out. Oh yes, it will also sort out terrorism, drugs, prostitution, benefits fraud etc etc etc.
MB, Vienna
The question one needs to ask Mr Howard, is what would have been the consequences on his own family should they have fallen foul of such a quota system? This is tawdry and cheap electioneering and Mr Howard should know better.
I McDonell, UK
I think Michael Howard is a politician not frightened to talk about and act upon something that concerns the vast majority, but which a minority try to smother as racism. Blair and Kennedy are very weak on this subject. Howard will get my vote without any doubt.
Les, Morpeth, England
It's about time we put a limit on asylum. If these people are genuine asylum seekers who fear for their lives in their home country then they should be happy just to be in a country that is safe. So why do we have so many people coming here? Is it because we are a soft touch and give them houses, money, etc? We are an island surrounded by safe countries so surely they are coming through these countries to get to us?
James Freeman, Higham Ferrers
The vast majority of immigration to the UK is people from the EU and places like the US and Australia. The numbers coming for asylum are dropping fast. When Michael Howard speaks of immigration curbs does he include people from the EU, Australia etc?
What would the price be of introducing quotas in political terms with our friends abroad and in terms of the costs of erecting even higher barriers around our shores? I have a house abroad and could work there if I chose - will Mr Howard's restrictions end up penalising me if other countries choose to follow suit? Much of the public is unaware of the true picture and an honest debate is needed.
Bob Richardson, Welwyn
I think Howard's plans are excellent; asylum needs to be cut and controlled in a systematic manner which is not happening under Blair. It shows that we are tough on immigration and not just a dumping ground for the rest of Europe.
Dave Phelps, Canterbury, GB
We do have to have a firm control on limit of refugees, whether they are skilled or unskilled. If not it will cause unrest in certain areas of the UK.
Bumble, Dartford, UK
I approve of Howard's stance. The other parties, however, will soon be implying he's a racist. Blair did this to Hague last time round - smearing the Tories is New Labour's main tactic. They don't have ideas of their own.
Rob, Yorkshire, England
It was only a matter of time before the Tories played the race card. They always do. Howard says it's not about race just numbers. So, if there is a sudden flood of white applicants from South Africa or Zimbabwe - are the Tories going to say "No, we've filled our quotas." I doubt it. This is a desperate party resorting to odious policies that will widen divisions in our society.
Frank, Bristol, UK
One-Minute World News 
News services
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
