HC Deb 03 May 2000 vol 349 cc155-6W
Mr. Cox

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for political asylum in the UK in 1999 were(a) approved and (b) refused. [119280]

Mrs. Roche

The information requested is given in the table. The latest information on asylum is available on the Home Office internet site at http://www.homeoffice. gov.uk/rds/index.htm. This information is updated on a monthly basis.

Applications received for asylum in the United Kingdom, excluding dependants, by location of application, and decisions, 19991 United Kingdom
Annual total
Applications received:
Total applications 71,160
Applied at port 29,455
Applied in country2 41,700
Decisions:3,4
Total decisions 532.330
Cases considered under normal procedures:
Recognised as a refugee and granted asylum 57,075 6(36%)
Not recognised as a refugee but granted exceptional leave 52,110 6(11%)
Refusals:
Total refused 510,685 6(54%)
Refused asylum and exceptional leave after full consideration 57,735 6(39%)
Refused on safe third country grounds 1.830 6(9%)
Refused on non-compliance grounds7 51.120 6(6%)
Backlog clearance exercise:
Granted exceptional leave under backlog criteria8,9 11.230 6(90%)
Refused on non-compliance grounds under backlog criteria8,10 1,230 6(10%)
Applications withdrawn: 730
1 Figures (other than percentages) rounded to the nearest five.
2 This excludes some cases lodged at Local Enforcement Offices and some postal applications.

3 Decisions do not necessarily relate to applications made in the same period.

4 Information is of initial determination decisions, excluding the outcome of appeals or other subsequent decisions.

5 Provisional figures.

6 Percentages for cases considered under normal procedures and those within the backlog clearance exercise, are calculated separately.

7 Paragraph 340 (paragraph 180F prior to I October 1994) of the Immigration Rules, for failure to provide evidence to support the asylum claim within a reasonable period, including failure to respond to invitation to interview to establish identity.

8 Cases decided under pragmatic measures aimed at reducing the pre 1996 asylum application backlog.

9 Includes a small number of cases where asylum has been granted.

10 Includes a small number of cases where the application has been refused on substantive grounds.

Notes:

1. Decision figures for January to March 1999 are low due to significant interruption to the casework operation during the transition of IND staff to Integrated Caseworking. This interruption also effects a small proportion of in-country applications in January 1999 which have been estimated.

2. Port figures for January 1999 are estimated and subject to revision.

Forward to