Countries are no longer divided by any “firm” borders, as the 91m annual visitor-movements through the UK testify.  International trade has dissolved national frontiers, quite literally.  It will be impossible to “hold the line” at the Eastern frontier of the European Union, at Poland, Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania – all these boundaries will be porous, as are those of the UK.  Indeed, it is that fact which has given rise to the ID-Card Movement, reflecting the belief that if the State cannot be defied satisfactorily in terms of territory, it must be defined in terms of Club Membership, with everyone in the UK Club carrying a Membership Card. 

The ID-Card Movement has considerable force, although it is an out-of-date answer to problems that have already moved on.  The ID-Card “model”, namely that of the Enumerated Society, is a chimera, a puff of smoke on the horizon, lacking realism or substance.  That is why the Blunkettian Dream is so dangerous: he is like a mediaeval police chief enthusiastic about a new set of out-of-date thumb-screws… 

In future, all “asylum” decisions, regardless of the persecuting country, should be made by the United Nations.  It is nonsense that every potential host country should hold its own adjudication hearings.  No special “islands” are necessary, for applicants should be allowed to live in other countries pending the asylum adjudication: the UN, for UK-resident refugees, should adjudicate here in the UK. 

All countries should be expected, under a yet-to-be-negotiated international treaty, to accept for permanent settlement a given annual quota as set out in that agreement.  That quota should be defined as a percentage of its resident population – in practice, the annual reception rate would be less than 1%, even in the European Union.  Every effort should be made to negotiate a common percentage quota, as a minimum: countries seeking immigrants would of course be free to set higher quotas, but each state would be bound to its Treaty minimum, and make reception arrangements accordingly.  This would counter common popular perceptions that “all immigrants are coming to the UK, and nowhere else”… 

“Refugees” (those fleeing persecution) would fall to be allocated by the United Nations according to the availability of current Treaty quota places, and with the agreement of the host country.  This would accommodate both refugees and economic migrants within the same statistical frame: it would be for each host country to determine its own immigration policy, subject to making the Treaty quota places available. 

In the meantime, we must make the ramshackle UK passport-based control system work much better. In my work with asylum-seekers in Swansea, I have been appalled at the unsatisfactory administrative systems of the Home Office, both as designed and as operated.  More administrative resources are certainly needed, and higher-calibre administrators assigned to the job.