News of another Labour failure on immigration...

I am one of those people that firmly believe that, if you are to have laws, then you have to have enforcement. After all, failure to do so tends to lead to a view that laws can be broken, and the inevitable undermining of public order. Immigration law being one of those emotional issues that it is, enforcement is all the more relevant. So, the news that the Home Office was failing to ensure that it was represented at 41,141 successful appeal hearings against rejected asylum applications, deportations and refusals of entry between 2006 and 2009 comes as a huge disappointment to anyone who believes in an honest, transparent immigration system.

In fairness, some of those appeals might very well have succeeded even if the UK Border Agency and its predecessor been represented, but it is a sign of a immigration system under immense stress. It also demonstrates that, if a system is discredited, more people will attempt to confront it or circumvent it.

There is an irony, in that this country was seen as a 'soft touch' for immigrants in the past, when it probably wasn't, whereas Labour in recent years talked tough on immigration and quietly dismantled the machinery that allowed it to be managed and controlled. Some of that machinery will need to be reassembled, with additional staff to handle appeals, the re-introduction of exit controls and to handle the backlog in the meantime. At a time of economic hardship and budget cuts, the idea that the Government may have to spend more money on this work whilst cutting other spending will be highly controversial.

And yet it must be done. Given the general dishonesty of the debate on immigration during the election campaign, and the deception over migration from Eastern and Central European countries in the European Union, in order to clear the air, the immigration system needs to be properly enforced.

That doesn't mean 'send them all home', as the BNP would like. It means that all applicants should be treated with respect, without undue delay and after consideration of the facts. It means that genuine asylum seekers should be allowed to work, rather than be forced to live off vouchers provided by the State. It means that overstayers are pursued whilst the system doesn't discriminate on the basis of race.

Think of it as an investment. A properly functioning immigration system will reduce the number of appeals, reducing in turn the cost of maintaining that system. It will allow those who can contribute to the life of our nation to gain access, it will enhance our reputation in the world (and never underestimate how that helps in our international relations) and allow a proper debate on what kind of immigration we want or can successfully manage, free of casual racism and uninformed cynicism.

If the Coalition can create a genuinely compassionate immigration policy, which allows genuine asylum seekers to gain admission, avoids the need for long-term detention and provides clear criteria for likely refusal, it will rise in my estimation. I expect the Liberal Democrat elements to lead the way in such a quest...