Search

The Commonwealth has long been regarded as the global champion for small states. With its remarkable convening power, it represents nearly one third of the world's population and a quarter [...]

Abstract In the summer of 2015, UK public attitudes towards refugees shifted significantly in the face of a substantial and sustained increase in the number of people entering Europe from [...]

Abstract How welcoming Great Britain was to refugees in the 1930s and 1940s depended on many factors, including the age, gender, class and profession of an individual. Members of some [...]

Abstract The Kindertransport has long been interpreted as a heroic response to the refugee crisis of the 1930s and has recently re-entered the British national conversation as a model to [...]

This paper uses an OLG-CGE model for the UK to illustrate the long-term effect of migration on the economy. We use the current Conservative Party migration target to reduce net [...]

This article explores both the official history of immigration detention in the United Kingdom as well as a lesser-known narrative of challenges to the practice. After outlining the legislative development of the U.K. detention estate, the study uses original research to demonstrate that Parliament, the courts, and civil society have historically been the sites of disagreement with both the supposedly benign nature of immigration detention as well as its promulgation as an ancillary tool to immigration control. The article also employs explanatory and normative theories to make sense of the continuing expansion of immigration detention across liberal states despite the moral outcry. The primary finding is that the U.K. government's attempts to normalize immigration detention have not been wholly successful. Keywords: Immigration Detention, Immigration Policy, United Kingdom, British Politics, United Kingdom History, Immigration Politics, Normative Theory, Punishment. Este articulo explora la historia oficial de la detencion de inmigrantes en el Reino Unido asi como la menos conocida narrativa de los retos que se han visto en la practica. Luego una breve exposicion del desarrollo legislativo de las detenciones en el Reino Unido, este articulo muestra una investigacion original para demostrar que el Parlamento, las cortes y la sociedad civil historicamente han sido lugares de desacuerdo con la supuesta naturaleza benigna de la detencion de inmigrantes asi como con su promulgacion como una herramienta auxiliar para el control de la inmigracion. El articulo tambien hace uso de teorias explicativas y normativas para comprender la continua expansion de la detencion de inmigrantes en los estados liberales, a pesar de la indignacion moral. El resultado principal es que los intentos del gobierno del Reino Unido para normalizar la detencion de inmigrantes no ha sido del todo exitosa., The long arm of state power is expanding immigration detention across the world. Governments are opting to detain migrants for longer periods of time, ostensibly to deter future arrivals and [...]

Introduction ONE EFFECT OF THE HISTORICAL PRECEDENCE OF BRITAIN'S EARLY DEVELOPMENT AS a capitalist state-society is the deep imprint on social relations produced by social class distinctions. In this context, [...]

The British welfare state is over 60 years old. Those who were born, grew up and who are now growing old within its ambit are a distinctive generation. They have enjoyed healthier childhoods with better education than previous populations living in Britain. That they have done well under the welfare state is accepted, but some critics have argued that these advantages are at the expense of younger cohorts. The very success of this 'welfare generation' is perceived as undermining the future viability of the welfare state, and some argue that the current levels of income and wealth enjoyed by older cohorts can only be sustained by cutbacks in entitlements for younger cohorts. This will lead to a growing 'generational fracture' over welfare policy. This paper challenges this position, arguing that both younger and older groups find themselves working out their circumstances in conditions determined more by the contingencies of the market than by social policy. KEY WORDS--welfare state, generational conflict, consumer, contingency. doi: 10.1017/S0144686X10000425

This article examines 14 judgments over a ten-year period of challenge to the removal of welfare support from 'late claimers' for asylum. The case history spans a period of transition in Britain from the general principles of the Common Law to the implementation of the Human Rights Act (HRA) (Home Office, 1998), but indeterminacy is to the fore in such a developing area of law, allowing considerable scope for judicial interpretation. The focus of this article is therefore the cumulative dynamic of the judgments, their strategic delivery and their policy impact. The analysis demonstrates the force of general principles in yielding a solution, while also providing evidence of judgment as political dialogue over competing visions of society. doi: 10.1017/S004727940999002X