GOVERNMENT policy designed to deter asylum seekers was blasted as "barbaric" today as new research from Swansea University suggested it has no impact anyway.

Harsh policies designed to make Britain a less welcoming place have no demonstrable influence on asylum seekers, according to a new report.

Independent research published by the Refugee Council (RC) revealed that refugees had little choice over which country they claimed asylum in.

Donna Covey, RC chief executive, said: "This research shows that the main reason asylum seekers come here is to escape conflict, and no amount of barbaric policy-making will influence whether they come here or not."

Professor Heaven Crawley of Swansea University wrote the report Chance or Choice: Understanding why asylum seekers come to the UK.

It is based on interviews with asylum seekers and refugees which appear to debunk a number of widespread myths.

Prominent among them is the idea that asylum seekers are attracted to the UK because of generous state hand-outs.

The report claims three quarters of asylum seekers had no knowledge of welfare or benefits and support before coming to the UK.

In fact, most had no expectation that they would be given financial support once they arrived here.

More than two thirds who do come here did not choose the UK as a destination and few know what to expect before they arrive here.

A total of 90 per cent were working in their country of origin and few were aware they would not be allowed to work when they arrived in the UK.

The primary objective for all those interviewed was reaching a place of safety.

The report makes it clear that most who fled their country did so very quickly and because their lives were in danger.

Most were helped to leave by an external party or agent, who made the key decisions about their destination and helped facilitate their journey to safety.

The single biggest area of British life that those interviewed were familiar with was football.

"So much of the debate around asylum centres on the UK being a destination of choice for refugees and the notion that people choose to come here because they will have an easier time of it," said Ms Covey.

"The reality is that asylum seekers are forced to flee for their lives. This report shows that in desperate circumstances most exercise very little choice about how or where they go to escape persecution."

She added: "The message is clear – treating asylum seekers badly after they arrive in the UK serves no purpose other than to perpetuate suffering and misery.

"This report sheds some much-needed light on an area of the asylum debate which is grossly distorted and misrepresented.

"We urge everyone – politicians, newspaper editors, the public – to heed the findings of this report and address the reasons why asylum seekers come to the UK in a more humane and informed way."

Prof Crawley said: "These findings strongly suggest that creating a tougher asylum system and harsher policies will not deter people fleeing persecution and violence in their own countries from coming to the UK.

"Asylum policy making should be based on solid evidence such as that provided in this report rather than on unfounded assumptions and misperceptions about the reasons why people come here.

"This is the only way to ensure that the system is as accessible and humane as possible for people seeking protection."