The government has unveiled plans for legislation to crack down on the bogus appeals culture within the asylum system.

David Blunkett has won parliamentary time for legislation to create a single tier asylum appeal process to prevent illegal immigrants making "groundless appeals" and fraudulent claims.

Ministers say that too many asylum seekers appeal against their decision simply as a means to extend their stay in the UK. They also believe that too much of taxpayers' money is being spent on the asylum system.

"The government believes that dealing with abuse of the system is vital to build public confidence in the system and encourage and welcome legal migrants where this is in the interests of the UK," the Queen told MPs and peers in her annual address to parliament.

Tough curbs on the cost of the legal aid budget will be introduced, with immigration lawyers likely to be forced to justify expenditure.

The legal aid bill on asylum has soared from £83 million to £174 million in the last two years.

Blunkett said the latest announcement was a continuation of previous asylum policy.

"The Immigration and Asylum Bill tackles the remaining area requiring reform, building on the significant progress already made in reforming the system and strengthening our borders," he claimed.

"The Bill will require individuals seeking our protection to be honest with us in making their applications; cracks down on the exploitative criminal gangs and organised traffickers; and provides for speedy and decisive decisions on asylum appeals and removal decisions."

But charities working in the immigration service say that scaling back the appeals process could put the lives of asylum seekers at risk.

Amnesty International claims that 14,000 wrong decisions were overturned on appeal last year alone.

The legislation will also serve notice on the small but significant number of disreputable legal advisers who manipulate the system.

Under the terms of the bill the immigration services commissioner will be given a range of new powers to curb the actions of those making money by defrauding the system.

These will include new powers to raid the premises of unqualified asylum appeals advisers.

The Home Office will also introduce a new law covering asylum seekers who are "undocumented without reasonable explanation".

It is hoped the move will prevent would-be asylum seekers destroying their paperwork when they arrive at UK ports and airports.

Those who destroy their travel documents could face a sentence of up to two-years if found guilty.

The government also appears set provoke the wrath of asylum charities by announcing the removal of financial support for immigrant families who are able but unwilling to return to their country of origin.

The legislation will also designate some countries as safe to enable asylum seekers who lodge claims to be returned speedily.

Amnesty International refugee's affairs director, Jan Shaw, has warned that the legislation could have dire consequences for people fleeing terror and oppression.

"With the third major piece of asylum legislation in six years the government's latest proposed changes risk further eroding safeguards for some of the world's most vulnerable people," she said.

"Cutting appeals against bad initial decisions raises the spectre of scared people being sent back to torture and persecution in places like Iran, Afghanistan and other repressive or dangerous countries.

"If the government also carries out legal aid cuts in asylum cases, asylum-seekers could be exposed to the twin perils of being cut off from early advice and then cut off from the appeal courts if their initial claim is refused.

"Rather than reducing the safety net of an asylum appeals system, the government should be concentrating on raising the standard of initial decisions which even its own figures show are faulty in at least one in five occasions."

The Law Society described the proposals as "unacceptable".

"A second tier appeal is essential in view of the poor quality of Home Office decision-making at the initial stage, which means that in many cases adjudicators are, in effect, the first decision-making body," said chief executive Janet Paraskeva.