What are the changes in Shabana Mahmood’s asylum crackdown – and how serious is Labour backlash?
“If we fail to deal with this crisis, we will lead more people down a path that starts with anger and ends with hatred,” Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said after the overhaul of asylum policy in the UK was announced.
After days of speculation, a sweeping reform of the system, including measures that would make the country’s asylum rules among the strictest in Europe, was presented to MPs on Monday.
Ms Mahmood told the House of Commons it was an “inconvenient truth” that the UK’s generous asylum offer was drawing people to its shores and that for British taxpayers the system “feels out of control and unfair”.
But Ms Mahmood faces a serious backlash from Labor MPs over the plans – although enough Tory MPs have offered to support the bill to quell a backbench rebellion by voting.
What did Shabana Mahmood announce?
On a busy day in the House of Commons on Monday, Ms Mahmood unveiled her reforms to the asylum system to make it easier to deport people who have no right to be in the country and make the UK a less attractive destination for asylum seekers.
The revamp is said to be inspired by Denmark’s approach to refugees, with the government transforming its system following an influx of people in the 2010s. The Scandinavian country has one of the toughest asylum and immigration systems in Europe.
Probably the biggest change was that refugee status was made provisional and regularly reviewed every 30 months.
Under current UK law, people who are granted status hold it for five years and can then apply to stay indefinitely and enter the pathway to citizenship.
Ms Mahmood said that under her reforms, refugees would be deported as soon as their home countries were deemed safe. Meanwhile, the waiting period for applying for permanent settlement will quadruple to 20 years.
This is similar to Denmark, where asylum seekers receive a one- or two-year temporary residence permit that is subject to regular review and can be canceled once their home country is deemed safe.
The home secretary also said there would be no automatic right to family reunification for refugees who want to bring relatives to the UK.
Families with children may also be subject to mandatory repatriation as part of measures to remove those who cannot seek asylum, and the government is launching a consultation on how this should be done.
The government’s legal duty to provide support to asylum seekers will also be revoked, meaning housing and weekly allowances will no longer be guaranteed. Those who have the right to work and can support themselves may also be denied benefits.
Those who come and claim to be children will face stricter checks on their age through methods such as facial age assessment technology.
Unsuccessful asylum seekers will be limited to making a single appeal against their deportation, rather than having the opportunity to file multiple appeals on different grounds.
Meanwhile, new, legal routes will be introduced to the UK as a way to reduce dangerous journeys by small boats across the English Channel; however, the number of arrivals will be limited based on capacity and the ability of communities to accept refugees.
Will families and children be deported?
The Home Office’s document on the asylum system overhaul stated that asylum seekers with children, some of whom were allegedly able to “exploit the fact that they have children”, would no longer be able to “take root to prevent removal”.
This policy could subject families with children to forced repatriation, and the government may hold consultations on how this should be done.
The document noted existing legislation that allows families with children who are rejected for asylum to continue receiving support until their youngest child turns 18, despite the family’s lack of cooperation in the return process.
“This undermines the integrity of the system by creating a perverse incentive to remain in the UK without status,” the document said.
Which countries are facing a Trump-style travel ban?
Showing her determination to make her plan work, Ms Mahmood will also ban countries from accessing UK visas unless they take back illegal immigrants, under a system similar to that used by Donald Trump’s administration.
Before the plan was published, it was reported that Angola, Namibia and the Democratic Republic of Congo would face visa sanctions if they did not cooperate more in removing illegal immigrants, and their tourists, VIPs and businessmen would be prevented from traveling to the UK.
“We expect all countries to take back citizens who have no right to be in the UK,” the Home Office document on the asylum system overhaul said.
“We will take action against countries that fail to cooperate with the return of their nationals, including imposing visa penalties as set out in section 72 of the Citizenship and Borders Act 2022. This may include suspending the issuance of entry to a country’s citizens until it returns its citizens who are illegally in the UK.”
Moving to Syria and other countries continues
Under the plan to make refugee status temporary, the UK will offer asylum to people who would be in danger if they return to their country of origin, the Home Office document on the asylum system overhaul said.
However, it was stated that when there is a regime change, there should also be a change in approach and it should be possible for the person to return to the country.
It was stated that people voluntarily returned to Syria after the fall of the Assad regime, and continued: “We are now exploring the resumption of forced repatriations to countries where we have not routinely carried out such removals in recent years, including Syria.”
Overseas ‘return centres’ plan being investigated
Earlier this year, Interior Ministry officials participated in discussions on creating “return centers” abroad to house asylum seekers whose requests were rejected after all objections had been exhausted.
There is a paragraph in Monday’s publication about the idea that hints at the Labor government’s plan to explore the issue, and discussions are said to be taking place with a number of countries.
It says: “We will continue to explore the use of ‘return centres’, which are safe third countries to which non-asylum seekers can be sent rather than to their countries of origin.”
It is understood the idea would involve payments to host countries for each person removed from the UK.
What did politicians say to the proposal?
Ms Mahmood’s proposed changes were met with strong public criticism from many Labor MPs and lords following a backlash from within the party.
Former Labor leader Richard Burgon said the policy was “just scraping the bottom of the barrel” and a “desperate attempt to triangulate with Reformation”.
Ian Lavery stated that the Conservative Party and Reform support the policies and said, “Isn’t it time to question whether we are actually in the right place?”
Stella Creasy said the plans would leave refugees in a “permanent sense of uncertainty” and Nadia Whittome called it “shameful that the Labor government is stripping away the rights and protections of people who have suffered unimaginable trauma”.
On Tuesday morning, Labor Party member Lord Dubs, who arrived in Britain as one of 600 Jewish children rescued from the Nazis, accused Ms Mahmood of “using children as weapons”.
“If there are children who live alone and have families in this country, then I think the right thing to do is to reunite the family and bring the children here.”
However, the plans also received support from MPs from other political parties.
Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch said: “Some of the measures he has announced today are undoubtedly positive steps; small steps, but positive nonetheless.”
Reform MP Danny Kruger, who left the Conservative Party earlier this year, said: “I understand the home secretary’s rhetoric today; we have a plan to restore justice, he has announced a plan to restore order and control.”
What did immigrant charities say about the proposals?
After days of media coverage, charities have had time to consider their responses to the proposals announced on Monday.
Steve Valdez-Symonds, director of refugee and migrant rights at Amnesty International UK, said: “Continuously demonizing and scapegoating refugees in a desperate and cruel attempt to deter people seeking asylum in the UK is collapsing the asylum system while causing social division – which is unhelpful.
“Unfortunately, this home secretary appears determined to continue in the same vein as the previous government, possibly subjecting people now granted asylum to decades of insecurity that will undermine prospects for recovery and integration.”
Fizza Kureshi, chief executive of the Immigrant Rights Network, said: “The home secretary is taking unprecedented and appalling steps to blame people for daring to come to the UK for asylum. Instead of supporting their right to seek refugee protection, he is making them a ‘problem’ that needs to be solved with tougher anti-refugee measures.”
Lara Parizotto, chief executive of the Immigrant Democracy Project, said: “Ms Mahmood is entrenching a dangerous narrative between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ refugees, backtracking to change immigration rules to make it effectively illegal to seek asylum, which is not currently the case, and washing her hands of responsibility by stating that it is the responsibility of local residents to host refugees.”
