Labour civil war looms as Mahmood dusts off Blair-era deportation laws | UK | News

Home Affairs Minister Shabana Mahmood will reportedly accelerate the deportation of foreign criminals and those whose asylum claims have been rejected, depriving them of the ability to use human rights legislation to delay their deportation until after they have left the country.

Drawing on powers first introduced under Sir Tony Blair during the migration crisis in the early 2000s, the Express understands Mahmood intends to certify asylum claims as “unsubstantiated” and remove people immediately; this restricts any application to a process conducted from home rather than British territory. More importantly, those deported under the program have no right to appeal their deportation before it takes place.

A record 104,400 people whose asylum claims were rejected are now appealing deportation – almost twice as many as a year ago – with many being housed in hotels and other taxpayer-funded accommodation while their files are reviewed through the system, reports say.

The move comes as Ms Mahmood seeks to contain the threat of rebellion by dozens of Labor MPs who oppose a wider crackdown on immigration; This package will also force legal immigrants and refugees to wait longer before they are eligible for permanent residence in the UK.

Twenty-five countries are said to be considered safe enough by authorities to allow immediate deportation without prior objection. The list spans many continents and includes India, Brazil, Nigeria, Kenya, Ghana, Albania and Ukraine; These countries included more than 14,000 failed asylum seekers and foreign criminals last year; among them were 4,000 Indian citizens, 2,700 Nigerians and 1,750 Albanians.

Alex Norris, the border security and asylum minister, told The Telegraph: “A robust and fair approach to immigration does not mean hard-working taxpayers are providing assistance to individuals whose human rights claims are being denied, many of whom are despicable criminals.

“That’s why we’re increasing the use of these powers to deport more foreign-born criminals to their home countries, where their appeals can be heard. We will not hesitate to remove the incentives that draw people to the UK illegally, and we will increase removals to restore order and control the border.”

Ministers have described both the deportation crackdown and wider immigration reforms as a “robust but fair” way to solve the migration crisis and save the UK billions of pounds.

How does the system work?

Once a claim is certified as “unfounded” under section 94B of the Citizenship, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 – Blair-era legislation being dusted off for this purpose, according to the Telegraph – the individual’s right to taxpayer-funded housing and support is immediately revoked. They have no right to appeal their deportation and are offered a voluntary departure package that includes flights and travel documents. Rejection triggers forced removal.

The legislation is claimed to contain a critical safeguard: deportation can only be carried out if there is “no real risk of serious, irreversible harm” upon return to the person’s home country. All 25 countries identified have been approved on this basis.

Operation on ‘Carousel’

A Home Office insider described the initiative as one of the most significant recent tightenings of deportation policy, suggesting it would eliminate the “carousel” of repeated applications that has allowed thousands of people to remain in the country indefinitely, the Telegraph reported. The source acknowledged a security flaw in the system: the risk of people released on bail before flights escaping before being boarded.

The figures underline how far standards have fallen. The number of those suspended without appeal rose 50 percent last year to 8,476; but this represents only 10.6 percent of the 80,000 people whose asylum claims were rejected; It’s a fraction of the 22 per cent achieved in the early 2000s, when up to 20,000 people a year were deported without objection under Blair. Blair had set a clear target of monthly removals to leave new false asylum claims behind by the end of 2005.

workers revolt

The Express reported how this policy offended a significant number of Labor supporters, with dozens of MPs openly opposing Ms Mahmood’s pressure. Broader reforms that would require legal immigrants and refugees to wait longer to qualify for permanent residence have further fueled discontent.

Angela Rayner, who is backed by the Labor left as a potential leadership candidate, last week attacked the plans as “un-British” and said they had “pulled the rug” out from under hard-working families. Ministers pushed back, describing the overall approach as “firm but fair”.

Imran Hussain, Director of External Affairs at the Refugee Council, said: “The government’s own figures show that up to two in three asylum applications are successful. This means that many people initially rejected are subsequently recognized as refugees by the courts.

“Forcing people to leave the UK before they have a chance to challenge flawed decisions risks sending men, women and children back into situations where they face real dangers.

“If the government wants to restore confidence in the asylum system, the priority must be to improve the quality of initial decision-making. Getting decisions right first time will reduce the number of costly appeals, clear the backlog more quickly and reduce the need for expensive and inappropriate asylum accommodation.”