Labour to deport more families under Mahmood’s new asylum crackdown despite growing backlash – latest

The Danish government drastically changed its immigration system in response to the massive influx of people in the 2010s. As a result, asylum seekers can only obtain temporary residence permits for one to two years.

– Residency is subject to regular review and can be canceled once the refugee’s home country is deemed safe.

– Refugees usually qualify for permanent status after eight years, and to receive this status they must speak Danish fluently and have been employed for several years. There are also additional requirements, including “active citizenship.”

– People who are rejected for asylum must live in “return centres”, a basic standard of accommodation designed to encourage voluntary return home.

– Family reunification is subject to strict tests, including that both the sponsor and the partner must be over 24 years of age to prevent forced marriages.

– A controversial policy known as the “jewelry law” allows Danish authorities to seize assets from asylum seekers, including jewellery, to help cover the costs of staying in Denmark. Assets of “special personal importance” should not be acquired.

– Authorities can also demolish and sell social housing in areas where more than 50 percent of residents are from “non-western” backgrounds, under the so-called “ghetto law” designed to prevent the formation of “parallel societies”.

– The effect of Denmark’s policies was to reduce the number of asylum applications to the lowest number in 40 years and to remove 95 percent of rejected asylum seekers. But it has been criticized as racist by some opponents, and some elements of it have previously been found to have violated human rights law.

Here we look at what’s in the policy document outlining the government’s plans and what is said to have inspired it in the Danish system.

Read the full article here:

There is a pleasant irony that Sir David Maxwell Fyfe, one of the principal midwives of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), was a fiercely conservative and later one of the most reactionary post-war home ministers, opposing the Wolfenden Inquiry’s proposal to decriminalize gay sex between consenting adults.

He nevertheless played a central role in the newly formed Council of Europe, serving as rapporteur of the committee that drafted the ECHR, which came into force in 1953. The apparent contradiction in Fyfe’s positions is less striking than it seems.

The Convention, although not codified and not yet developed, was intended as a restatement of the fundamental freedoms that the British believed they already possessed. Few on the left or right would dispute the actual text of the Convention.

For many continental states freed from tyranny and occupation, these articles became a template for modern declarations of rights. But the UK has resisted unification on a bipartisan basis for decades. The argument was simple: We already had these rights, corporatization would be an unnecessary, continental import.

Read former home secretary Jack Straw’s full analysis here:

Sir Keir Starmer and the home secretary are facing a furious backlash over plans to strengthen Britain’s asylum system. Labor MPs describe the new rules as “disgusting” and “cruel in implementation”.

Shabana Mahmood on Monday announced a series of tough measures aimed at discouraging asylum seekers and making it easier to deport those who do not have the right to remain in the country.

The Prime Minister said the current system was not designed to cope with a “more unstable and insecure” world; But Ms Mahmood’s announcement has gone much further than many in Labor feared and is already facing resistance from hardliners.

Read the full article here:

Shabana Mahmood dismissed comparisons between the policies she outlined today and Reformation England’s stance on immigration, saying they were like “night and day”.

He told Sky News: “I don’t accept that these are in any way similar. That’s because I think it’s right for us to act now.

“Refugee status unlocks automatic settlement almost immediately. It’s right that we move away from that process. It’s right that we tell people: if you come to this country illegally, for example on a small boat, it will be a difficult and long road to settlement in this country and it will be reviewed regularly because we want to privilege people who come through a safe and legal route.”

“This is the opposite of the ‘oh, you know, drawbridge approach’ that the Reform Party and others have taken.

“They are not interested in our international obligations to provide shelter to those who need it most. I want to fulfill them.”

Almost half of Labor voters want Sir Keir Starmer to be kicked out of Downing Street by the next election, a new poll has shown.

YouGov’s poll of 2,100 people found that 23 per cent of Labor voters think the prime minister should resign now and allow the party to choose a new leader, while 22 per cent think he should stand down at some point before the next election.

Just a third, 34 per cent, think he should continue to lead Labor in the race.

The results come after a difficult week for No 10, who insisted the prime minister would oppose plans to sack him, with anonymous briefings suggesting health secretary Wes Streeting planned to do so.

In an interview with Daily MirrorStarmer has vowed to lead Labor at the next election and attacked speculation about his future.

The home secretary said he could “calm down” as he was “not interested in anything he had to say” when asked about his response to Nigel Farage’s asylum policy.

The Reform UK leader said he was “undecided” on whether to support Shabana Mahmood’s plans, but said it looked as if he was “auditioning” for a place in his party.

Speaking to Sky News, Ms Mahmood said: “I won’t let him live in my head forever.

“Just because he says something doesn’t mean I have to talk back to him just because he’s being naughty.

“The Reform Party currently has a policy of eliminating indefinite leave to remain for long-term residents of our country. This is immoral. It is deeply shameful and a wrong policy.”

Asked about her support for far-right activist Tommy Robinson’s reforms, she replied: “He’s a vile racist. He doesn’t believe I’m British and he hates Muslims. I’m also a very proud British and British Muslim.”

“To be honest, I find it incredibly offensive that people are quoting me from a man who doesn’t even think I belong in my own country.

“Honestly, he can shit too.”

Reform England leader Nigel Farage said he was “undecided” on whether to support Shabana Mahmood’s asylum plans.

He told reporters: “I welcome the home secretary’s language. He appears to be auditioning for Reform. But I have very serious doubts about whether any of this will make a difference.”

He added that he supports the ideas that “Things like visa bans and using our muscles are absolutely right.”

On whether his party would support the law, he said: “This is a big decision.”

“I want it because Mahmood says the right things, on the other hand, when the ECHR is there and the big elephant is in the room, I ask myself ‘what’s the point?’ I’m starting to say. Therefore, I am undecided at this stage,” he said.

In fact, Mahmood is talking about sanctions against some countries, such as Angola, Namibia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, that are reluctant to accept their returning citizens. And there is every reason to think Mahmood will do what he has promised to do as he continues his programme, “by whatever means necessary”.

Read Sean O’Grady’s full analysis here:

The latest Home Office figures show 111,084 people have applied for asylum in England by June 2025.

This is the highest figure seen in a 12-month period since current records began in 2001.

A contributing factor has been the continued flow of small boats across the Channel, with almost 40,000 people crossing so far in 2025.