Britain Unveils Major Overhaul of Asylum Rules, Toughens Policies

Britain has announced a comprehensive reform of its asylum seeker policies, marking the most significant change in years. The ruling Labour government plans to unveil these new immigration rules on March 4, 2024, in response to escalating anti-immigrant sentiment and challenges from rising right-wing parties. This initiative is partially inspired by Denmark’s stringent approach to asylum, which has been characterized by some of the toughest rules in Europe.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is set to reveal the policy changes, which include an end to permanent protection for refugees and reductions in living allowances. These measures aim to deter illegal migration, particularly from small boats crossing the English Channel from France. Mahmood emphasized the need to “reduce the numbers coming here illegally” and to “restore order and control” in a recent video posted on X.

Under the new framework, individuals arriving illegally will face a waiting period of 20 years before being eligible to apply for permanent settlement. In addition, refugee status will become temporary, requiring reviews every 30 months, and individuals from countries deemed safe may be required to return. Those who arrive legally will now face a ten-year pathway to permanent residency, which is double the current timeline.

Mahmood warned that failing to address the rising number of illegal migrants could lead to a “more divided” society. In an interview with the Sunday Times, she expressed concern that illegal migration is “tearing our country apart.” The Labour party has faced pressure from various political factions regarding its immigration stance. Traditionally, the left advocates for a more humanitarian approach, while the right pushes for stricter immigration controls.

The political landscape has shifted considerably with the emergence of the populist Reform UK party, led by Nigel Farage. This party has drawn attention to the Labour government’s challenges in managing illegal immigration, amid rising public discontent and far-right demonstrations concerning housing and public funding for refugees.

The previous Conservative government attempted to tackle immigration issues through a controversial deal to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, a move that saw only four individuals deported, all of whom volunteered. Mahmood highlighted the £700 million ($920 million) spent on this initiative, which has faced significant criticism.

The new policy draws heavily from Denmark’s model, where refugee status is temporary, support is conditional, and successful integration is expected. The Home Office stated that the UK will now match or exceed these standards in certain areas. Under the current UK system, which originated from a prior Labour government in 2005, refugees can apply for indefinite leave to remain after five years. The new 20-year route to settlement would make the UK’s process the longest in Europe, following Denmark’s eight-year timeline.

Denmark’s immigration policies have been known for their strictness for over a decade. The Danish approach has reportedly reduced asylum claims to a 40-year low and resulted in the removal of 95% of rejected applicants. However, these reforms have faced backlash from rights organizations, which argue that they create a hostile environment for migrants and undermine protections for vulnerable individuals.

Earlier this year, a UK delegation of senior Home Office officials traveled to Copenhagen to observe Denmark’s asylum approach, which includes granting only temporary residence permits for typically two years, requiring reapplication upon expiration. Mahmood reiterated that asylum claims in the UK have increased despite a decline across many other European nations, citing that over 400,000 people have sought asylum in Britain in the last four years, with over 100,000 currently supported at taxpayer expense.

The Refugee Council criticized the proposed reforms, stating that “people who have been persecuted, tortured or seen family members killed in brutal wars are not ‘asylum shopping.’” They argued that refugees do not compare asylum systems while fleeing for their lives, emphasizing that many come to the UK because of family ties, language skills, or established connections that aid in their resettlement.

As the Labour government prepares to implement these changes, the political implications and societal reactions remain to be seen, with the potential for significant impact on the future of asylum policy in Britain.