Mahmood sets out plans for tougher asylum system in face of Labour resistance

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood claimed the UK was targeted by people “asylum shopping” around Europe as she faced the prospect of a backbench revolt to plans to toughen up the system.

She announced sweeping changes designed to reduce the UK’s attractiveness to asylum seekers and bolster the process for removing people with no right to be in the country.

The plans, set out in a Government statement, have already faced resistance from Labour MPs.

But Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said the asylum system was not designed to cope with a “more volatile and insecure” world or a situation where asylum seekers travel through “multiple safe countries before seeking to cross the English Channel by boat”.

He said: “If we want to see fewer channel crossings, less exploitation and a fairer system with safe and legal routes, we need an approach with a stronger deterrent effect and rules that are robustly enforced.”

The Home Secretary said the UK was viewed by asylum seekers as a more attractive destination than other European nations.

She said: “While some are genuine refugees, others are economic migrants, seeking to take advantage of the asylum system. Even amongst those who are genuine refugees, economic incentives are at play.

“Instead of stopping at the first safe country even genuine refugees are searching for the most attractive place to seek refuge, many now ‘asylum shop’ their way across the continent, in search of the most attractive place to seek refuge.”

The plans have already sparked opposition from backbench MPs.

Kent MP and former immigration lawyer Tony Vaughan said ministers’ rhetoric “encourages the same culture of divisiveness that sees racism and abuse growing in our communities”.

Mr Vaughan warned plans to review refugees’ status every few years would divert “huge amounts of resource away from making our asylum system work”.

And referencing Sir Keir’s speech at the Labour Party conference, he said: “The Prime Minister said in September that we are at a fork in the road.

“These asylum proposals suggest we have taken the wrong turning.”

Other backbenchers expressed support for Mr Vaughan’s comments, with one telling the PA news agency the Government’s policy was “incoherent” and saw communities “pitted against each other”.

Another told PA that “performative cruelty” would undermine efforts to both solve problems in the immigration system and improve Labour’s polling position, adding that Monday’s announcement was unlikely to help MPs show loyalty at a difficult time for the Government.

And while others were more receptive to “difficult discussions” about how to improve border security, they said ministers lacked the “moral authority” to do so and attacked the proposals as a “visionless shambles”.

Stroud MP Simon Opher said Labour should “stop the scapegoating of immigrants because it’s wrong and cruel” adding “we should push back on the racist agenda of Reform rather than echo it”.

In the Commons, backbench MP Nadia Whittome said it was “shameful that a Labour Government is ripping up the rights and protections of people who have endured unimaginable trauma” as she asked Ms Mahmood why she was “adopting such obviously cruel policies”.

The Home Secretary insisted her plans could unite “a divided country” and fix the asylum system.

The mobilisation of resistance on the back benches came before the policies were formally announced after extensive efforts to sell the plans to voters who have shifted away from Labour as Nigel Farage’s Reform UK has secured months of opinion poll leads.

The measures include:

– Cutting the time refugees are initially granted to stay in the UK from five years to a 30-month “core protection” system, which can only be renewed if it is not safe for them to return.

– Refugees will have to spend 20 years in the UK before being allowed to apply for settled status, up from five years.

– There will be no automatic right to family reunion for refugees under core protection.

– Housing and weekly allowances will no longer be guaranteed for asylum seekers, and those who can work or have assets will have to contribute to their costs in the UK.

– Families with children could also be subject to enforced returns under measures to remove failed asylum seekers, and the Government is launching a consultation on how that should be done.

– Syrians with no right to be in the UK could potentially be forcibly returned home following the collapse of Bashar Assad’s regime under plans being considered by the Government.

Ms Mahmood said the measures were part of a “more hard-headed approach” to removing failed asylum seekers.

“We will remove people we have not removed before, including families who have a safe home country they can return to.

“We will remove people to countries where we have, until recently, paused returns.

“We will reform an asylum appeals system that sometimes seems designed to help frustrate a legitimate removal. And it means tackling a thicket of laws that have achieved the same end, both international and domestic.”

Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: “When the Labour back benches inevitably revolt over even these limited measures, we stand ready to help get the legislation through as long as they pursue the measures necessary to tackle this crisis.”

But he said leaving the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) would be necessary to tackle the problem rather than the “half-measures” set out by the Government.

The latest Home Office figures show 111,084 people applied for asylum in the UK in the year to June 2025.

This is the highest number for any 12-month period since current records began in 2001.

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

The reforms have been modelled on the Danish system, which is seen as one of the strictest in Europe.

Denmark has reduced the number of asylum applications to the lowest number in 40 years and successfully removed 95% of rejected asylum seekers.

Despite this it still remains a signatory of ECHR.