Pictured: Shabana Mahmood

Image Credits: James Whatling via Wikimedia Commons

On the 17th of November, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced government plans to radically change the asylum system, telling MPs the current situation is “out of control and unfair”. It is clear that Labour’s focus has drifted from evidence-based asylum statistics and issues that matter most to voters, towards cruel attempts to appease the far-right and un-viably racist, anti-migrant sentiment. 

The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill will make refugee status temporary, require people to reapply for the right with an assessment every 30 months, and half the current period of 5 years, which was introduced in 2005 under the Blair government. Similarly, the right for refugees to bring their spouse and children will be denied to those “not earning enough”, guaranteed housing support will end, and possibly the most alarming, hostile reform of all is the confiscation of the valuables that refugees bring with them, including a wedding band or necklace, to cover the costs of their stay. 

Labour’s changes to the asylum system received overwhelming support from the right, with both the Conservatives and Reform lining up to express their support. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch even called them “baby steps, but positive”, urging the Home Secretary to work with the Conservatives, promising they would back the bill if Labour backbenchers refused to. Nigel Farage went as far as praising Shabana Mahmood for her hard-line position, suggesting she was auditioning to defect to Reform. It’s painfully clear who these reforms are designed to appeal to; Labour have successfully drifted into a space that the right are more than comfortable with.

At this point, the only thing that really distinguishes Labour from right-wing parties on migration is their stance on the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Both Reform and the Conservatives have argued that Labours plan has merit but will only work if the UK leaves the ECHR. Yet, even this supposed differentiation is delicate, as now Labour’s stance on the ECHR is becoming increasingly blurred as they have changed the way the ECHR is applied to make deporting asylum seekers who were denied status easier. 

The goal of the policy is to reduce the numbers of people seeking asylum in the UK, but as far-right governments across Europe have already demonstrated, cruel policy cannot reduce the amount of people fleeing persecution and danger. They also cannot and will not put an end to the divides in Britain. Anti-migrant politicians and the media will always go a step further, because their rhetoric depends on escalating the threat they claim migrants pose. 

This leads me to question Labour’s underlying assumptions about migration and asylum seekers. It appears that a major assumption is that most migrants are engaged in ‘lawfare’, Shabana Mahmood even cited an example of an asylum seeker receiving “£800 from their families and an Audi, yet still benefiting from taxpayer money”. She argues that by enforcing the confiscation of valuable items from asylum seekers, it would prevent such lawfare from occurring. 

It is revealing how the impacts of this inhumane policy is justified conveniently by using an example of an individual that makes the approach seem modest, reasonable in fact, but there is no consideration of the policy impacts on, say, an asylum seeker having a necklace from their dead spouse confiscated and logged as a “valuable asset” to pay for their stay. Rather than focusing on fixing the economy, the cost of living and the state of public services- all issues that matter most to Labour voters- Labour are once again turning their attention to immigrants, using them as a political scapegoat to hide their own failures.

From this policy, along with Labours broader direction, including previous considerations of restricting Indefinite Leave to Remain, I can only conclude that this Labour government is one which has no values, no beliefs, no morals and no political backbone. Instead, they chase power by curating policy they believe will gain approval and appease the right. Shabana Mahmood herself, years before becoming Home Secretary, campaigned along with a few other Labour MPs for compassion and consideration of undocumented migrants and was pictured at pro-Palestinian protests. Now, she sits at the top of the government that arrests peaceful protesters and creates an unwelcoming space to migrants fleeing from conflicts that Britain played a direct role in assisting. 

If it is truly concerns over the economic impacts of our asylum system at the centre, providing early integration support such as language classes and giving migrants a genuine chance to contribute to the economy is essential. There is no humanity in condoning policies that rip sentimental items from refugees, deny them housing support and make it harder for them to live and integrate. Time will show the Labour government that these measures do not repair divides, they will achieve no access through reinforcing far-right beliefs that refugees are the issue to be targeted. We cannot possibly be a society that punishes people for seeking safety and then pretend to be shocked when social cohesion fractures.