Labour is preparing to move to the right on asylum policy as Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood sets out what she calls the biggest reforms to Britain’s asylum system since the Second World War.
In a statement to the House of Commons on Monday, Mahmood proposed switching the U.K. to a Denmark-style system of temporary status, with all refugee protection subject to regular review and revoked once a person’s home country is deemed safe.
The current five-year route to indefinite leave to remain, introduced by Labour in 2005, would be replaced with a 20-year qualification period — the longest anywhere in Europe. Those who arrive through legal routes could shorten that period by entering specific work or study programs. “The more you contribute, you can bring forward that period,” Mahmood told the House.
Ministers will also seek legislation to tighten the interpretation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) — the right to a family life — in asylum appeals. However, while parliament can influence how domestic judges apply Article 8, final appeals to the Strasbourg court would still override U.K. rulings, limiting the practical impact of any change. Social conservatives, such as former Conservative home secretary Suella Braverman and ex-immigration minister Robert Jenrick, have consistently said that only by leaving the ECHR can Britain limit the disproportionate effect human rights laws have on asylum policy.
The Labour government will also end the statutory duty to provide accommodation and weekly support for asylum seekers, meaning housing and allowances will no longer be guaranteed. Those with permission to work could be denied access to benefits. Failed asylum seekers will be restricted to one appeal against removal, replacing the current ability to mount multiple challenges on different grounds. Officials would also gain powers to confiscate valuables from migrants to offset state-funded accommodation costs, in a measure resembling Denmark’s so-called “jewellery law.”
In an op-ed published in The Guardian ahead of her speech, Mahmood wrote, “The pressure placed on local communities has been profound. The burden borne by taxpayers has been unfair. More than 100,000 people now live in asylum accommodation, funded by the taxpayer. Unless we act, we risk losing popular consent for having an asylum system at all. In a country that is seeing division stirred up on our streets, we will not bring unity unless we restore order to our borders.”
To reduce small-boat crossings, Labour plans to open new capped legal routes for people “genuinely fleeing war or persecution,” and local communities will be permitted to sponsor arrivals under a model similar to the Ukraine scheme. Ministers say the aim is to cut demand for journeys controlled by smuggling gangs, but concern will mount over the omission to provide a figure for the cap. Former Reform UK chairman Zia Yusuf went as far as claiming the refusal to quantify the cap effectively means there isn’t one, writing on X, “This whole announcement was about flooding the zone and trojan-horsing in a new asylum program with *no cap*!”
🚨This whole announcement was about flooding the zone and trojan-horsing in a new asylum program with
*no cap*! pic.twitter.com/gP6ztbER8S
— Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) November 17, 2025The shift has drawn notable reactions on the political right. Independent MP Rupert Lowe said, “This will be unpopular to some, but I want Mahmood to succeed. I don’t give a toss about who kicks out the illegals, I just want them gone. And for now, there is one group of people who can deliver that: the Labour Government.” He added that if robust reforms lead to “far more illegals getting sent home, then I will support it,” arguing that the debate has shifted and that “progress is being made here.” He urged supporters to “keep the pressure on, to make them go far faster and far further.”
This will be unpopular to some, but I want Mahmood to succeed. I don't give a toss about who kicks out the illegals, I just want them gone.
And for now, there is one group of people who can deliver that.
The Labour Government.
Whether we like or not, that's the reality.
So…
— Rupert Lowe MP (@RupertLowe10) November 17, 2025Reform UK leader Nigel Farage wrote, “The Home Secretary sounds like a Reform supporter. It’s a shame that the Human Rights Act, the ECHR, and her own backbenchers mean that this will never happen.”
The last comment could be significant. Government proposals would still need to be passed in the Commons, and the majority of the Labour parliamentary party are typically pro-refugee and pro-immigration.
In response to Mahmood’s statement to the House, for instance, Labour MP Nadia Whittome gave a flavor of how the plans were going down on the government’s own backbenches.
“How can we be adopting such obviously cruel policies? Is the government proud to have sunk to such depths that it’s now being praised by [nationalist activist] Tommy Robinson?” she asked.
It remains to be seen whether enough lawmakers in the party can foresee the threat that Reform poses at the next election and vote accordingly in what would be significant reforms to nullify the populist party, at least on this issue.
Does anyone buy what Shabana Mahmood is selling today?
Here she is advocating amnesty for EVERY illegal immigrant in Britain. https://t.co/3PFQ541mui pic.twitter.com/s3dNHqyhxG
— Conservatives (@Conservatives) November 17, 2025The Conservative Party took aim at Mahmood’s integrity ahead of her speech, reminding her of the fact that while she talks tough on asylum now, as a backbench MP (a lawmaker not in the government), she called for a general amnesty on all illegal migrants currently living in Britain.
“I do support a general amnesty for all people who are already in the country so that they can regularize their status and start playing a full part in British society,” she said previously.
