Home secretary Shabana Mahmood has detailed new reforms to the UK asylum system, including a means-tested scheme requiring asylum seekers to pay around £10,000 each for state-funded living costs or risk being denied settled status. Refugee charities have condemned the plan as a tax on those fleeing war, torture, and famine.
Reforms and safe routes
Mahmood also plans to accelerate the opening of safe and legal routes to claim asylum, such as employer sponsorship, in an effort to appease backbench critics including former deputy leader Angela Rayner. This acknowledges that the lack of such routes has forced many to attempt dangerous Channel crossings in small boats.
Both proposals are part of the immigration and asylum bill, presented to MPs today. Mahmood has described the initiative as a “moral mission” while facing pressure from different factions within Labour.
Political context and challenges
Sunder Katwala, director of the British Future thinktank, noted that the government can make significant immigration policy changes without legislation, and the bill serves partly as “a communication tool.” He highlighted “cross-pressure” from two contrasting election results: the May local elections showed an “existential threat” to Labour’s coalition, while the Makerfield byelection suggested winning over Reform voters is key.
An escalating row between Mahmood and home office minister Mike Tapp emerged after Tapp published an article arguing migrant care workers should be excluded from plans to change settlement time requirements. Mahmood was reportedly working on similar proposals when Tapp’s op-ed appeared without her knowledge. Workers’ rights campaigners and unions have strongly objected, with migrant care workers close to the five-year threshold expressing devastation.
Impact on Channel crossings
British Future research from May found only one in six people know net migration fell last year. As of mid-June, 9,852 people crossed the Channel in 2025, 40% fewer than the same period in 2024, reflecting a Europe-wide fall due to EU external border policies. Katwala is sceptical that Mahmood’s proposals alone will reduce crossings further, advocating instead for accessible legal routes combined with swift returns for unauthorised arrivals.
He points to a US policy breakthrough under President Biden that reduced illegal crossings at the US-Mexico border by 81% in a year by integrating returns with controlled legal routes. Katwala recommends scaling up the UK-France “one in, one out” agreement on cross-Channel migration, despite criticism from NGOs, arguing it could put smugglers out of business and save the principle of asylum.
Local approaches and community sponsorship
Andy Burnham, Manchester mayor and potential prime minister, has criticised the government’s dispersal system as “unfair and bad for communities,” especially for underfunded areas like Makerfield. Katwala suggests Burnham could accelerate exiting hotels, commit to never using them again, and promote community sponsorship so immigration comes from the bottom up. This fits Burnham’s devolution agenda and could appeal to voters wanting compassionate but fair policies.
Katwala believes Burnham should propose an annual immigration plan in parliament addressing budget, benefits, impacts, and numbers. He also notes that immigration policy is often siloed within the Home Office when it should be cross-government. Localising and personalising migration stories, like the Welsh town of Fishguard welcoming Syrian refugees through community sponsorship, can help balance public opinion, but the current online ecosystem and political debate often work against that.
