Labour's Radical Asylum Shake-up Faces Internal Opposition
The Labour government has unveiled what Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood describes as "the most sweeping asylum reforms in modern times", drawing inspiration from Denmark's controversial hardline approach to immigration. The proposed changes would fundamentally alter how refugees gain settled status in Britain, replacing the current five-year protection period with a new system that could leave asylum seekers in limbo for up to two decades.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer defended the approach, arguing that maintaining public confidence in the asylum system depends on it being "fair, effective and humane". However, the announcement has already triggered significant backlash from within his own party, setting the stage for another political challenge for the government.
The Danish Model: Inspiration and Limitations
Denmark's asylum system underwent a dramatic transformation following the 2015 migration crisis, when the centre-right government responded to public concern about nearly 15,000 asylum seekers arriving in a country of just six million people. The system shifted from granting five to seven-year residence permits that typically became permanent, to offering just one or two years at a time with no guarantee of permanent status.
Miranda Bryant, the Guardian's Nordic correspondent, explained that "the rhetoric in Denmark has had a big impact. Even when policies can't be fully implemented, they create huge uncertainty and vulnerability for people seeking asylum." This uncertainty itself acts as a deterrent, regardless of what the state can legally enforce.
Interestingly, Denmark's own legal system has prevented some of the most extreme measures from being implemented. When hundreds of Syrian refugees had their residence permits revoked after Denmark declared Syria safe, the country's appeals court blocked forced returns.
What Labour's New System Would Change
The government's proposal introduces several fundamental changes to Britain's asylum framework:
- "Core protection" status replacing five-year refugee protection with 30-month leave renewable only while protection is needed
- No prospect of permanent settlement for 20 years
- End to automatic family reunion rights
- Tighter benefit access more closely tied to economic contribution
- New appeals body with single, faster process and limits on repeated claims
- Restarting enforced returns to countries including Syria
In a concession to potential rebels, the government has promised a capped expansion of "safe and legal" routes and community sponsorship programmes to ensure local acceptance of refugee numbers.
Labour Backbenchers Voice Strong Opposition
The proposals have not been well-received across the Labour parliamentary party. Folkestone and Hythe MP Tony Vaughan warned that the policy risks creating "perpetual limbo and alienation" that helps neither refugees nor society.
Walthamstow MP Stella Creasy was more blunt, describing the idea as "not just performatively cruel" but economically misjudged. She argued that without stable status, refugees will struggle to find employment, open bank accounts or secure mortgages, increasing their dependence on state support.
Rotherham MP Sarah Champion expressed concern about conflating refugees, asylum seekers and migrants, potentially damaging Britain's reputation as "a principled country that stands by the most vulnerable".
Political Fallout and Conservative Opportunism
The Conservative response has been telling. Kemi Badenoch announced her party would support the plans as "steps in the right direction", noting Labour backbench discontent and offering Tory support to get the measures through Parliament.
This positioning creates a difficult dynamic for Starmer, potentially forcing him to rely on opposition votes to pass contentious legislation through a divided Labour party.
The Danish experience suggests that moving rightward on immigration doesn't necessarily solve political problems. Despite the Social Democrats adopting tough immigration policies, far-right parties are gaining popularity again in Denmark, making even more extreme demands including "remigration" - the mass deportation of people with immigrant backgrounds.
As today's municipal elections in Denmark may show, with the Social Democrats likely to lose the Copenhagen mayoralty for the first time ever, there's a political price to pay for hardline immigration policies, particularly in cosmopolitan areas.
The question remains whether Labour's Danish-inspired asylum overhaul will achieve its intended goals or simply create new political problems while leaving vulnerable people in prolonged uncertainty.
