Public sentiment regarding the UK's proposed overhaul of the asylum system is overwhelmingly negative, marked by skepticism and distrust towards the government's intentions and capabilities. Many commenters express frustration over perceived insincerity and ineffectiveness of the reforms, arguing that they fail to address core issues and will likely worsen conditions for genuine refugees. A significant portion view the proposed changes as politically motivated and insufficient.

UK Government

Labour Party

Asylum Seekers

Read the fine print

&gt;Under the plans, people who are granted asylum will only be allowed to stay in the UK temporarily, with their refugee status regularly reviewed and those whose home countries are then deemed safe told to return.

They are betting that a lot could happen in 20 years; and ***"those whose home countries are then deemed safe told to return."***

Mo_h

That’s… definitely one way to say “we fixed the system” while actually duct-taping it to a wall and hoping no one notices.

sexyapple0

Why is this an issue? They came for safety not a passport. When it’s safe they go back irrespective of whether they have been working or not. That asylum not immigration.

Pandita666

Couple of questions...

1. If they have a child while in the UK, which given the 20 years, isn't unlikely: will their child be a British citizen?
2. If so, when the parent is sent back what will happen to the child (let's say 7, or even 14 years old who was born and lived their entire lives in the UK)? Sent to a country they've never been to? Or put in foster care? Or, perhaps most likely, the parent will be allowed to stay in the UK to prevent "family separations"?
3. What if their origin country doesn't exist any more? Again with the 20 year window this isn't that unlikely. Hypothetical scenario: war between country X and Y flares up  and X conquers Y. Then there is nowhere to repatriate Y country's refugees, right?

_x_oOo_x_

I don't see why this would be controversial. Typically asylum is granted because you are persecuted for your beliefs by government, if there is war, famine, etc.

Wars end and regimes change (see Syria recently), famines are alleviated (see Ethiopia in 80s), and government persecution can end (see Chile, Argentina, Etc).

If your country drastically improves and it becomes safe to return, criteria met.  Now, if during that time you have done something amazing or become a critical worker, apply for a different type of visa.

IntolerantModerate

Its time to face the reality that good intentions for refugees has not worked. We cant take in and integrate this number of people while also upholding the welfare system that most want. 

If the point is to help as many as possible then doing it locally is a better bet. Also if the point of a refugee status is temporary then it must be that. 

Immigration should be up to each nation depending on their needs, whether it is skill or numbers.

Chirsbom

When I read this I thought, "20 years, wow?" 

That is a long time to be reminding people of their status and the inevitable right to family life challenges.

I can't help thinking we should be much more discriminating at the initial asylum application presentation. As much as we should help as many people as we can it should not be at the price of creating a longer term problem.

andrew0256

Unless, of course, their name is Ivan Warcrimovich and they have a few billions.

radome9

Please enjoy another distraction while your employer continues to suppress your wages while delivering your stolen equity to a privileged, rich few in power.

Intrepid-Scheme4159

[deleted]

They seem to have taken the labour out of labour. If I wanted the tories I would have voted for them.

Backspkek

Very remarkable that a lot of these comments are mad at the concept of people moving to another country for any reason.

Hellioning

It should be like that. I saw people claim refugee status and then get citizenship. With the passport, the first thing they do is visit their home country. Isn't it committing fraud?

External_Use8267

Are these government officials actively trying to lose their jobs? Because... Almost everything they've done recently looks like they are actively sabotaging themselves.

Why? You know what the people want, why do something other than that?!

MaxMouseOCX

Wasn't there something about "illegal immigrants" entering the UK illegally? Wait... Is there any way to enter the UK legally?

noseshimself

Former refugee here I spent 18 years not knowing if I could stay or not in European country and got kicked out so luckily I went to USA before sickos came to power. Keep imagining that immigrants and refugees are reason for all of your problems.
For the love of god ,don’t look at ultra wealthy who keep becoming richer

Megalodon7770

Good.

Carve outs should be made for geopolitical use cases like Hong Kong and Ukraine, but otherwise, if your country becomes safe, that’s it. We wish you well.

WGSMA

I think Labour take the British people for fools. So while they are all waiting for settled status they are still in the UK up to 20 years. If that's not defacto settled status what is it?

Living_the_Limit

Fairy Tale thinking. In the 20 years or so your country will be definitely peaceful (if it even exists anymore), so please forget the family, life and career you build here and leave our country foreigner

KT28x

The tide of migrants will only get bigger. Oppression, economic disparity, environmental and ecological disasters. The reforms will only get stronger.

gottagrablunch

God i hope other countries do this shit to British expats. The shit we let go abroad and we have the nerve to see you aren't welcome here?

Nurgleschampion

Why would you want to live in a Nigel Farage run nonce island

GymSocks84

Trying to defuse Nigel Farage/Reform, very smart.

ElliotAlderson2024

the current labour government is so pro immigrant but anti immigrant at the same time

agsolymosy11

So UK is complaining how people don’t want to integrate but then ask to wait 20 plus years to become British? Cool.

that_tealoving_nerd

My first thought was that 20 years is kind of insane.

However, if you are fleeing your home due to it being too dangerous, any safe asylum is better than nothing.

Honestly, if the government is *reasonable* about this, I don't really have a problem with it. That said, I don't know that I trust the government's immigration policy to stay consistent and reasonable over a long period of time.

Dejugga

A more constructive debate would be how to assure immigrants of any flavor become productive members of society. In my 30-year experience, I came to the conclusion that the US has done a remarkably good job at it.  Key imho is the absence of a welfare state and an uncomplicated job market, creating opportunities at all levels.

PfauFoto

Perhaps UK should implement a 20 year wait on making foreign policies that creates refugees in the first place.

Hammerhead2046

Always a woman or POC to come up with and pass such controversial laws or veto votes.

horn_ok_pleasee

Snapshot of _Asylum seekers face 20-year wait to settle in UK - as demo held at migrant site_ submitted by theipaper:

An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&amp;url=https://inews.co.uk/news/asylum-seekers-two-decade-wait-uk-settled-4046026)  or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&amp;url=https://inews.co.uk/news/asylum-seekers-two-decade-wait-uk-settled-4046026)         


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

As we’ve seen it’s one thing for this government to announce something, it’s entirely different for them to actually do it. So I’ll wait and see what happens.

BobMonkhaus

How about a 15 minute wait while we figure out which country to deport them to?

Adorable_Pee_Pee

It’s good to see Labour at least changing its rhetoric towards this issue. But everything they have announced still leaves insane wiggle room that the activist judges and pro migration civil servants will just be able to take advantage of to not change our levels of migration at all.

It should have been instead, that anybody who uses “I am seeking asylum” as a route into the UK, by using that route, permanently forfeits their right to settle in the UK. It should be a conscious choice the migrant uses where if they use those magical words, fantastic. Just sign this form here, let your biometrics be taken, congratulations you are now officially seeking asylum and will be processed within a month. But by the way, you are now permanently excluded from settling in the UK. You will never be entitled to ILR. You will never have a route to citizenship. You will never get a passport. And you will never get social housing or access to our welfare state.

What you get, is a temporary safe haven where you **will work**. You will pay your way. And as soon as we deem your country safe enough to return, you get yeeted out and sent home. And then can never come back. Not even on a holiday visa. The UK permanently shuts off for you as a destination.

And the measures we use to see if a country is safe is literally “is a war happening right now?”. We don’t measure their personal risk of their religious belief, sexuality, gender or political beliefs and decide they still need asylum because they personally will suffer if they go home. The measure we use is purely on a nationwide level. Is your country currently engaged in a direct war or civil war? No? Congratulations, time to go home. You can deal with your personal issues there yourself, that’s between you and your government, not the UK.

ThunderousOrgasm

Labour will make sweeping changes to human rights law and the asylum appeal system in a bid to solve the small boats crisis, the Home Secretary is vowing.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said [restricting the ability of illegal migrants and foreign criminals to claim the right to a family life under the European Convention on Human Rights](https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/migrants-stricter-danish-rules-uk-4040097?ico=in-line_link) (ECHR) was needed to “restore order” to Britain’s borders.

In a slew of changes which will be set out in Parliament on Monday, the Home Secretary will promise new legislation to reform the application of the ECHR, overhaul the asylum appeals process, and update the Modern Slavery Act to stop illegal migrants making “bogus” claims to avoid deportation.

Also among the new rules will be that asylum seekers who arrive illegally but successfully apply to stay will have to wait 20 years before they can settle permanently.

Refugee status is to be treated as temporary and checks will be made every 30 months. If a home country is considered safe in that time, the migrant will be returned.

It comes amid public anger at successive governments’ inability to stop small boats crossing the Channel, with more than 39,000 migrants having crossed so far this year.

Further signs of the level of public anger surfaced yesterday as hundreds of people marched in Crowborough, Sussex, to protest against plans to house asylum seekers at a former military base on the outskirts of the town.

The disused army camp is one of the bases selected to house migrants rather than send them to hotels, such as the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, which earlier this year saw several protests after one of the residents was accused of sexual assault.

Illegal immigration has [fed support for Nigel Farage’s Reform UK](https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/reform-shock-15-point-lead-labour-farage-power-3887857?srsltid=AfmBOoolASotqNVFBoLYSqB7PWVejjy0iu7W0FW33e0ATNbiPPIt7c4n&amp;ico=in-line_link) – which has led in every major poll for seven months – and Labour insiders believe addressing the issue is crucial to their party retaining power at the next election.

Mahmood said on Sunday that illegal migration was “tearing our country apart” and that wholesale reform was needed “if we are to retain public consent for having an asylum system at all”. She said she sees tackling illegal immigration as a “moral mission”.

theipaper

My reddit must be broken, where are all the comments about the labour party being fascist and Nazis? I was informed this kind of rhetoric is equivalent to that of killing 6 million Jews. /s

tunasweetcorn

Absurd. Creates a huge barrier to people integrating into society with jobs and lives. Imagine coming to the UK as a baby and then being deported at age 18.

rainbow3

Snapshot of _Asylum seekers could be denied housing and allowances under migration crackdown_ submitted by theipaper:

An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&amp;url=https://inews.co.uk/news/asylum-seekers-face-20-year-wait-to-settle-in-uk-under-new-migration-rules-4045825)  or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&amp;url=https://inews.co.uk/news/asylum-seekers-face-20-year-wait-to-settle-in-uk-under-new-migration-rules-4045825)         


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

The Home Secretary has vowed to end Britain’s “golden ticket” for [asylum seekers](https://inews.co.uk/topic/asylum-seekers?srsltid=AfmBOor-wqCSM3_Czgt-miFjAUXUwR24_AAybLED4z83frCyFgHzRVqs&amp;ico=in-line_link), forcing people who have come to the UK illegally to wait 20 years before they can apply for permanent settlement.

Under plans set to be unveiled by Shabana Mahmood on Monday, refugee status in the UK will also be made temporary, meaning those who have been granted asylum will be removed as soon as their home countries are deemed safe.

The Home Secretary said the changes to the asylum system will “restore order and control to our borders”.

“This country has a proud tradition of welcoming those fleeing danger, but our generosity is drawing illegal migrants across the Channel,” Mahmood said.

“The pace and scale of migration is placing immense pressure on communities. This week, I will set out the most sweeping changes to our asylum system in a generation.

“We will restore order and control to our borders.”

Seeking to make the UK a less attractive destination for refugees, Mahmood is set to revoke the statutory legal duty to provide asylum seekers support, introduced in 2005.

This will mean housing and weekly allowances will no longer be guaranteed for asylum seekers.

Those who break the law, or have the right to work in the UK and can support themselves but choose not to, could be denied housing and benefits.

*The i Paper* [revealed earlier this week](https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/migrants-stricter-danish-rules-uk-4040097?srsltid=AfmBOoqkpu2--kfTVtsJr1nF7FNqtu-HEqaqgPniFySnEMQKFHyGXQCS&amp;ico=in-line_link) that Mahmood was planning to announce major [reforms to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)](https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/home-secretary-global-refugee-laws-end-small-boat-crossings-3912662?srsltid=AfmBOopkyVXDWT5f_TWMKlyYUPg9YYMmdx86xmWkfz0bXkr1-7GTiiMU&amp;ico=in-line_link) and modern slavery laws in a bid to stop what ministers regard as unjustified attempts to delay or stop deportations.

Mahmood’s announcement will include reforms[ modelled on an asylum crackdown by the centre-left Social Democrats in Denmark](https://inews.co.uk/news/world/happiest-country-anti-immigration-anger-growing-4032779?srsltid=AfmBOoq3314VjB9dfwvqGDc5OXgic_Fh4t5EcNi9_wSZ79WqOK5xqDH_&amp;ico=in-line_link), which deports 95 per cent of failed asylum seekers – a much higher proportion than the UK – and, as of May 2025, recorded its lowest level of asylum applications in 40 years.

Under current rules, people granted refugee protection can wait five years before applying for long-term settlement status in the UK. But this will be changed to 20 years, according to *The Sunday Times*.

The 20-year qualifying period will apply to those who arrive in the UK illegally in small boats, as well as those who overstay their visas, and then claim asylum. It will be the longest route to settlement in Europe, followed by Denmark, which currently has an eight-year pathway.

People’s refugee status will be reviewed every 30 months, the newspaper reported. Those whose countries become safe will be immediately made to go home.

Begs the questions why the conservatives didn't do this in the first place?

classic123456

Mahmood impressed this morning on Laura K. Very clear in her responses and laying out the policies. Came off very competent. Especially as opposed to Chris Philp who tried to claim he was only "a junior minister 6 years ago for 18 months" despite actually holding cabinet positions subsequent to that under all 3 of Johnson, Truss, and Sunak. Bold faced lie

The test will be whether she can get this past her party but if they vote it down then they are screwed electorally

Brilliant_Medium8190

*This is an excellent start.* There are other pull factors which must be rapidly addressed too.

Together, *all* the many factors, make the UK much more attractive than France to asylum seekers, particularly those with very weak claims for asylum.

(1) UK accepts a significantly higher % of claims than France.

The UK's initial asylum grant rate for the year ending June 2025 was 48%. Many refused claims are later overturned following a lengthy multiple stage appeal process, resulting in an overall long-term acceptance rate significantly higher than the initial decision rate. (The final UK acceptance rate doesn't seem to be publicly available.)

In contrast, France's first-instance protection rate was 31.4% in 2023, meaning that nearly 68.6% of asylum applications at this stage were rejected, according to an AIDA report. And France's limited appeal process is shorter and tougher than the UK's.

(2) If claims are fully rejected and deportation is likely, it is easier to disappear in the UK than France 

Our lack of one universal ID system allows a market in fake/stolen/borrowed IDs to flourish in the UK. Including: passports, driving licences, NI numbers and using other people's Minicab/Uber/Deliveroo/Just Eat and their equivalent app accounts to earn money or to find accommodation.

In contrast the French carry out sweeps at busy train stations, such as Paris's Gare du Nord where Police demand to see valid photo ID from all passengers.

https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20250618-france-deploys-4-000-police-for-crackdown-on-illegal-migrants-at-transport-hubs

Kit-Tobermory

I feel like the word "could" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

martelclubprez

Activist lawyers launching a judicial review in 3,2,1…

B0797S458W

What's the new immigration tracker department going to be called,  will it be linked to the review department or different sections of the same one if they are all going to be reviewed every 30 months. Will they be prioritised over the current backlog of cases?  I don't disagree in principle just wondering how it's going to be implemented.

Ok_Corner5873

&gt;Those who break the law, or have the right to work in the UK and can support themselves but choose not to, could be denied housing and benefits.

"food and housing will be denied, except to people who need it"

sjintje

“Could”

Wake me up when it _is_. 

She said she’ll announce on Monday, but she’s obviously leaked all these plans to make it sound tough (which is a good thing) but I bet half won’t make it, and whatever does just gets slapped down by courts.

I’ll be happy if she completely rewrites the laws, having British judges working for British people, and won’t have backbenchers blocking it all.

No, I will not be happy until we _see_ real changes, because so far Labour is good at making noise. I have a lack of faith because of their own actions, I actually _wanted_ Labour to succeed when they got in, but they only have themselves to blame. The fact that she outright lied on her tough promo video about deporting 50,000 already, which they’ve been proven multiple times it’s a lie and they _still_ push it, means I don’t believe a word of this lot. 

She’s got 3 years. Then they’re out of time. If they think for one second they can gaslight us with “we just need time” they’re going to be disappointed in the outcome.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad they’ve woken up a bit, but until it’s actually more than just words, I’m not giving them a break.

MrSoapbox

At this point I'm not going to give Labour any more credit until these measures change from "could" to "done".

90davros

Has it been outlined anywhere who will decide what a safe country is and will there be exceptions for individual circumstances? For example Qatar is a safe country, but if someone was gay they would be able to say their human rights could be violated if they were deported there?

How does this get us around the issue that an individual could be persecuted for a protected characteristic in a safe country?

LondonSurveyor

Britain cannot house the world. This is a positive step.

Russeldust

&gt;Seeking to make the UK a less attractive destination for refugees, Mahmood is set to revoke the statutory legal duty to provide asylum seekers support, introduced in 2005.

We edge ever closer to invoking [Article 9 of the 1967 Protocol.](https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/protocol-relating-status-refugees) The day cannot come soon enough.

PelayoEnjoyer

Even as a left-leaning person I think something needs to be done now.  It's getting to the point where it is unsustainable.

himalayangoat

Still nuts. Could be. If I illegally entered any other country in the world I wouldn't expect a hotel room and board and spending money. They come to the UK knowing we have moral guilt to treat these people as invited guests. 

While I am optimistic this is a step forward this doesn't change the pull factors that there are vast public resources available for illegal migrants as well as a huge amount of illegal work available. And obviously free healthcare dental etc no wonder they come here compared to staying in France.

Putaineska

We have quite a strong touring caravan economy, we have quite a high number of manufacturers. 

The government should do a caravans scrappage scheme where caravanners can sell their old caravan for say 4,000 pounds as long as they buy a new British made caravan. 

The government then has a lovely supply of temporary accommodation which is mobile so they can move it anywhere. 

Why not move all the caravans to some building sites and house the migrants at the building sites where they can start to work on building houses motorways and railways. 

Wikipedia boosts to the caravan industry and we relieve the pressure on hotels and housing for those in housing markets who are looking to buy.

IntravenusDiMilo_Tap

Is Labour waking up to how it reverses it's absolute catastrophic first year in power?

finniruse

I think the whole thing smells like bullshit COULD BE in other words we won`t do this but if we say could then it looks like action with out having to do anything.

Longjumping-Year-824

What we actually need to do...

Build an enormous, Kowloon Walled City-esque development somewhere like Tristan Da Cuhna, the Falklands or Ascension Island.

Unlike the old Kowloon building, it needs to be safe for human habitation, and include all the absolute basic necessities, running water, heating and cooling, beds, etc.

Everyone living there is provided their basic calorie needs via Huel Powder, ensuring they get their necessary macro nutrients and enough calories to sustain themselves.

Every week, asylum seekers are sent to this absolute safe haven, via ship or special chartered flights. They will no longer face the threat of persecution, government oppression, or death in their homelands. They have their most basic needs taken care of. 

We will soon see which ones are genuinely fleeing their homelands in search of safety, and which simply want a more comfortable life.

8NaanJeremy

Any time "could" is in the headline, just assume it wont happen.

DukeboxHiro

Serious question- why can’t UK sue France for allowing it? If nothing else it’s a gross failure from a safety point?

bigchiefdarkcloud

People want retroactive change, not to simply "accept" what's done is done. The majority of the country want remigration, and it will continue to change and go further. I don't think this will help Labours cause.

PhyllostachysBitch

Give them a tent, see how long they like it over here through November - April.

LieutBromhead

Could a trebuchet be set up to fire them back across the channel on arrival?

adamu980

Just copy Denmark's system as is. It's proven to work. What will happen now is the following:

The idiots in charge will start cherry picking the policies, because they think they know better.

They will come up with some loophole filled patchwork which won't work.

They will blame everyone, but themselves.

throwaway19inch

They will "revoke the statutory legal duty to provide asylum seekers support"

And keep the discretionary 95% approval rate asylum seeker support.

Polysticks

it does make sense the ones that come through illegal are denied this. I hate all the hate towards immigrants and asylum seekers but it may deter future illegal  entries.. if I  trespass on somebodies land i would not be given free board and lodgings at their property would I  ?   NO So the same should apply  to countries..  I do not think this should apply for people who have been here for years and have been crime free and contributed though. i would say a ten year time limit and based on how they have behaved.

smellyfeet25

Is this how end up with a tent city of migrants? Isn't that what Europe has?

What a political mess.

The management of this has been out of control for decades. The repercussions are going to go on for decades. Politics is never going back to what it was.

taboo__time

So seems Labour has gone for the Danes tactic. Take the wind out of the right wings sails.

Luficer_Morning_star

There are Turkish barbers , carwashes and weird minimarts everywhere in this country it’s absolutely ridiculous

dingo_deano

There is some potential for this to just make the problem worse, you’re going to have a lot of people here for potentially up-to 20 years who employers will see as unemployable if they can be removed from the country at any point. If they then can’t receive benefits or if that process is made increasingly difficult they will no doubt turn to crime and be living on the streets. 

Also, are we really going to deport someone who has been here 15 years, potentially married to a British Citizen, with children and ties to the community, do they really want those ICE like images when the time comes a country is deemed safe?

JamesyEsquire

**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation were set at 15:45 on 17/11/2025. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules.

Existing and future comments from users who do not meet the [participation requirements](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs) will be removed. Removal does not necessarily imply that the comment was rule breaking.

Where appropriate, we will take action on users employing dog-whistles or discussing/speculating on a person's ethnicity or origin without qualifying why it is relevant.

In case the article is paywalled, use [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&amp;url=https://news.sky.com/story/politics-latest-starmer-asylum-mahmood-labour-budget-taxes-badenoch-farage-12593360?postid=10537602#liveblog-body).

ukbot-nicolabot

&gt;Nadia Whittome told the Commons: "The Denmark-style policies briefed in the last couple of days are dystopian .... How can we be adopting such obviously cruel policies? Is the home secretary proud that the government has sunk to such depths that it's now being praised by [far-right activist] Tommy Robinson?"


Be interesting to see the level of resistance to what is a pretty fair and sensible bunch of changes. Labour MPs are not helping themselves by going full attack on their own parties polices that will see a lot of public support.
 Funny to see Denmark being referred to so negatively when they have a Social Democrat and Liberal government as well, just more purity testing from these MPs than actual interest in fixing the system.

Toastlove

The Labour and other MPs opposed to such changes are more concerned with looking virtuous to a minority than the greater good of the country’s social cohesion.

9e5e22da

I await the Labour back benchers forcing the U-turn 

raven43122

The core asylum vs work or education asylum just goes to show you the media furore around 20 year ILR was just nonsense.

They’re going to give you ILR much quicker for having minimum wage job.

LonelyStranger8467

&gt; On Mornings With Ridge and Frost, we asked Home Office minister Alex Norris if that's the case, and while he wouldn't directly confirm it, he said: "At the moment, the British public pay billions of pounds a year so that those seeking asylum, or those who have already failed in their applications, can be supported in their accommodation and their living.

&gt; "It is right that if people have money in the bank, if people have assets like cars, like e-bikes - they should be contributing.

&gt; "No, we're not going to be taking people's heirlooms off them at the border."

&gt; But he pointed to someone who is "getting £800 a month sent to him" and has "got himself an Audi".

Ok, first off, I am not naïve enough to think there are people claiming asylum fraudulently and I would hope the system would be able to weed those people out and deal with them appropriately.

Second, this sounds an awful lot like the rhetoric that's been going around on social media saying that asylum seekers are given PS5's , laptops and tablets which has been proven time and time again to not be true. 

Thirdly, are we really paying "billions"? Really? Honestly, if someone can provide facts and figures I'd love to see them because I find it hard to believe that the figure is in the "billions".

supergodmasterforce

When you put your mark in the ballot box for Labour last year, did you realise they were National Socialists? I didn't.

FoxtrotThem

Snapshot of _UK set to limit asylum seekers to temporary stays_ submitted by Confident-Variety883:

An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&amp;url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c231x8rj1zpo)  or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&amp;url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c231x8rj1zpo)         


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

The default reaction seems to be to find why this isn't right, why it's too late etc.

I personally think this is at least a step in the right direction, and the kind of initiative this government needs to show more of.

FanWrite

Amazed this isn't already standard. A refugee is granted asylum on the basis of their country being unsafe - if their country becomes safe, they should obviously lose asylum, and time spent in asylum should not count towards gaining citizenship. They can apply for visas if they want to stay in the UK - having built a successful and integrated life here would obviously count significantly in their favour.

CaterpillarLoud8071

This is brilliant. Yes, late, but better late than never. I've been pleasantly surprised by Shabana Mahmood.

madeleineann

I don’t know why this wasn’t always the case. The problem will be they will marry locally, have kids etc and it will be hard to remove them later. We currently can’t deport criminals because of all sorts of reasons so it is unclear to me how this will actually work in reality. An entire industry of advocates will be working to frustrate the process as usual. All that said I think this is a positive step.

Far-Crow-7195

&gt;When it was revealed that Denmark was being used as a model for tougher rules in the UK, Labour's Clive Lewis told the BBC the system in that country echoed "talking points of the far right."

&gt;And he said "progressive" voters may migrate to more left-wing parties, such as the Greens, if Labour goes down this route.

&gt;Another Labour left-winger, Nadia Whittome, said following in Denmark's path would be a "dead end - morally, politically and electorally".

These people are totally unhinged, they will drag Labour down with them just so they can feel morally superior.

HolyFreakingXmasCake

Unbelievable - we actually have a Home Secretary that’s genuinely good.

Wisegoat

As a leftie, I'm okay with this. It makes sense that the reasons to claim asylum are likely temporary, and that if they arent it should be possible to prove so at a reapplication.

It doesn't reduce 'legal' migration nor reduce our compassion as a country, so it's not inherently right-wing.

I think the Labour left should think carefully before destroying this idea. It's a lot better than Reform, it's better than leaving ECHR, it's better than a weaker policy.

TheMusicArchivist

Hopefully this works. If Labour manages to take control of the immigration issue, the likes of Farage will have to scurry back underneath his rock.

Tim1980UK

Seems like the right call.

We have 515,000 refugees in this country with another 224,000 currently being processed.

That's plenty as far as I'm concerned

This might even deter some of the chancers that are thinking about making the journey across the channel.

1c3_cr34m_c0n3

Wait, what? Politicians can actually _do_ things????

Fungled

What does this actually mean in practice? If we have trouble deporting criminals why would we be able to deport asylum seekers once there temporary visa has come to an end?

mgorgey

Firstly - rather farcical this wasn't the case already, I reckon you ask Joe Public they' have already assumed this was the rule.

Secondly can we make it retroactive.

ThrowAwayAccountLul1

"I'm really pissed off the government did something I wanted them to do"

PrimeWolf101

what happens of the place they are fleeing isnt ever going to be considered safe for them to return too?

e.g. cant see the Taliban losing power again, or (legitimate) Apostates from hardline religous Countires?

popeter45

They also need to redefine who is eligible. It should be limited to people fleeing active conflict zones so they can be repatriated when the conflict ends. Sexual orientation or religious beliefs should not be grounds for asylum.

Lando7373

This seems reasonable?

Let’s see if they can get it past the backbenchers.

ShinHayato

Despise this govt as much as anyone but they've finally done something I agree with

weinerfish

Awesome move! Well done! Labour have shown they are willing to make serious decisions that the public are in favour of. This is the only way they will have any chance of beating Reform

Unbudgeable-Drudgery

Shouldn’t be letting any that come here on a visa stay. Whether they’re on a work/education visa or here for asylum they should have it made clear they are going home once their stay is over.

Fortree_Lover

It literally seems like Labour is doing MORE than reform on the mass migration disaster right now. 

So why are people still saying they will vote reform?

SignificantLegs

They don't even deport those that are refused asylum, nor visa overstayers. Making asylum grantees' stay temporary does not mean they will leave at the end of their temporary period. They will remain and we will do nothing about it.

This is just for the headlines.

londonandy

Good,  a step in the right direction.

Next apply it retroactively and start revoking citizenship.

Protect-the-dollz

The UK government is set to implement significant reforms to its asylum system, aiming to tackle perceived strains caused by undocumented migration.

UK Asylum System Overhaul

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want