On the government’s first day back in the Commons – after a summer marked by dire headlines about asylum hotels and ever-rising number of arrivals in small boats – Yvette Cooper was probably hoping that her plans to fix “our broken asylum system” would draw a line under things. Fat chance, home secretary.
In an attempt to regain the upper hand on immigration, many of her new measures have leaked in recent weeks – including further restrictions on the rights of refugees to be joined by their family members through tougher English language tests, narrower criteria of what counts as a family member, and further restrictions using Article 8 of the ECHR for failed asylum seekers to appeal against deportation.
Trouble is, however tough Cooper’s new measures are, it looks like Labour is playing catch-up. They were trumped by Nigel Farage and his big, aggressive Reform reveal on immigration last week, which included the “no ifs, no buts” promise to deport 600,000 illegal migrants. Cooper’s argument in the Court of Appeal last week over the Bell Hotel in Epping amounted to the government arguing that the rights of the asylum seekers trumped those of the community.
Neither is her claim today that Labour’s plans are working because Channel migrant crossings during August were at their lowest since 2021 going to shift voter frustration. The ‘win’ is also easily debunked, as the people smugglers are now running fewer crossings, but in dinghies that can carry well over a hundred souls at a time.
A record 28,947 people have crossed the Channel in small boats this year – up from 19,294 last year at this same point. One year of a Labour government and voters are likely to conclude we are going backwards.
It is all arguably too little, too late. The public has watched successive governments grapple ineffectively with the issue, and polls are showing the public does not trust Labour to fix it either. At a time of a cost-of-living crisis, frustration is growing and, in some quarters, has become downright fury.
Add to the toxic mix some high-profile cases of asylum seekers arrested on charges of sexual assault against women and girls, and a general rise in misinformation, and there is concern among policymakers that we may soon face an unstoppable tide of insurrection. A policeman was punched in the face over the weekend at another hotel demonstration; we had the riots last summer. Driving back from Wales to London yesterday, I saw Union flags strung across every highway bridge, while friends report seeing flags painted on roundabouts from Sussex to Somerset.
It is why former foreign secretary Jack Straw’s intervention – calling for Britain to “decouple” British laws from the European Court of Human Rights, and how to do so would have no operational difficulty for peace in Northern Ireland – would have infuriated the prime minister, as it undermines his authority. Only a week ago, Starmer’s spokesman doubled down on our membership of the ECHR, saying: “Let’s be clear, the ECHR underpins key international agreements on trade, security, migration and the Good Friday Agreement. Anyone who is proposing to renegotiate the Good Friday Agreement is not serious.” That argument now looks weak, feeding into the view that Starmer is too cautious.
So, where next, if today does not work?
It is possible for a progressive, left-of-centre government to be truly tough, in ways that would leave a Conservative government gasping. And we don’t need to leave the ECHR.
Labour should look to Denmark as an example. During a decade in power, its centrist coalition has gone further than any European country, ditching its historically welcoming stance in favour of a ‘zero refugee’ policy.
In 2016, the government brought in the so-called jewellery law, whereby funds over £1,200 held by an asylum seeker is appropriated to pay for their stay. In 2018, they banned the burqa. Asylum seekers and migrants must learn to speak Danish in six months or be deported. Those who study for degrees are confined to just a few universities. Refugees have had their residence permits revoked and returned home after parts of Syria were deemed “safe”.
I am not arguing that these are the measures that Britain should now take – but they have proven to be both effective and electorally popular. They are also examples of how far you can go without ripping up long-held conventions. But you just need to get past your own political party.
