Davey believes that joining the pact would reduce the number of people crossing the English Channel illegally.

Several major parties, including Labour, have promised to ‘stop the boats’, but only the Lib Dems are currently advocating for the UK to join the Migration and Asylum Pact.

“We have a plan that would finally end the small boats crisis” Davey said. “A pact with every EU country that will allow us to return people who come over the Channel. Taking away the major pull factor that (Reform UK leader Nigel) Farage and co-created, and destroying the business model of the criminal gangs.”

What is The Migration and Asylum Pact?

The EU’s Pact on Migration and Asylum was introduced in June, with the aim of creating a fair and ethical system that shared the responsibility for housing asylum seekers between EU states.

Under the previous system, known as the Dublin Regulation, asylum seekers only had the right to claim asylum in the first EU member state they entered.

While this rule will continue to apply in most cases, the new pact creates a pool of roughly 30,000 asylum seekers who will be redistributed between member states, based on the members’ ability to support them.

Members will however be able to pay £17,000 not to take a redistributed asylum seeker.

These laws will be made easier for the EU to enforce by the introduction of mandatory screening for all asylum seekers aged six or over at their time of entry. Along the use of a shared database tracking all asylum seekers’ movements.

The Lib Dems believe that joining the scheme would reduce the incentive for asylum seekers to risk their lives crossing the English Channel, reducing the need for the UK government to stop the boats directly.

How Many Small Boats Are There?

According to data from the UK Home Office, by the end of last week, 14,000 people had crossed the English Channel by small boat so far this year.

This is 43% fewer than at the same stage of last year, and leaves 2026 on track to be the year with the fewest small boat crossing since 2021.

Despite this, a recent YouGov poll found that 36% of respondents believed more people were crossing the English Channel than in previous years, compared to only 28% who thought the number had reduced.

14,000 is also almost twice the number that crossed the Channel in small boats in the whole of 2020, the year Britain left the EU. As well as almost ten times as many as crossed in 2019.

Earlier this month, a record 230 people attempted to cross the Channel on a single vessel, which the Home Office described as “reckless and dangerous.”

What is the Government Currently Doing?

Labour’s commitment to “restore common sense and control to our borders” was a key part of its 2024 General Election campaign.

The Government’s efforts to stop the boats have so far prevented 47,000 Channel crossings, according to the Home Office.

Under former Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, the Government supplemented its efforts to stop the boats with negotiations with foreign partners to resettle asylum seekers abroad.

In response to Davey’s proposals, a government spokesperson said that discussions with European countries were “bearing fruit”, but that there was “more to do that will only happen by working in collaboration with the EU.”

The Government agree however with the Lib Dem’s belief that the UK should be granted access to the EU’s asylum database, something that was removed during Brexit.

What Are the Alternative Policies to the EU Migration and Asylum Pact?

Reform UK has described the suggestion that closer alignment with the EU would help the UK to stop the boats as “complete misinformation.” The party maintains that EU membership “did nothing to make it easier to return asylum seekers.”

The party’s own scheme to stop the boats, named ‘Operation Fortress’ and announced earlier this month, involves enlisting Royal Navy vessels to detain small boats in the English Channel. The small boats would then be escorted by the Royal Navy to either France or Belgium.

The French Interior Ministry has said that Operation Fortress “would constitute a violation of French sovereignty, as well as a violation of the law of the sea, and international law.”

The Conservative Party, who first popularised the term ‘stop the boats’ when in government in 2023, believe the UK should withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights. Others centre-right conservatives have opposed this position.

They believe this would allow anyone who enters the country illegally to be deported within a week of their arrival.

Final Thought

Data suggests that the Government is making progress towards its objective of stopping the boats, but not quickly enough to satisfy many British voters.

Joining the Migration and Asylum Pact would almost certainly reduce the number of small boat crossings, though its impact on overall migration is less clear.

Any further alignment with the EU would also be portrayed by the Conservatives and Reform as the Government undermining the result of the EU Referendum and relying on other nations to stop the boats.

This proposal cements the Lib Dems as the most pro-European mainstream party, securing the party an electoral niche going forwards, though potentially costing it in some of the rural areas where it had success in 2024.

In the same period, over 15,200 illegal migrants were removed by force, a 45 per cent increase from what the Conservative government achieved in the 19 months prior. As well as this, in line with increased powers granted to law enforcement in the Border Security, Asylum, and Immigration Act 2025, deportations of foreign national offenders, including murderers and rapists, have increased by 32 per cent, with over 8,700 deported since Starmer’s government came into power.

Despite these record-breaking figures, Mahmood has committed to further removals and deportations in order to restore law and order to Britain’s borders, stating that the government “must go further to remove those that have no right to be in this country.” Mahmood further vowed to “do whatever it takes to restore order and control.” As a result of this, the government will issue further visa sanctions if countries deemed to be safe refuse to take back illegal migrants or foreign nationals.

Further, new legislation is due to be introduced this year to prevent illegal migrants from using Article 8 of the ECHR to prevent their removal, creating a “one stop shop” to replace the broken appeals system, so that once an illegal migrant loses a single appeal, they will be forced to leave the country.

In response to these proposals, the Minister of State for Prisons, Probation and Reducing Reoffending, James Timpson, stated that the Government is “serious about fixing the broken prison system”, committing to “stopping foreign criminals from clogging up our jails.” As well as this, Timpson stated that removals of foreign offenders from British prisons are “up more than forty per cent”, and that the new legislation would only increase the speed of intervention.

The Sentencing Act will amend the law so that foreign nationals no longer need spend a minimum portion of their sentence in British prisons, instead allowing for immediate deportation. This will also apply to those already in custody once it is in force.

The Home Office has stated the purpose of these changes are to remove incentives for migrants to come to the UK illegally, in order to secure Britain’s borders. Prior to new legislation, illegal migrants and foreign criminals have utilised Article 8 of the ECHR, which preserves the “right to respect for his private and family life” to prevent removal, a practice which the Government is keen to end.

In regards to appeals, the Government has pledged that a single route of appeal will be introduced, whilst cases deemed to have very little chance of success will be fast-tracked to expedite the removal process. If the appeal is lost, the individual will be expected to immediately leave the country, and if they do not, they shall be forcibly removed.

In order to improve value for the taxpayer, asylum costs will be scaled back, beginning this week, as migrants living in hotels shall be banned from using expensive taxis for medical appointments. Already over £74 million has been recouped from wasteful hotel contracts, as just under 200 migrant hotels remain open, whereas under the Conservative Party, 400 hotels running at the cost of £9 million a day were in use.

In addition, the Government has committed to housing people in more basic accommodation such as military sites, instead of hotels, to further deter migrants from illegally coming to Britain. It is hoped that reforming the system will disrupt organised immigration crime, prevent human trafficking gangs, and tackle illegal working.

The Home Office has reported that 2025 was the highest year on record for illegal working enforcement activity, after 9,000 arrests and 12,800 raids were carried out across the UK, which is a 60 per cent and 58 per cent rise respectively from 2024. This week, new measures took force to criminalise online posts advertising small boat crossing services and ban foreign sex offenders from refugee protections on account of their crimes, to protect British citizens. Legislation brought into force this week shall now enable enforcement to tackle criminal gangs selling fake immigration documents or help crossing the channel, through the classification of these actions as criminal offences.

Over the last 19 months, the Government have utilised the Borders Security, Immigration and Asylum Act to cut the number of people waiting on initial decisions for asylum claims by 39 per cent, to enable border security to be tightened and taxes to be allocated to improving the lives of taxpayers, rather than funding expensive migrants hotels. However, enforced removals have significantly increased as compared to voluntary removals, the former up 45 per cent as compared to 27 per cent, indicating that the Government still have a long way to go with implementing genuine reform.

Featured Image: James Whatling/Parsons Media for the Home Office

Ruth Jones’s Early Career

Ruth Jones is a rare figure in politics, having opened her career not in policy or business, but in public health; she was a physiotherapist for 32 years before becoming a trade union full time officer. But, as she explained, this is not as great a discrepancy as it may at first seem: “in both roles, you’re advocating for people; you’re representing patients or clients or staff”.

She repeatedly draws on her NHS experience during the webinar, testament to the fundamental, formative training she garnered from her work: although not centred in public policy, clearly of invaluable worth for human skills, team leadership and unified values.

She explained that “as a member of staff, I was always part of a team”; regardless of status or role, as a manager of a team of 50, she “could never have done that job without the cooperation of the team” – a constantly evolving and diverse team of “admin, support workers, cleaners, porters”. Her work gave her a deep understanding of the “spirit of teamwork”: “everybody had to work together to make sure we got the best for the patient or the client that we were working with”.

“Health is a massive issue. The NHS is a national health service, but at the moment it seems to be a national sick service” ~ Ruth Jones MP

Ruth Jones’ entry into politics

Frustrated by her limited power to affect real, tangible change during her time as a trade union officer, Jones swiftly learnt that “you need to get higher up the food chain to actually make a difference”. From campaigning in unwinnable seats to winning her home seat in 2019, Jones’ political career saw her return to her homeland, having lived in her victorious constituency for most of her life, and having been a Labour member for over 20 years.

Ruth Jones’ loyalty to, and firm sense of, the importance of Welsh identity spans back to her political inspirations. She cited Nye Bevan and Neil Kinnock – “brilliant orators, passionate, powerful and really strong advocates for their local community”. She endeavours, through her roles as constituency MP and Welsh Select Committee chair, to emulate their sincerity; to serve as a “passionate representative of her patch”.

‘Nye Bevan and Neil Kinnock were brilliant orators, passionate, powerful and really strong advocates for their local community’ ~ Ruth Jones MP

Welsh Affairs Committee Operations

As Chair of the Welsh Affairs Select Committee, Ruth Jones outlined the Committee’s cross-party remit to examine how Westminster policy affects Wales and to scrutinise the UK Government’s engagement with devolved institutions.

“We work together – Labour, Plaid Cymru, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats – to get the best outcomes for Wales“, she explained, highlighting the difference between a Select Committee’s modelling on collaboration and balance, and the often adversarial nature of Prime Minister’s Questions.

The Committee focuses on issues effecting people in Wales, specifically retained powers such as justice, immigration, and defense. Its current inquiries include prisons, probation and rehabilitation; the economic regeneration of coalfields and the steel industry; and the impact of trade and inheritance tax on Welsh farmers. The Committee questions the Secretary of State for Wales twice a year and invites the First Minister from the Senedd, a partnership crucial for avoiding overlap and ensuring comprehensive coverage of issues, particularly regarding devolved powers like health and education.

Cross-Border Health and Social Care

Upon Fatima Kamara’s questioning on the most important areas of healthcare reform facing the UK Government, Jones’ response was immediately impassioned: “Health is a massive issue. The NHS is a national health service, but at the moment it seems to be a national sick service”. She insisted that Government should be looking at “far more” preventative health promotion and ill health prevention in order for “people to live long, happy and healthy lives”: “it’s no good living to the age of 90 if you’re bedbound for 10 years”.

Another crucial point made, and one clearly influenced by Jones’ career in healthcare, was that the UK needs “to have a long term view on health”. She referred to the Smoking White Paper of the 1970s to 1990s which linked cancer to nicotine – but highlighted that it “didn’t actually show results for 30 years because people were still smoking”, resulting in no decrease in cancers for 20 years. Healthcare developments, she insisted, happen far outside the parliamentary terms, which is why they prove so challenging to push through – but are all the more vital for their comparative ostensible lack of urgency, when pitted against more short-term solvable issues.

Ruth Jones praised the teamwork that underpins the NHS at every level and urged closer integration between hospitals, community care, and local authorities to reduce pressure on services. However, she feels, health and social care systems must increasingly operate together if hospital backlogs and patient flow are going to be better handled.

With heightened focus on Wales, Jones expressed how the country faces the challenges of an older, sicker population and the emigration of younger generations, leading to a shortage of care staff. She explained how “we need young people, at the very basic level to look after our older people”.

Although the Welsh Government has legislated Wales as a country of sanctuary, welcoming skilled immigrants to fill vacancies, particularly in the NHS, delays in processing legislative papers for refugees and asylum seekers prevent them from working. Such issues exacerbate staffing shortages and negatively impact both their and patients’ well-being.

“We need young people, at the very basic level to look after our older people” ~ Ruth Jones MP

Skills, Migration and the Welsh Workforce

Ruth Jones’ positive, welcoming stance on immigration is clear, albeit, self-admittedly, “going against the rhetoric that’s out there in terms of England in quite a strong way”. Jones describes how her mother, recently in hospital, was treated by a “brilliant” network of staff whose “vast majority were from overseas”: “they were non-white, from overseas, and they were absolutely superb”.

“Well, I’m not being funny, you’ve been retired 20 years. They’re not taking your job, they are filling a vacancy which is not your job and they don’t want your job because to be honest, they’re very highly qualified as a lawyer, a barrister, whatever. They want to come in and give to the country that has taken them in’’ ~ Ruth Jones MP

Jones expressed her frustration, empathising with foreign workers who struggle to attain their right to remain and legislative papers dealt with – “during that time, you’re not working, you’re existing on a pittance, you’re dealing with your family, you’ve got nothing. It’s bad for your mental health, it’s bad for your physical health, it’s bad for your family”.

She emphasised how the Government should prioritise getting such people into work: we can do that, “it’s not that difficult” – but political, social pressures and red-tape are debarring Labour from swifter action.

“We need to ensure that working people have hope, because you can have all the stability and all the talk about growth, but if you haven’t got hope, then people just do lose heart” ~ Ruth Jones MP

On the sorts of arguments espoused by right wing spokespeople such as Robert Jenrick and Nigel Farage, she is scathing and blunt: “somebody said, in my constituency, “oh, they’re coming, they’re taking my job”. And I said, “Well, I’m not being funny, you’ve been retired 20 years. They’re not taking your job, they are filling a vacancy which is not your job and they don’t want your job because to be honest, they’re very highly qualified as a lawyer, a barrister, whatever. They want to come in and give to the country that has taken them in””.

Jones wants to dismantle the “right wing rhetoric which says they’re freeloaders, they’re coming in to get the benefit”. They don’t want the benefit, she argues; “they want to give back”. She describes the result of proper integration as a powerful tool for enhancing the community: they become a family, paying taxes, being involved in the community: “So do you know what? I think we should welcome them with open arms”.

‘I think we should welcome them with open arms’ ~ Ruth Jones MP

Energy Transition and Economic Growth in Wales

Ruth Jones emphasises how Wales is well-positioned to capitalize on natural energy resources due to its geography: “we’ve got wind, we’ve got solar and we’ve also got tidal”. She expressed her keenness to establish a reliable and secure energy system independent of external geopolitical influences.

Jones also set out the key challenges for renewable energy in Wales, which will increasingly include connecting renewable sources to the national electricity grid, especially in mid-Wales, and developing battery storage solutions to capture and release energy as needed.

She celebrated Newport’s innovative clean energy transformation: a city boasting the largest semiconductor cluster in the UK, as well as multiple data centers, which are power-hungry and require robust renewable energy infrastructure.

Future Priorities

Ruth Jones explained the Government’s heavy emphasis on ‘growth and stability’, but has a more human message to deliver: ‘But what we do need to do is ensure that working people have hope, because you can have all the stability and all the talk about growth, but if you haven’t got hope, then people just do lose heart’.

She continued, expanding on the Government’s focus on apprenticeships, training and increased employment levels: ‘Jobs, jobs, jobs, yes, of course, but not just jobs at any cost. We want decent jobs which are well paid’.

And permanence: Jones believes in creating jobs for good, and for the long term – jobs still existent for the next half century – also something that she feels will prove crucial for communities.

‘Jobs, jobs, jobs, yes, of course, but not just jobs at any cost. We want decent jobs which are well paid’ ~ Ruth Jones MP

Ruth Jones’ overarching values rest on a celebration of both small-scale community togetherness, and cooperation on a national level; in short, unity. It is a value which has guided her from before her political journey even began, when she became aware of the power of a healthy and supportive hospital team. And it is a value which, in today’s climate of social entropy, is more apt than ever.

Ruth Jones’ words on immigration were refreshingly honest; Labour continue to remain circumspect about their rhetoric on the issue given the UK’s immense public backlash, but Jones’ support of an ‘open-armed welcome’ is a bold gambit, promising and hoping for deeper community integration for both Brits, and people from around the world.

The ID will prove individual’s right to work, with Starmer saying that people will be unable to work without a valid digital card. 

The plans were laid out at the Global Progress Action conference in London, with roll-out expected to take place by the end of the Parliment. 

Whilst concerns have been raised about data security and potential government tracking, the government website highlights the potential to streamline services including tax records, welfare and license application. 

As reported by the BBC, storing the ID cards in a digital wallet poses little risk to the user. However if plans include an app development, privacy and tracking becomes more complicated. 

Starmer made clear that the ID cards will be compulsory for anyone looking to work in the UK, kept on people’s phones with details specifying an individual’s name, date of birth, nationality or residency status, and a photograph. 

He said that it’s been “too easy” for people to “slip into the shadow economy and remain here illegally” and urged that the plan will make UK borders “more secure”.

The move will mean that employers can no longer rely on a National Insurance number, which can easily be borrowed or stolen from someone else.

The idea of ID cards was initially proposed by Tony Blair by way of the Identity Cards Act 2006. It faced backlash over concerns around data handling, rather than the cards themselves, and was repealed in 2011 by the Conservative / Liberal Democrats coalition. 

Unlike the initial scheme, the digital ID’s, provisionally called the “BritCard”, are set to be issued free of charge. 

On the government website, an “outreach programme” is mentioned alongside the venture, to provide “face-to-face support for citizens who are struggling to access the scheme.” No further details are given about this but it is expected to support the elderly, homeless, and other groups who may struggle to adopt the new digital ID.

Questions have been raised around access to necessary technology and whether gender and addresses will be included as necessary information. 

The PM calls it “an enormous opportunity for the UK” and recognises general concerns around “a secure border and controlled migration.”

The IDs will be available for all UK citizens and legal residents and will be required in order to work. For students, pensioners, or others not seeking employment, possessing a digital ID will be optional, and there will not be a reason to require them in day-to-day use.

Zack Polanski, leader of The Green Party, called the comment “bullshit” and said that “politicians have talked about little else for decades and almost always in the most toxic, dehumanising way possible.” 

In another challenge to the decision, leader of Reform, Nigel Farage, also took to X to say that it would make “no difference to illegal immagration, but it will be used to control and penalise the rest of us.” 

Farage concluded “the state should never have this much power”, while Kemi Badenoch, Conservative leader, said that while there are arguments “for and against” digital ID, making it mandatory “requires a proper national debate”.

In a post on X she said: “Can we really trust [Labour] to implement an expensive national programme that will impact all of our lives and put additional burdens on law abiding people? I doubt it.”

Featured image via No10 / Flickr.

Speaking alongside Reform’s former chairman and current head of the party’s Department for Government Efficiency, Farage unveiled his party’s toughest immigration policies yet, at a time when most Brits believe the current government is failing to keep immigration under control, pledging to bar foreign nationals from claiming benefits and making the path to British citizenship harder.

However, the most significant of Reform’s proposals is a pledge to abolish Indefinite Leave to Remain, which allows foreign nationals to stay in the UK without any time limit, free to study, work, or operate a business.

Farage and Yusuf promised to scrap this and replace it with a new system of 5-year renewable work visas. According to Yusuf these visas will be far harder to obtain than current work visas; people with a criminal record will be ineligible, the salary threshold will be raised, and the required English language proficiency will increase.

Furthermore, the pair pledged to make the path to citizenship harder, by raising the length of time one must be resident in the UK to apply for a British passport from 6 years to 7.

A notable element of the press conference was Farage and Yusuf’s repeated use of the term ‘Boriswave’ – a colloquial term coined by the online right to refer to the record-breaking levels of non-EU immigration to the UK post-pandemic, beginning under Boris Johnson’s leadership and continuing into Rishi Sunak’s.

Net migration to the UK skyrocketed from 224,000 in the year ending June 2019 to 634,000 in the year ending June 2022, and more than 900,000 in the year ending June 2023, with the vast majority of new arrivals were from non-EU countries, such as India, Pakistan and Nigeria. In fact, despite falling by nearly half since 2023, the latest provisional net migration figure of 431,000 is still higher than any year prior to 2021.

Farage described this as the ‘greatest betrayal of democratic wishes’ in living memory, referencing the fact that in 2019 Boris Johnson actually campaigned on reducing immigration, whilst Yusuf claimed that the country is yet to feel the full detriment of the ‘Boriswave.’

According to him and Farage, once the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of new arrivals acquire indefinite leave to remain, and thus become eligible for certain benefits and public services, the British taxpayer will face an enormous expense; Farage claims the cost will be £230 billion, whilst Yusuf claims it could be much higher, accusing the government of refusing to release data that will show the true extent of the issue.

The pair confirmed that the abolition of ILR will apply to those already in the country, and that the changes will lead to ‘hundreds of thousands of people having to apply and ultimately losing their settled status in the UK.’ He added that those who don’t leave voluntarily will be subject to immigration enforcement.

However, they recognised that this could have a negative impact on key sectors such as health and social care that depend heavily on migrant labour, and thus announced the introduction of an Acute Skill Shortage Visa, by which a limited number of visas will be made available for people working in sectors with high shortages of staff.

Yusuf also added that under a Reform government, entrepreneurs and investors would still be welcome in Britain, and therefore they would increase the number of routes available for ‘those willing to commit significant capital to our economy.’

The reaction to Farage and Yusuf’s announcement has been polarising. Whilst Rupert Lowe, the independent MP for Great Yarmouth who left Reform amidst unproven allegations of threatening behaviour, described it as ‘very good news,’ other politicians were less impressed. Newly elected Green Party Leader Zack Polanski called on his supporters to ‘reject’ figures who use immigration as a way to distract people from ‘talking about inequality,’ whilst Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp accused Reform of copying Conservative plans to ban migrants who claim benefits, live in social housing, or have a criminal record from settling indefinitely in the UK.

Meanwhile, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has claimed that Reform’s claim that abolishing ILR would save £230 billion is inaccurate, with Labour arguing that their figures came from a report published by the Centre for Policy Studies, who said that their own cost estimates ‘should no longer be used.’

Elsewhere in yesterday’s press conference, Farage said that the UK’s recent recognition of Palestinian statehood was ‘completely wrong,’ and was ‘rewarding terrorists.’ However, he refused to say whether he would reverse the decision – that has also recently been taken by France, Canada and Australia – if he were elected Prime Minister, an event that continues to look like a real possibility, as his party continues to top polls.

The prime minister is facing pressure from some Labour ministers and voters to take a more thorough approach to the small boats and immigration ‘crisis’ that the UK is facing.

Public concern over immigration is ever increasing which has led to protests and a rise in British and English patriotism in the form of campaigns like Operation Raise the Colours.

A recent YouGov poll for The Times found that 71 per cent of voters believe that Starmer is handling the asylum hotel issue badly, including 56 per cent of Labour voters.

Many also believe that immigration and asylum are among the most important issues facing the country, with almost four in ten voters taking this stance.

A survey carried out by the David Hume Institute and the Diffley Partnership, of 2,190 Scottish voters revealed that this sentiment is shared across the UK, with 21 per cent of those who completed the online survey in August believing that immigration is the top issue facing the country.

This is up from 16 per cent in May 2025 meaning that immigration is now a higher priority concern for Scottish voters than the economy and trust in politics.

In an attempt to address concerns from the public and UK authorities, home secretary Yvette Cooper has announced plans to overhaul the asylum appeal system to deport asylum seekers faster.

The government will also begin to put up advertisements in France highlighting a new “one in, one out” treaty, which will send small boat migrants back to France in exchange for individuals who have a right to come to the UK.

Lord David Blunkett, a former Labour home secretary has said the current Labour government needed to take more “radical action” and suggested it was failing to “grip” the issue.

Current cabinet ministers are also growing more concerned about the government’s response as it is decreasing voters trust in the party and placing it in the hands of Nigel Farage and Reform UK whose stance on immigration is considerably harsher.

The leader of Reform UK has indicated that 600,000 asylum seekers could be deported in the first parliament of a Reform government and has suggested that the next UK general election may come earlier than the expected 2029.

Farage announced this along with a five-year plan to detain and deport all migrants who arrive in the UK without permission on Tuesday morning as a news conference in Oxford.

Under the plan, named Operation Restoring Justice, Reform UK would stop anyone who comes to the UK on small boats from claiming asylum and forge deals with countries to return those people.

Starmer is open to securing returns deals with countries like Afghanistan and Eritrea however there are concerns about their humans rights records, but has insisted the government was setting out “serious” solutions to the issue, not “gimmicks”.

Despite the criticism over human rights, Reform have doubled down, with former chairman and current party DOGE head, Zia Yusuf, saying the party is “ready and willing” to work with the Taliban in Afghanistan to return asylum seekers.

Under Farage’s plans, people who arrive on small boats would be arrested on arrival, detained as unused RAF bases and, providing agreements were reached, returned to their countries of origin.

Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch responded on X that “Farage’s ‘immigration plan’ looks v familiar. We set out our Deportation Bill months ago.”

Similarities were also seen with the Conservative’s Rwanda scheme policy introduced in 2022 which came under significant criticism from human rights groups and was scrapped by Labour in 2024.

Featured image via Framalicious / Shutterstock

The policy would apply to previous applicants, with successful asylum seekers found to have worked illegally stripped of citizenship or leave to remain.

Shadow Home Secretary, Chris Philp, previously wrote to Deliveroo, Just Eat, Uber Eats and the Home Secretary calling for a crackdown on illegal workers operating in the gig economy.

His demands included immediate enforcement against companies found to be failing their legal duty to verify their employees right to work, removing illegal workers from gig platforms, and action to stop illegal workers from operating from taxpayer funded asylum accomodation.

Asylum seekers allegedly working illegally for companies like Uber Eats and Deliveroo were at the centre of controversy in June when Philp, found equipment like branded bags and bicycles outside a migrant hotel.

Further controversy arose during a protest outside a migrant hotel in Canary Warf, East London, when two motorbike drivers were blocked by protesters under the assumption they were illegal delivery riders when they were legal employees of the hotel.

Later in the day an Uber Eats cyclist was surrounded by protesters and called an “illegal” by protesters while legally delivering food to the hotel, eventually being escorted to safety by police.

Last month, the Home Secretary announced a new agreement with delivery firms to share the locations of migrant hotels in a bid to crack down on illegal operations from them, helping firms to close illegal worker’s accounts.

Speaking on the agreement, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Illegal working undermines honest business, exploits vulnerable individuals and fuels organised immigration crime.

“By enhancing our data sharing with delivery companies, we are taking decisive action to close loopholes and increase enforcement.

A Deliveroo spokesperson said: “Deliveroo has led the sector in introducing security measures to prevent the abuse of our platform and tackle the sophisticated criminals seeking new ways to exploit all delivery platforms’ systems.

“We are fully committed to working with the government as we continue to collectively combat illegal working.”

The Conservatives claim that the agreement fails to “punish offenders or close loopholes” like account sharing.

Instead, the party aims to create a “common-sense” plan to stop asylum seekers from working illegally.

Their proposals include making it clearer to asylum seakers that illegal working during their application prcess is a disqualifier in itself, as it is a criminal offence, and reclaiming the wages earned from illegal work to cover the costs of housing and supporting them.

This policy would apply retrospectively, stripping citizenship or leave to remain from any successful asylum applicant if they were working illegally during their claim period.

Kemi Badenoch, Leader of the Conservative Party, said: “This is a loophole that rewards illegality, protects perpetrators, and mocks hard-working taxpayers.

“If you come here illegally, take advantage of our asylum system, and then break our laws by illegally working – your asylum claim must be rejected, and you should be on the next plane home.

“Under my leadership, the Conservatives will never allow Britain to become a soft touch for those who think they can break the rules and profit from it.”

Chris Philp said: “When I visited an asylum hotel, what I saw shocked me – a taxpayer-funded base of operations for an underground courier cartel operating right under this government’s nose.

“Illegal working is a pull factor sold by smugglers as a reward to break into our country and cross the Channel. That is why we are calling for new action – anyone who plays the system should have their status stripped, wages confiscated, and be deported.”

Featured image via MikeDotta / Shutterstock.

Those sanctioned will face asset freezes, exclusion from the UK financial system, and travel bans to British territories.

Illegal Channel crossings have reached record highs in 2025, with approximately 23,000 illegal migrants having made the journey across the Channel since January, the highest figure ever recorded.

Since Labour came to power, a total of 46,000 crossings have been documented. In the first quarter of 2025, 6,642 migrants arrived via small boats, yet only 482 were removed, representing just five per cent of arrivals.  

Minister of State for Europe, North America and Overseas Territories, Stephen Doughty, commented: “Our new sanctions regime will target the gangs profiting from the vile trade in people smuggling, human trafficking, and organised immigration crime

“It will enhance our ability to prevent, combat, deter, and disrupt dangerous irregular migration and hold perpetrators accountable. This will be a global regime, expanding our reach to target individuals and entities facilitating these journeys.”  

Despite Labour’s commitment to reducing the reliance on hotel accommodation for asylum seekers, recent figures suggest limited progress.

As of 31 March, 32,345 asylum seekers were being housed in hotels, an increase from 29,585 in June 2024, when the Conservative government left office.

The scheme continues to cost the taxpayer around £1 billion a year. Chancellor Reeves is keen to cut this, saying in a statement last month: “Funding that I have provided today, including from the Transformation Fund, will cut the asylum backlog, hear more appeal cases, and return people who have no right to be here”.

Despite this pledge, the data indicates that Labour has yet to reverse the trend or improve significantly on the record of the previous government. 

The aim is to disrupt the financial networks and resources that enable organised immigration groups and weaken their ability to support Channel crossings.

Opposing the plan, Shadow Home Secretary, Chris Philp, said: “The truth is you don’t stop the Channel crossings by freezing a few bank accounts in Baghdad or slapping a travel ban on a dinghy dealer in Damascus.

“Swathes of young men are arriving daily, in boats bought online, guided by traffickers who laugh at our laws and cash in on our weakness”.

Other leading politicians are sseptical of mass deportation attempts, Reform UK leader, Nigel Farage voiced similar concerns last summer, calling crackdowns a “political impossibility”.  

Labour’s landmark sanctions signal a shift in rhetoric on illegal immigration, but questions remain over their practical impact. With record crossings and limited removals, critics argue that tougher words must now be matched by results. 

But how exactly does the Whitepaper differ from the Conservatives’ controversial and ultimately unsuccessful Rwanda scheme – and can it really reduce net migration without compromising the UK’s ability to attract and retain top international talent? 

An “island of strangers”: What is driving the government’s immigration tough talk?

During his press conference unveiling the Immigration Whitepaper, Prime Minister Keir Starmer warned that Britain risked becoming an “island of strangers” if immigration remained unchecked. This phrase, intended to underscore the importance of integration and social cohesion, has ignited significant debate across the political spectrum.

Critics, including several Labour MPs and commentators, have compared Starmer’s language to that of Enoch Powell’s infamous 1968 “Rivers of Blood” speech, which warned of communities becoming “strangers in their own country.”

Labour backbencher Zarah Sultana and former shadow chancellor John McDonnell expressed concern that such rhetoric could echo divisive sentiments from the past. London Mayor Sadiq Khan also refrained from using similar terminology, emphasising the need for inclusive discourse.

The controversy around Starmer’s comments highlights the heightened sensitivity surrounding immigration discourse in the UK, particularly in a context where net immigration surged to unprecedented levels. Net immigration reached record highs in recent years, peaking at 906,000 in the year to June 2023 before declining slightly to 728,000 in 2024.

These numbers reflect long-term arrivals -those staying 12 months or more – including foreign workers, international students, asylum seekers, family members joining relatives, and returning British citizens.

But what is behind Britain’s record numbers of immigration?

The shift began with the post-Brexit immigration system, which opened up new routes for non-EU nationals. Policies widened access through the expansion of care worker visas and by adopting broader definitions of what qualifies as “skilled work.”

At the same time, the UK saw a sharp increase in international students and their dependents, further boosting the numbers. Temporary humanitarian pathways for people fleeing crises in Ukraine, Hong Kong, and Afghanistan also played a significant role. On top of these factors, more immigrants have been choosing to remain in the UK for longer periods, contributing to the sustained high net immigration.

The Labour government views this trend as both a political and economic challenge. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has described the current levels of net immigration as “unsustainable,” placing the blame on the previous government for enabling employers and universities to become overly reliant on foreign recruitment.

The issue has become increasingly politicised, especially following Labour’s losses in recent local elections, where Reform UK capitalized on voter concerns by taking a hard line on immigration. With public anxiety mounting over housing shortages, healthcare access, and social cohesion, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has pledged to do what he claims the Conservatives failed to accomplish in over a decade: Restore control over the UK’s borders.

Raising the bar for skilled workers

One of the biggest shifts comes in the form of reforming the way skilled worker visas are awarded – and who qualifies for them. The rules for bringing in overseas workers are getting significantly tougher – if companies want to hire from abroad, they will have to prove it is necessary, and that they’ve tried hiring at home first.

The previous Conservative approach greatly expanded “skilled” visas to jobs requiring only A-level qualifications and relatively modest salaries. By early 2024, nearly 60 per cent of so-called skilled worker visas were actually going to jobs below graduate level (RQF 6) – the new plan sharply “raises the bar” for foreign workers.

In future, only graduate-level roles will qualify for skilled visas, and salary thresholds will also rise across the board. Details are to be set after expert review, but the change is expected to remove roughly 180 occupations from visa eligibility.

At the same time, ministers plan to eliminate loopholes and sweeteners that made hiring from abroad easier than training at home – including the removal of the 20 per cent salary discount for jobs on the Shortage Occupation List (which effectively lowers salary requirement for certain roles).

The Immigration Skills Charge (ISC) – a fee employers pay per foreign worker hired – will jump 32 per cent (its first increase since 2017), raising costs for companies that rely on imported labour. Sectors with chronic overseas recruitment will be pressed to boost local apprenticeships and wages, or face intervention by a new Labour Market Advisory body.

One of the most headline-grabbing moves is the plan to end overseas recruitment of care workers. During the past few years, amid staffing crises, the UK issued work visas to tens of thousands of care staff – over 105,000 care worker visas in 2022-23 alone – often in lower-paid roles. Citing “significant concerns over abuse and exploitation” in the adult social care visa route, the government will “close social care visas to new applications from abroad.”

In other words, care homes and agencies will be barred from sponsoring new care workers from overseas (after a transition period for those already here). Instead, ministers say, care providers should improve pay and conditions to attract UK staff.

This marks a sharp departure from the previous approach of plugging gaps with foreign labor. Other skilled visa tweaks target perceived points of misuse. For instance, dependants accompanying foreign workers will face new limits – those in lower-paid roles won’t be allowed to bring family at all, and anyone who does will need to earn above a higher threshold.

While some welcomed Labour’s focus on domestic workforce development, many in the care sector warned of serious disruption. Care England described the proposals as a “crushing blow for an already fragile sector”. Unison’s general secretary stated: “The NHS and the care sector would have collapsed long ago without the thousands of workers who’ve come to the UK from overseas.” She also urged ministers to stop labelling care work as “low-skilled” and called for progress on fair pay agreements.

In 2023, over 58,000 international care workers entered the UK under skilled worker visas, constituting nearly half of the new additions to the social care workforce.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper defended the policy on the BBC, asserting that employers should focus on recruiting from the existing pool of care workers already present in the UK, including those who arrived on visas but have yet to be placed in roles.

“They can also extend existing visas. They could recruit as well from people who are on other visas who are already here,” she stated. “But we do think it’s time to end that care worker recruitment.”

International students and post-study visas 

International students have become another major component of net immigration – and political scrutiny. Student visas and their dependents accounted for a significant chunk of the immigration surge between 2021 and 2023. At the peak, over 143,000 dependents joined students in the UK – up from just 16,000 in 2019. Recent changes have already restricted this, bringing the figure down to around 22,000 in 2024.

The White Paper takes a careful but firm line. The popular Graduate Route – which allows international students to stay and work after graduation – will be retained, but its duration will be reduced from two years to 18 months. The government argues this still provides time for graduates to find jobs, but discourages long-term stay without contribution.

More controversially, the paper proposes a new 6 per cent levy on universities’ international student fee income, with the proceeds reinvested into domestic skills training. The aim is to reduce over-reliance on overseas students, especially at lower-ranked institutions, which saw a 49 per cent increase in visas between 2021 and 2023.

Universities UK (UUK), the sector’s main body, responded cautiously. In a recent statement, UUK said it welcomed the retention of the Graduate Route and acknowledged the need for “sustainable” international recruitment. However, it warned that the levy could impact the UK’s global competitiveness. “International students bring enormous social and economic benefits to the UK, while helping fund university courses for British students,” said UUK chief executive Vivienne Stern.

For now, the government says it is “exploring” the levy with more detail expected in the autumn Budget.

Who gets to stay? The new tests for integration and citizenship

Perhaps the most sweeping changes in the white paper come in the rules for who can settle permanently in the UK and eventually become a British citizen. The philosophy is one of “earned citizenship”: Making long-term settlement less of an automatic entitlement and more conditional on integration into UK society. As the document starkly puts it, “citizenship in the UK is a privilege and not a right”, and the government says it “does not want to offer” that privilege to those who “have not demonstrated” they respect the rules.

In practice, the qualifying period for settlement (permanent residence) will double from 5 years to 10 years for most immigrants.

Under current rules, many work visa holders, for example, can apply for “indefinite leave to remain” after five years, and citizenship after six. The new policy resets that timeline: A decade of lawful residence will be the standard before someone can become settled, significantly lengthening the journey to citizenship. However, crucially, there’s an “earned” fast-track built in. Those who make especially strong contributions to the UK economy or society will have “the opportunity to reduce the qualifying period” for settlement and citizenship.

This echoes the white paper’s broader theme of rewarding contribution – a nod to public sentiment that immigrants should “earn” their place. Family members of Britons will still have a shorter 5-year path to settlement as now, and humanitarian cases or vulnerable groups will retain protections. 

Language and cultural integration tests are also being toughened. Currently, skilled workers must speak English at an intermediate level (B1), and new rules have recently required even overseas students on degree courses to demonstrate English ability. Now, even adult dependents of immigrants – for example, a worker’s spouse or a student’s husband or wife – will be required to prove basic English (A1) before coming, aligning with the existing requirement for spouses of UK citizens.

The emphasis on learning English reflects a political calculus as well as a principled stance: Polls show the public strongly values immigrants learning English. Starmer has echoed that, saying Britain is welcoming, “but the public expect that people who come here to learn the language and integrate.”

The backdrop to these changes is the reality that the huge inflows of recent years would translate into a surge of people eligible for settlement and citizenship under the old rules. Indeed, the Home Office notes that given “the extremely high level of net immigration between 2019 and 2024,” many more people would soon qualify to stay permanently if nothing changed.

Labour hopes to reassure the public that future Britons-by-choice will be fully invested in the country, and that the era of “easy” immigration leading to automatic citizenship is over. Whether these moves genuinely strengthen integration or simply make life harder for immigrants will be a subject of debate.

But politically, the message is clear: High immigration might be a reality of Britain’s global future, but those numbers must be managed in a way that voters feel immigration is under control, fair, and serving the national interest. 

What’s next?

While the Immigration Whitepaper sets out a bold new direction for the UK’s immigration system, it is not yet law – but rather a policy document to outline its proposed reforms and the reasoning behind them.

Now that the whitepaper has been published, the process moves into its next phase. Several of the proposals, such as raising the skilled worker salary threshold or introducing new settlement timelines, will require changes to existing immigration rules or new secondary legislation.

These changes must go through formal scrutiny in Parliament, and some may face challenges or amendments during that process.

In parallel, the government will launch consultations with key stakeholders, including employers, universities, care providers, and immigration experts.

These discussions are expected to influence the final shape of the policies, especially those with significant economic or social consequences. Complex measures, like the proposed 6 per cent levy on international student fees, will likely take longer to implement and may be revised before they are brought into force.

Featured image via Lauren Hurley / No 10 Downing Street on Flickr.

It marks the first time the Conservative’s have published a full bill while in opposition.

A party spokesperson said: “This Bill is a direct challenge to the Labour Government’s failure on immigration.  

“It spells out exactly what a serious, credible immigration policy looks like—and proves the Conservative Party, under new leadership, is ready to govern with strength and principle.”

The key tenants of the deportation bill include the automatic deportation of anyone who enters the country illegaly, disapplying the Human Rights Act from all immigration-related matters, doubling the residency requirement for indefininte leave to remain from five to 10 years, and introducing a legally bidning cap on annual migration.

A number of other policy changes have been tabled as well, including removing GDPR protections from foreign criminals and illegal migrants and visa sanctions on uncooperative countries.

More stringent tests will also be implemented on partners and civil partners to identify illegitimate relationships or exploitative practices related to relationships such as first-cousin marriage, and scientific age testing will be implemented to end “the scandal of adult migrants pretending to be children to exploit our education and welfare systems.”

Chris Philp MP, Shadow Home Secretary, said: “For months this Labour government has turned a blind eye to the crisis at our borders, as small boat crossings have increased.

“The Conservatives are today introducing the Deportation Bill – a bold, pragmatic and deliverable plan to take back control of our borders and restore public confidence in our immigration system. If Labour can’t or won’t act, we will an introduce a Bill and Labour MPs can vote against it.

“Labour and Reform are both complicit in the trade of empty slogans and hollow promises. Our plan can be enacted now to get immigration back under control.”

The party also claim to be “pushing for new rules to bring an end [to the] era of mass low-skilled migration” by tabling amendments to Labour’s Border Security, Asylum and Immigration bill.

These ammendents aim to reduce the amount of family visas being issues by implementing a £38,700 salary threshold for UK based partners of asylum seekers, mandating that both partners must be over the age of 23 to combat forced or underage marriages, and create criteria that partners must have been married for a minimum of two years, and that no spousal visas will be issued to first cousins.

The new deportation bill comes after headline figures suggest that 10,000 people had crossed the English Channel as of 28 April 2025, the earliest point in the year that the number has reached 10,000 since records began in 2018. In the past three years it took until June to hit this number.

The party has criticised Labour for this figure, saying the government “is not serious about tackling immigration”, while also critiquing Reform UK for having “no plan” for the issue and that the party led by Nigel Farage “cannot be trusted” to crack down on immigration.

Featured image via Edward Massey/CCHQ on Flickr.

The Home Office confirmed today that any foreign national placed on the sex offenders register will automatically lose eligibility for refugee protections under a new amendment to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill. Appeals by asylum seekers receiving accommodation support and by foreign offenders must also now be decided within 24 weeks.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: “We are restoring order to a broken asylum system that has been mired in delay and dysfunction for far too long, and we are strengthening our system to ensure that the rules are respected and enforced.”

“Sex offenders who pose a risk to the community should not be allowed to benefit from refugee protections in the UK. We are strengthening the law to ensure these appalling crimes are taken seriously.”

As part of the reforms, new technology will be rolled out across the asylum system with AI supporting caseworkers by summarising interviews and speeding up country research, saving up to an hour per case. The changes aim to clear the asylum backlog, end the use of hotels, and save taxpayer money.

Safeguarding Minister Jess Philips added: “It is right we ensure that convicted, registered sex offenders are not entitled to refugee status, as part of our work to see these awful crimes treated with the seriousness they deserve and perpetrators held to account.”

The crackdown will also give the Immigration Advice Authority new powers to fine unregistered immigration advisers up to £15,000. Separately, the government will force gig economy employers to conduct right-to-work checks on contractors for the first time.

The Home Office said removals of people with no right to remain have surpassed 24,000 in the nine months since the election, with a 16 per cent increase in the removal of foreign criminals. Asylum decision-making rates rose by 52 per cent in the last quarter of 2024.

The Conservative Party has criticised the Labour government’s new asylum measures, arguing they do not go far enough.

Chris Philp MP, Shadow Home Secretary, said: “This is too little, too late from a Labour Government that has scrapped our deterrent and overseen the worst year ever for small boat crossings – with a record 10,000 people crossing this year already.”

He also pointed out what he described as the failure to swiftly remove foreign criminals, noting that they “pose a danger to British citizens and must be removed, but so often this is frustrated by spurious legal claims based on human rights claims, not asylum claims.”

The reforms are part of the government’s Plan for Change to strengthen borders, dismantle people-smuggling operations, and restore order to the UK asylum system.

Featured image via Andy Taylor/Home Office

A Counter-Terror Approach to People Smuggling

For the first time, law enforcement agencies will be granted counter-terror style powers to tackle organised immigration crime. This legislative shift represents a significant escalation in the government’s strategy, moving beyond reactive measures and instead focusing on early intervention. Officials will be empowered to act much earlier in their investigations, aiming to dismantle smuggling networks before migrants even set foot in a boat.

A key element of the bill is the ability for police and immigration officers to seize and search electronic devices – such as mobile phones and laptops – before an arrest is made, in order to track smuggling networks and disrupt their operations. The legislation also introduces new criminal offences targeting those involved in the supply chain, making it illegal to sell or handle small boat parts for suspected use in people smuggling. Those found guilty could face up to 14 years in prison. Moreover, anyone caught gathering intelligence – such as tracking weather conditions or planning departure points – will now be at risk of prosecution.

Perhaps the most striking provision is the introduction of a new offence aimed at individuals who engage in coercive or reckless behaviour at sea. Instances where smugglers use intimidation to force migrants into unsafe conditions, prevent rescue attempts, or incite disorder on small boats could now carry a prison sentence of up to five years. The government argues that such measures will help curb the chaos and dangerous conditions frequently witnessed on these crossings.

Strengthening Law Enforcement Capabilities

The bill places significant emphasis on bolstering the capabilities of UK law enforcement agencies. Central to this effort is the appointment of a new Border Security Commander, who will be given statutory powers to coordinate law enforcement bodies and disrupt smuggling networks more effectively. The government argues that this will introduce a much-needed strategic approach to tackling illegal migration, ensuring better cooperation between different agencies.

Additionally, biometric checks on individuals coming to the UK will be modernised to prevent those with criminal histories from entering the country. Law enforcement agencies will also be granted the power to impose Serious Crime Prevention Orders, which could lead to travel bans, internet and mobile phone restrictions, and curbs on financial transactions for suspected smugglers. These new powers mark a shift towards preemptive action, preventing organised crime groups from establishing operations rather than dismantling them after the fact.

This legislative approach is designed to move the focus away from penalising migrants and towards the dismantling of the smuggling networks that exploit them. While previous policies – such as the Conservatives’ Rwanda deportation plan – were widely criticised as ineffective and inhumane, this bill appears to offer a more structured and enforceable alternative. However, critics argue that while targeting smugglers is necessary, it does little to address the underlying reasons why people attempt these crossings in the first place.

Tougher Sentences for Smugglers and Organisers: Smash the Gangs

The bill aims to send a strong message to those involved in people smuggling by introducing harsher penalties. Those found guilty of selling or handling small boat parts for smuggling operations will now face up to 14 years in prison. Similarly, those who use threats or coercion during crossings could receive up to five years behind bars. Furthermore, individuals who collect and share information that aids smugglers – such as departure timings and weather conditions – could also face prosecution under the new laws.

These provisions mark a significant tightening of the legal framework surrounding people smuggling, ensuring that those who profit from this trade face serious consequences. However, the effectiveness of these measures will depend on enforcement. Smuggling networks are notoriously adaptable, and it remains to be seen whether tougher laws alone will be enough to deter criminal organisations.

The Political Divide: Will It Work?

While the government insists that this bill is a game-changer, opposition voices remain sceptical. Labour presents the plan as a serious and structured alternative to the Conservatives’ Rwanda scheme, which cost taxpayers £700 million without a single deportation taking place. Cooper has been keen to emphasise that this is not a gimmick, but a systematic approach to tackling the root of the problem.

However, Conservative Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp has dismissed the bill as “minor tinkering”, arguing that it lacks the necessary deterrents to curb illegal migration effectively. Critics from humanitarian organisations have also voiced concerns, warning that without expanding legal migration routes, the government risks simply making crossings even more dangerous. The bill, they argue, focuses too much on enforcement and not enough on providing realistic alternatives for those fleeing conflict and persecution.

Final Thought

The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill marks a significant policy shift, moving away from punitive measures against migrants towards a targeted crackdown on criminal gangs. If successful, it could significantly disrupt smuggling networks and reduce the number of dangerous crossings. However, the challenge lies in implementation. Without increased cooperation with European authorities and investment in safe and legal migration pathways, there is a risk that smugglers will simply adapt their methods, leading to further human suffering.

Whether this legislation will truly “smash the gangs” or prove to be another political pledge that struggles to deliver remains to be seen.

For more of Chamber UK’s insight on immigration and border control policies, please click here.