Labour opening doors to more illegal immigration
Labour Waters Down Immigration Controls Amidst Controversy
Ministers Face Backlash Over Changes to Border Security Legislation
The Labour government has announced significant modifications to border control legislation, prompting fierce criticism from opposition MPs over the softening of regulations concerning illegal migrants’ pathways to citizenship and age verification protocols.
In a controversial move, the Home Office is proceeding with the repeal of Conservative-implemented regulations that effectively barred small boat arrivals from obtaining British citizenship. Additionally, the government is rolling back legislation that previously authorised ministers to categorise asylum seekers who declined scientific age assessments as adults by default.
The Shadow Home Secretary, Chris Philp, launched a blistering critique of the policy shift, characterising it as a “total capitulation to people smugglers” that would transform the United Kingdom into “the soft touch of Europe”. However, government sources have defended the changes, arguing that the Conservative Party had made “such a mess” of implementing these powers that they remained dormant since their parliamentary passage.
The modifications emerge within the framework of the newly published Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, which Labour ministers assert will address the ongoing small boats crisis. A detailed examination of the legislation reveals the government’s intention to repeal substantial portions of the previous Conservative government’s Illegal Migration Act, which had only received parliamentary approval in 2023.
The Conservative legislation had incorporated stringent provisions that rendered virtually any individual entering the country illegally ineligible for settled status and, ultimately, citizenship. Moreover, it contained a controversial clause empowering authorities to classify asylum seekers as adults if they refused to undergo scientific age assessment procedures.
Responding to the changes, Mr Philp expressed grave concerns to The Telegraph, stating: “It will lead to dangerous young men being placed with teenage girls and makes the UK the soft touch of Europe. Starmer is a weak Prime Minister. He is weak on borders and is weak when it comes to protecting our borders, our children and our people.”
The age assessment debate has taken on particular significance given recent statistics. In the first six months of the previous year, authorities identified more than 1,300 illegal migrants who had falsely claimed to be minors. Official data demonstrates that unaccompanied minors enjoy significantly higher asylum approval rates, with three-quarters of cases receiving positive determinations compared to approximately half for adults.
The implications of age classification extend beyond asylum decisions. Those designated as under-18s receive educational placements and council accommodation, rather than being housed in migrant hotels. The current system relies on initial assessments conducted by two Home Office staff members who evaluate “physical appearance and demeanour”. Under existing guidelines, categorising an individual claiming to be a child as an adult requires evidence that “very strongly suggests they are significantly over 18 years of age”.
In contrast to British practices, other major European nations, including France and Germany, routinely employ medical examinations to determine asylum seekers’ ages. These assessments typically involve X-ray analyses of hand and wrist bones, molar teeth examinations, and MRI scans of knee and collar bones.
Whilst the power to conduct such assessments in Britain was established through the 2022 Nationality and Borders Act, implementation remains pending. That legislation stipulated that officials must consider a migrant’s refusal to undergo such tests as “damaging” to their credibility regarding age-related claims. The subsequent 2023 Illegal Migration Act strengthened this position, enabling ministers to classify those refusing assessment as adults automatically.
Labour’s current position maintains the more moderate 2022 powers whilst reserving the right to introduce stronger measures if deemed necessary. A government source dismissed accusations of being lenient on border controls, highlighting Conservative failures in managing illegal immigration: “Labour will continue to use age assessment and won’t hesitate to go further in legislation if needed.”
The citizenship ban had faced criticism for creating an unsustainable limbo situation for asylum seekers, effectively preventing the processing of their claims. Labour has committed to addressing the substantial backlog of 177,000 cases, which has resulted in 35,000 migrants being accommodated in hotels at an annual cost of £3 billion to taxpayers.
Former Home Secretary Suella Braverman, who spearheaded the Illegal Migration Act, accused Labour of “decriminalising illegal migration”. She denounced the Border Security Bill, stating it “removes all the security and provisions we had put into place to keep the UK safe and is a disgrace”. She added emphatically, “To put it bluntly, it is an insult to the British people. It shamefully opens up our borders and disgracefully allows illegal immigrants to become citizens.”
Rupert Lowe, the Reform MP for Great Yarmouth, offered a particularly stark assessment: “Our asylum system is already as soft as a boiled maggot. Zero tolerance is required. It is abundantly clear that thousands of males are fooling the incompetent Home Office through lies over their age, sexuality, religion and more. It is a scam. The word of the migrant is often taken as the truth, with ‘the benefit of the doubt’ regularly implemented as official policy.”
Labour has defended its approach, emphasising that its reforms incorporate new deterrent measures, including substantial prison sentences for migrants who deliberately delay rescue until reaching UK waters. The Border Security Bill introduces an offence of endangering life at sea, carrying a maximum five-year custodial sentence. This provision specifically targets those who intentionally obstruct rescue efforts in French waters to ensure reaching British territory.
Furthermore, the legislation criminalises the handling or supply of small boat components, engines, or life jackets intended for channel crossings, with offenders facing potential 14-year imprisonment terms.
A Home Office spokesperson provided official comment: “The new Border Security Asylum and Immigration Bill introduces workable measures to strengthen cross-system, operational efforts to tighten border security, enhance upstream work with international partners and help ensure a properly functioning, secure immigration system.
“The Illegal Migration Act has largely not been commenced (including this measure on age assessments); nor will it be under this Government’s policy which focuses on delivering long-term, credible policies that restore order to the asylum system.
“We have robust processes in place to verify and assess an individual’s age where there is doubt, including the National Age Assessment Board, and have maintained the provisions on scientific assessments from the Nationality & Borders Act 2022.”
The ongoing debate reflects the complex challenges facing the UK’s immigration system and highlights the significant ideological differences between political parties regarding border control and asylum policy. As the legislation progresses through Parliament, it is likely to face continued scrutiny and debate from all sides of the political spectrum.