Kate Whannelpolitical reporter
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has championed sweeping changes to the UK asylum system, telling MPs the current situation is “out of control and unfair”.
Speaking in the House of Commons, Mahmood said: “If we fail to address this crisis, we will draw more people down a path that begins with anger and ends in hate.”
Under the plans, refugee status will become temporary, guaranteed housing support for asylum seekers will end and new “legal and safe routes” to the UK will be created.
Some Labor MPs expressed concern, with Nadia Whittome calling the plans “dystopian” and “shameful”, but Conservatives gave the measures a cautious welcome.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the proposals were “small positive steps”. However, he warned that unless the UK left the European Convention on Human Rights, Mahmood’s efforts would be “doomed to failure”.
Badenoch urged the Home Secretary to work with the Conservatives, saying she might find their votes “helpful” if Labor MPs did not support the changes.
Over the past year, the government has been forced to backtrack on some of its policies, including cuts to welfare and winter fuel payments, after objections from its own MPs.
Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Max Wilkinson welcomed the introduction of new safe and legal pathways but accused the Home Secretary of “stoking division through the use of intemperate language”.
Mahmood responded angrily, telling the MP: “I wish I had the privilege of walking around this country and not seeing the division that the issue of migration and the asylum system is creating across the country.”
She said she regularly faced racist abuse, using racial slurs which she claims are used against her, as well as being told to “go back home”.
So far, around 20 Labor MPs have criticized the plans. Whittome, MP for Nottingham East, accused the government of “trashing the rights and protections of people who have suffered imaginable trauma”.
Folkestone and Hythe MP, and immigration lawyer Tony Vaughan, said making refugee status temporary would create a “situation of perpetual limbo and alienation”.
Richard Burgon said the measures were “morally wrong” and would “alienate Labor voters”.
“Why not recognize it now and not in a few months and do a 180 degree turnaround?” said the Leeds East MP.
Other Labor MPs expressed their support for Mahmood. Chris Murray told BBC Radio 5 Live the system had to be fair “otherwise it will collapse, and there is nothing progressive about allowing that to happen”.
Blackley and Middleton South MP Graham Stringer said the Home Secretary was “on the right path”.
He said she would reach a “compromise” with Labor MPs, but added: “It could all be in vain if we don’t leave the European Convention on Human Rights.”
Speaking later to the BBC, Mahmood said changing the system was a “moral mission” for her.
“If we don’t win this argument… we will lose public support for having an asylum system and therefore we will lose something brilliant about this country.
“I’m not willing to jeopardize public support for having an asylum system.”
He acknowledged that some Labor MPs had concerns but insisted that “the vast majority of my colleagues agree with me”.
So far this year, 111,800 people have applied for asylum in the UK: 39% arrived by small boat, while 37% arrived by legal means before applying for asylum.
The government says its plans aim to reduce the number of people coming to the UK and increase expulsions of people who do not have a legal right to be in the country.
The Home Office published the changes in a 30-page document and a few hours later Mahmood presented them to the House of Commons.
Under the proposals, people granted refugee status will only be allowed to stay in the country temporarily, with their status reviewed every 30 months, half the current period.
People could be returned to their country of origin when it is considered safe to do so.
The amount of time refugees will have to stay in the UK before they are allowed to apply for permanent residence will quadruple from five years to 20.
Families with children who have been denied asylum will be offered incentives to leave, but could be forcibly removed if they refuse to do so voluntarily.
Asylum seekers with income or assets would have to contribute to the cost of their stay in the UK.
Mahmood told MPs this would “put an end to the absurdity of an asylum seeker receiving £800 a month from his family and an Audi being given free accommodation at taxpayers’ expense and the courts judging we could do nothing about it”.
Home Office sources have rejected suggestions that asylum seekers could have items of sentimental value, such as wedding rings, confiscated to pay for their accommodation.
To facilitate the removal of rejected asylum seekers, the government intends to change the way the European Convention on Human Rights and the Modern Slavery Act are applied.
Mahmood also threatened to stop granting visas to people from three African countries – Angola, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Namibia – unless those governments improved cooperation on deportations.
Outlining his plans to limit legal and safe routes, Mahmood said community and voluntary organizations would have a “greater role” in welcoming and supporting new arrivals.
UK reform leader Nigel Farage praised Mahmood’s “strong language” and suggested he was auditioning to join his party.
However, he said he had “serious doubts” his plans would survive objections from Labor MPs or the European Court of Human Rights.
Zack Polanski, leader of the Green Party of England and Wales, told BBC Newsnight: “All Labor MPs must look to their conscience.
“This is extreme, it is inhumane and this is a government of cowards.
“They chose the retired, the disabled and now they are targeting people fleeing war and conflict.”
Enver Solomon, of the charity Refugee Council, said tightening the system would not deter people from “fleeing for their lives”.
He said people were not coming to the UK because of asylum rules but because they spoke English or had family ties or community connections in the country.
“We have those communities because of our historical ties and our past history as a large colonial nation,” he added.
