Shabana Mahmood faces backlash over her plan to overhaul the asylum system, increasing deportations. Photo / Getty Images
Shabana Mahmood is facing a growing Labour backlash over her plan for the biggest overhaul of the asylum system since the Second World War.
The Home Secretary is proposing fundamental reforms to increase deportations and reduce the pull factors making Britain Europe’s destination for “asylum shoppers”.
However, Labour MPs accused the Government of promoting rhetoric that risked “divisiveness” and fuelled racism and abuse, with one claiming the plans were “performatively cruel” and “economically misjudged”.
Refugee status for those granted asylum will be made temporary and reviewed every 30 months. They will be returned home if their country becomes safe, mirroring an approach that Denmark has adopted.
Refugees who arrive illegally will have to wait up to 20 years before they qualify for permanent residence, four times the current timeframe. Even those who come legally will face 10 years.
The plans have emerged amid growing unease among Labour MPs with Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership, with Downing St ditching the plan to raise income tax in the Budget and No 10 engaging in a briefing war against his leadership rivals.
Ministers were forced to push back against claims that Mahmood was seeking to “out-Reform” the Reform UK party, whose hardline policies of mass deportations and stripping some migrants of permanent settlement have helped the Right-wing group secure a lead in the opinion polls.
More than a dozen Labour MPs had publicly signalled their concerns over the asylum reforms either by reposting colleagues’ opposition or speaking out.
Tony Vaughan, the moderate Labour MP for Folkestone, Hythe and Romney Marsh, condemned the “rhetoric around these reforms” which he claimed “encourages the culture of divisiveness that sees racism and abuse growing in our communities”.
He posted on X: “The Prime Minister said in September that we are at a fork in the road. These asylum proposals suggest we have taken the wrong turning.
“The idea that recognised refugees need to be deported is wrong. We absolutely need immigration controls. And where those controls decide to grant asylum, we should welcome and integrate, not create perpetual limbo and alienation.”
John McDonnell, the former shadow chancellor under Jeremy Corbyn, shared Vaughan’s post on X, noting that he was not a traditional Left-wing critic of the Government and had displayed a “considered approach to issues”.
“He’s certainly not what the media would call a ‘usual suspect’. I suspect he is reflecting here what many in the PLP feel,” said McDonnell.
Meanwhile Stella Creasy, the MP for Walthamstow, condemned Mahmood’s plans for refugees to be offered only temporary right to stay in Britain as putting “victims of torture or persecution in a perpetual limbo”.
She said: “This is not just performatively cruel, it’s economically misjudged. There is scant evidence that Denmark’s decision to refuse to grant long-term asylum to most has deterred anyone who would have chosen Denmark as a destination.”
She added: “In reality, if this policy becomes law the UK will require ICE-style raids to remove people – and their children.” ICE refers to United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal law agency.
A senior Labour MP said the Home Secretary was right to “tighten loopholes” in the asylum system, but warned that refugees, asylum seekers and migrants could “become conflated”.
Sarah Champion, chairman of the Commons international development committee, said: “The Home Secretary is absolutely right to tighten loopholes to prevent those gaming the system. However, the UK has a proud record for supporting refugees.
“My biggest concern is that refugees, asylum seekers and migrants become conflated, to the detriment of our reputation as a principled country that stands by the most vulnerable.”
Dr Simon Opher, the Labour MP for Stroud first elected in 2024, said it was right to “stop the boats because it’s dangerous” but the Government should “stop the scapegoating of immigrants because it’s wrong and cruel”.
Brian Leishman, Labour MP for Alloa and Grangemouth, described some of the proposals to be announced this afternoon as “very Reform in their nature”.
He told Times Radio: “Speaking with other Labour MPs, I know that there’s a real degree of disgust at some of these proposals.”
Another left-wing MP said Mahmood was “competing for the hard-right vote” with her immigration crackdown.
The backbencher said it felt like the party was “abandoning millions of tolerant voters”, including people from ethnic minorities, with its new asylum policy. The MP told The Telegraph: “We can’t out-Reform [Reform] because they have no scruples. So whatever we do, they will outbid us.”
Richard Tice, Reform’s deputy leader, said Mahmood was “beginning to sound like she’s putting in an application for vetting to join Reform”.
He said that he thought the Home Secretary’s asylum plans were “well-intentioned” but he did not believe she would be able to deliver the changes.
However, allies say that Mahmood believes that the proposed reforms are about more than Labour’s electoral fortunes. “This is the last chance for a decent, mainstream politics,” one said. “If these moderate forces fail, something darker will follow.
“But this demands that moderates are willing to do things that will seem immoderate to some. She has reminded those who are reluctant to embrace her ambition with an ultimatum: ‘If you don’t like this, you won’t like what follows me’.”
Mahmood, who has been tipped as a potential leader of the Labour Party, has argued that unless the “broken” asylum system can be fixed and migrants deterred from crossing the Channel, the public will lose trust in the Government.
However, No 10 refused to rule out the possibility that the number of Channel crossings could increase before it went down, as migrants sought to get to the UK before the changes were introduced.
Asked if the Prime Minister agreed that Mahmood was “talking the language of Reform”, a Downing Street spokesman said: “No, we are talking the language of dealing with an asylum system that is in chaos.
“We are setting out clear plans to make it less attractive for illegal migrants to come to Britain, to make it easier to remove illegal migrants, but also to maintain fairness through safe and legal routes for genuine refugees.”
Sign up to Herald Premium Editor’s Picks, delivered straight to your inbox every Friday. Editor-in-Chief Murray Kirkness picks the week’s best features, interviews and investigations. Sign up for Herald Premium here.