Tag: bill

Key Changes in UK Asylum Seekers’ Rights


Refugees and asylum seekers remain a hot political issue

July 2026

With attention shifting to Andy Burnham and whether he will be the new prime minister in a matter of days, and the resignation of Nigel Farage from parliament resulting in a new by-election in his constituency, other topics like immigration have dropped – albeit temporarily – from the news. The latest effort by the Government to get a grip on the immigrant/asylum seeker issue, the Asylum and Immigration Bill, is now published, with the first debate to take place on July 13th.  Much of this post will be related to the Bill.

As mentioned previously, the most contentious parts of the Bill are the amendment of the waiting period for prospective residents from 5 years with a promise of acceptance to 2½ years, to be reviewed every six months.  Family reunions are also being more restricted, and the Home Secretary has mooted making immigrants pay up to £10,000 once they are in work.  Meanwhile, the “one-in-one–out” scheme agreed with the French authorities for boat arrivals, is to be ended in October; about 900 exchanges have been made so far.

On a related topic, the Home Office state that successful claimants must move on from temporary accommodation within 42 days: as the backlog of cases falls, this has added to the number of migrants seeking accommodation quickly, and the IPPR say that this is increasing the number of homeless migrants (up to a quarter of rough sleepers are now non-UK nationals).

A new appeals body proposed by the Bill, the Independent Immigration Appeals Authority, would not require all panellists to be legally qualified.  The Law Society has opposed the measure, and it has been said that the idea, originally tried in Australia, was not a success.

Also in the Bill, the contentious Article 8 (right to family life) defence against deportation is addressed.  Little change to existing rules are proposed, but the impact is reckoned to be that 11,700 claimants per annum will be rejected. Nevertheless, 55% of those declined permission to stay will likely remain, due to technical issues.  The Home Office reckon that overall 34,000 asylum seekers have been granted leave to remain under Article 8.

Separately, the Home Secretary has announced a new scheme to allow local communities and educational bodies to sponsor refugees to settle in their area. A refugee work route is also expected to open next year.  These are concessions to the  critique by the Refugee Council that the reason refugees make irregular journeys – including via small boat – is due to the lack of legal routes available.  Prof. Sarah Singer notes that community sponsorship already exists, and that putting the responsibility on local communities might be seen as the Home Office avoiding responsibility.

Performance politics

Amnesty International’s response to the Bill was summarised by Steve Valdez-Symonds, Amnesty International UK’s Refugee and Migrant Rights Director:

“The introduction of yet more immigration legislation in the final days of Keir Starmer’s premiership, just before summer recess, will be a bitter disappointment for anyone hoping for a genuinely new direction from government. The Bill, and a series of recent immigration announcements, continue down a path laid by successive governments: reducing legal constraints on Home Office decision-making while making the immigration and asylum system increasingly punitive for migrants and refugees.

“Several proposals are deeply alarming: from attempts to weaken protections for families and sideline long-established human rights obligations, to plans for a Home Office-controlled appeals system without legally qualified judges, and proposals to warehouse people seeking safety in mass barrack-style accommodation centres, deny them the right to work, and then present them with a bill for it.

“Access to justice and the rule of law are not inconveniences to be worked around. Protections against torture, family separation and arbitrary state power are values this country has upheld for generations.  Yet this government appears willing to cast them aside in pursuit of political headlines.

“This is politics as performance, not problem-solving.  Abandoning principles that should never be negotiable, including by seeking to weaken the protections guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights, is weakness, not leadership.

“Whoever the new Prime Minister is, if they truly want a reset, then dignity, fairness and hope must be for everyone.  Britain needs a new politics that rejects scapegoating and appeasement and returns to the values of justice, humanity and equal dignity.”

The House of Lords Justice and Home Affairs Committee has a new report on the proposed changes, which repeats the criticisms of other bodies and fears that impacts may be harmful.

The new Independent Commissioner for Immigration and Border Inspection has criticised the asylum team at the Home Office for poor initial decision- making and a consequent long appeals backlog.  The backlog of asylum appeals is now up to 87,000.  Twice as many appeals are coming in as going out.  New appeals are not likely to be resolved for 3 years.

Migration Observatory have a report on the long-term jobs market for immigrants.  As of 2023, 13% of those granted leave 5 years earlier were earning £20k+.  Home Office have figures for 16-24 year-olds between 2015-2023, 24% had work within a year, 48% within two.

A new move is reported for improving the settlement of new arrivals, an asylum dispersal pilot scheme, reputedly being offered for the Autumn. 200 local authorities have expressed interest, but none have heard anything more. £500 million has reputedly been allocated, but no information on funding has been revealed.

Beyond the UK, UNHCR note a trend in global refugees.  The number of forcibly displaced people was down in 2025, the first drop in a decade.  They warn, however, of the dangers of returning home for many exiles..

Sea rescue has been reported as an issue.  The law on rescuing victims comes under 4 separate international laws, making responsibilities and enforceability difficult.  It is believed that between 2014 and 2020 some 83,000 deaths occurred among sea bound refugees.

AH

0

How the New UK Bill Aims to Prevent Foreign Election Interference


New bill to tackle electoral reform

March 2026

A functioning democratic system is vital for human rights.  It is about power and how it is wielded.  Increasingly, we have witnessed powerful outside interests – whether they be states or wealthy individuals – influencing the political debate.  Electoral reform is carried out infrequently partly because political parties settle into a comfortable relationship with the status quo.  They can also be reluctant to go against the wishes of their influential patrons. 

The newly introduced Representation of the People Bill aims to keep hostile foreign states from interfering in British elections while significantly extending democratic rights to the population. As part of the biggest expansion of democratic participation in a generation it offers first the extension of the franchise to 16 and 17-year olds, which will give voice to millions of young people.

Second, the capping of donations from companies towards electoral expenses will be set at two years of revenue, ensuring that companies that have no genuine business activity or UK footprint will be prevented from making donations.  The Bill means companies will need to have shown sufficient revenue made over the previous 3 years (allowing in most cases two financial years of revenue) to justify their donation.  It means foreign actors will no longer be able to use their money to interfere in the UK’s elections,

MPs will not be allowed to accept gifts of money or in-kind donations over £2,230. Legitimate gifted hospitality valued below this thresh-hold will continue to be acceptable.

The many other proposals to ensure election fairness include automatic voter registration without voters needing to apply, extending legitimate Voter ID to include bank cards digital forms of ID, increasing the time available for postal voting, ensuring candidates offer documentary proof of their identity to avoid misleading voters, and addressing issues of harassment at polling stations

It marks the beginning of a process that may reshape the practical workings of the UK’s democracy. Few governments have attempted to reform our democratic system quite so comprehensively in a single legislative package.  For once, the over-used ‘once in a generation’ tag may actually be justified.

But it does little to protect democracy from misinformation and disinformation in elections, despite the government recognising the risks.  It is this ability to ‘control the narrative’ which is a big factor in our political process.

Image: Electoral Reform Society

0

UK’s involvement in torture


One of the fundamental components of the Human Rights Act is the freedom from torture. It was abandoned in the seventeenth century in the UK. It is rarely effective since the information derived is likely to be what the questioners want to hear rather than the truth. The UK government has long maintained that it does not use these practices overseas nor uses other countries as proxy torturers on our behalf. This has been shown to be untrue: Guantanamo prisoners have testified to UK personnel being present during torture sessions carried out by the Americans, and after the fall of Ghedaffi in Libya, documents revealing MI6’s involvement in torture were discovered. We were also complicit in the use of UK airfields used by the Americans to fly prisoners to ‘black sites’ in eastern Europe.

The Overseas Operations Bill is important therefore in this context. Yesterday, the House of Lords voted in favour of the amendment supported by several agencies.  When it was first introduced last year, the Bill risked effectively decriminalising torture committed by UK personnel. The amendment means prosecution for torture – as well as genocide and other serious international crimes – could go ahead without facing roadblocks originally included in the Bill.  It also seeks to apply a 5 year limitation on actions which is contrary to international law. There should be no time limit on actions regarding the use of torture.

The background to the Bill has been a campaign against so-called ‘vexatious’ legal claims against British soldiers overseas. Politicians and some sections of the media have painted a picture of innocent soldiers being pursued through the courts whilst doing their duty for their country and serving in conditions of great danger. If innocent soldiers are being pursued in this way it is very much to be regretted. But there is plentiful evidence of bad behaviour which should be investigated. Eight years ago Lt Col Mercer, who left the Army because of what he witnessed, spoke at an Amnesty service in the Cathedral. His was first hand testimony of the mistreatment and sometimes death suffered by some prisoners at the hands of Army interrogators.

Yesterday, 333 Lords voted in favour of the amendment to the Bill – a majority of 105. The amendment we fought for was tabled by former Defence Secretary and Secretary General to NATO Lord Robertson.  This is an important win: the UK helped build the ban on torture in the Geneva Conventions. This amendment ensures it doesn’t roll-back now. 

The battle is not over however and we still need to make sure the changes are kept in the final version of the Bill when it goes to the House of Commons and is voted into law. 

It is depressing to read of these and other retrograde plans by the government.

Sources: Reprieve; Amnesty International; Independent

1

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑