Inclusion,And,Diversity.,Hand,Protecting,Inclusive,Equal,Pawns

Government’s triple whammy on asylum support, refugee status and settlement

In past months, the government has produced a barrage of policy and legal changes. With help from the Greater Manchester Immigration Aid Unit’s (GMIAU) April update, we give you the latest on the different proposals. 

Earned settlement  

A GMIAU  information sheet  goes into detail on the government’s declared plans for so-called ‘earned settlement’. These would extend routes to settlement (Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR)) to a default 10 years, with 15-, 20- and 30-year routes for some, and introduce new mandatory requirements for settlement. The measures are mainly aimed at people on migration routes, but how they might interact with refugee status is not yet clear. The government has said they want the changes to be retrospective — to apply to people already here who do not yet have settlement. 

What has changed already?

Of the earned settlement reforms, only the English language requirements have been changed so far, but they don’t take effect until March 2027. Other changes are now expected in the autumn.

Why the delay? 

The Home Affairs Select Committee (which received 5,700 written submissions) warned that the Home Office is not currently equipped to deliver such a large-scale overhaul and urged the government to “get changes right rather than to implement them quickly”. The government consultation received over 200,000 responses, which it now needs to review before final rules are published. In the meantime, the five-year route to ILR still applies. 

More responses are detailed below. 

Refugee status 

The home secretary has made major changes to how refugee status works in the UK, making it far less secure. People who claim asylum on or after 2 March 2026 or make a fresh claim on or after that date, will be granted 30 months of ‘core protection’ status. After that period they will need to reapply. Their situation will be reviewed each time to decide whether protection is still needed, and refugee status could be revoked if their home country is judged to be “safe”. Their status will need to be renewed eight times for up to 20 years before they can apply for settlement. 

What has changed already?

This change has been made and placed in the immigration rules. Note that it does not apply for people who already have refugee status, people who claimed asylum before the 2 March 2026, or to unaccompanied children — even if they turn 18 before receiving an asylum decision. 

We do not yet have any information about what the process for renewing ‘core protection’ status will look like. The only change that has been made is that 30 months’ status will be given instead of five years. 

How have organisations responded? 

A joint statement from the Refugee Councils of Great Britain warns that the “policy will prolong uncertainty for refugee families, which makes rebuilding lives much harder” and that children “will feel this uncertainty most”. The Law Society pointed out that the changes appear to conflict with the UK’s obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention to facilitate the integration and naturalisation of refugees. 

Right to work 

There has been a change to permission to work rules for people seeking asylum. People who have been waiting for over a year for their asylum claim to be decided can request permission to work. People who applied for permission to work before 26 March 2026, if granted, can work in any job on the Appendix Immigration Salary list. For those who apply for permission on or after 26 March 2026, that work must be in a role on Appendix Skilled Occupations — a different list — but only if its skill level is RQF 6 or higher (i.e. degree level roles). This is a further restriction to the right to work for most people in the asylum system. 

Detention of families 

The government wants to make it easier to remove families from the UK who do not have status. Currently, detentions and removals of families with children under 18 are unusual due to rules about detaining and using force on children. 

What has changed already?

Nothing has changed yet. The government is consulting on these measures. Currently there is a family returns process in place, but it is rarely used. The government has announced a pilot to try to increase ‘voluntary’ returns by offering families up to £10,000 per person to leave the UK. This is already underway. 

Asylum and care leaver support 

The government is consulting on major changes to the asylum support system: “Asylum handouts and accommodation removed for illegal migrants abusing Britain’s generosity,” the press release stated on 5 March. 

The home secretary currently has a duty to provide support for people in the asylum system who would otherwise be destitute — the government plans to change this duty to a power. They want to make it easier to remove support for families who do not have status in the UK. Many people are very concerned that this will mean adults, families and children living in destitution, with no access to support. 

You can access the statement of changes from here on GOV.UK. The direct link to download the 48-page statement (HC 1691) is here. The accompanying 22-page explanatory memorandum can be downloaded here. 

A consultation on the proposals runs until Thursday 28 May. This covers two key areas:  

  • The process for enforcing the removal of families, including those with children 
  • The commencement of provisions in the Immigration Act 2016 that would enable the withdrawal of support from families who do not have a genuine barrier to leaving the UK. 

Home secretary Shabana Mahmood described the policy changes to the IPPR in a presentation (video); the IPPR’s reflections on the speech question whether the proposed reforms will effectively manage irregular arrivals, be fair to those already here or encourage integration. 

ASAP has an article in the newsletter explaining the support changes in more detail. 

What has changed already?

The government has already published draft regulations to implement changes to asylum support. One set will enable the government to withdraw accommodation if someone is working illegally. The other revokes the duty to provide asylum accommodation: “This is to provide the Government with more flexibility to shape how asylum support is delivered, while still keeping important protections in place.” 

From 2 June 2026, the Home Office will no longer be legally obliged to provide support, and decisions on section 95 and section 98 (interim) support will be made at the Home Office’s discretion. 

Is government going wobbly on its migration plans? 

A storm of criticism from politicians led the BBC to ask: “Is government going wobbly on its migration plans?” Political editor Chris Mason said: “Pressed on whether they were considering watering down their idea, [government spokespeople] said they were currently studying the responses to a consultation on the plans and would respond once they had.” 

Several Labour MPs have spoken out. Stella Creasy said that “cruelty to immigrants is not what my party stands for. It’s time for True Labour, not Blue Labour”. 

Neil Duncan-Jordan said on X: “The changes to Settlement Rights will hurt all of us. Our Government shouldn’t break promises to those working hard & contributing to our country.” 

Former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner called the proposed changes “un-British” and a “breach of trust” that will alienate voters, as reported the FT. In response, the prime minister suggested that the reforms could be “softened”. 

In the House of Lords, during a debate on the rule changes, Baroness (Ruth) Lister quoted a torture survivor: “I wish policy makers could walk in my shoes and only understand how difficult life is with insecure immigration status.” Labour peer Alf Dubs subsequently told Politico that he had more success influencing the previous government on refugee issues than he does under Labour. 

Zoe Williams in the Guardian suggested that “politicians are in a race to the bottom” with their refugee plans. While Politico said Labour is trying to neutralise Nigel Farage by using Denmark’s policies. 

More reaction to the changes to refugee status 

Zoe Gardner has a three-minute guide to the changes and also published her own proposals: Time for change: The evidence-based policies that can actually fix the immigration system. Her 20-page report has recommendations on asylum, labour migration and integration and citizenship. Sue Wilson praises Zoe’s report in Yorkshire Bylines. In New Statesman, Zoe argues that Labour is creating a vulnerable migrant underclass. 

In The Conversation, Georgia Cole looks at the Refugee Convention to show that refugee status was never “permanent from day one”. Also in The Conversation, Matilde Rosina pointed out that the UK could make migrants wait up to 20 years before becoming settled — making it one of the longest waits in the world. 

“Shabana Mahmood’s temporary refugee status is a recycled failed policy,” say Refugee and Migrant Justice. 

Free Movement explains that Denmark adopted a similar policy in 2015 and has seen a fall in asylum applications. It worked for them, so why shouldn’t it work for us? It’s obvious, right? No. First, there is little evidence that hostile policies deter asylum applications. Second, Denmark’s figures are misleading. And finally there are significant differences between Denmark and the UK. 

Open Democracy looks at what research says about the proposed reforms. It argues that they will lead to permanent insecurity, deepen destitution and exclude a generation from full civic rights. The researchers are from the Glasgow Refugee, Asylum and Migration Network (GRAMNet). In a separate article, Open Democracy also talks to people affected, one of whom says: “My heart is in pieces.” 

More reactions to ‘earned settlement’ 

  • The NRPF Network submitted evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on the likely effects of the proposals, especially on the issue of access to benefits 
  • Sunder Katwala looks at whether the proposed reforms could “meet the fairness challenge” 
  • The government doesn’t know how many NHS staff will be affected by the changes, reports The Independent 
  • 300,000 children face a 10-year delay to get settlement, says think-tank IPPR 
  • In We Wanted Workers, Colin Yeo argues that “changing the rules for migrants already here is wrong and unfair but only affects a finite group of people. Extending default settlement to 10 years or more for everyone is a social policy disaster”; 
  • He also argues that Labour’s earned settlement proposals destroy a British success story 
  • Refugee and Migrant Justice published a study on the Government-imposed poverty that will result from the longer settlement period, as potential applicants forego benefits so as not to prejudice their future applications 
  • An FoI request reported in the Guardian suggests the savings resulting from the government’s planned changes will be a fraction of what they have claimed. 

What would Reform do? 

At an event marking the anniversary of Enoch Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech, Reform raised the ante by announcing it would undertake a complete review of asylum law. 

Reform’s review would determine whether people granted refugee status had entered Britain illegally or overstayed their visas and whether their country of origin was now deemed to be safe. If they met one of these criteria, they would have their protection in the UK rescinded. 

The party said that about 400,000 people would be “in scope” of the review and that the majority would be deported by the party’s new agency called the UK Deportation Command. 

Nigel Farage said that “the public’s faith in the whole democratic system has broken down” because asylum seekers continued to arrive in Britain on small boats. He added that Reform would establish “the principle that anyone who comes to the country illegally will not be able to stay”. Reform claimed, without providing a breakdown of its figures, that its policy of reversing asylum grants would save taxpayers £11.9 billion over the next parliament. 

Similar Posts