Immigration and Asylum in the UK: The Impact and Politics of the Illegal Migration Bill

The Illegal Migration Bill was introduced to the House of Commons on the 7th of March 2023. It is now undergoing scrutiny in the Lords after passing its third reading in the Commons with a majority of 289 to 230. The bill aims to ‘prevent and deter unlawful migration by unsafe and illegal routes’. It places a duty on the Home Secretary to remove those who arrive in the country illegally including those who enter or arrive without a visa and not directly from the country they fled persecution. They will be removed to their country, or a safe third country and any asylum or protection claim they make will be deemed inadmissible with no right of appeal to the immigration tribunal. The bill also disapplies S3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 which requires all legislation to be interpreted in line with human rights law.  This represents a stark message to the courts and judges to interpret the legislation literally to achieve its stated purpose. 

There are serious questions about the practical ability to implement this legislation. It requires third countries to remove asylum-seekers to, but these are in short supply. Save for the UK’s recent deal with Rwanda, the Home Secretary may find herself in a position where she has nowhere to remove those she has placed a duty on herself to remove. Practicalities aside, this bill is unprecedented in its assault on refugees and asylum seekers rights.

Section 19 of the Human Rights Act (1998) requires any minister in charge of a Bill in both Houses of Parliament to lay a statement before Bill's second reading saying that: ‘In the minister's view, the Bill is either compatible with human rights’. The Bill has attracted widespread criticism for breaching international refugee and human rights law.  The Home Secretary stated that: ‘I am unable to make a statement that, in my view, the provisions of the Illegal Migration Bill are compatible with the Convention rights’. The UNHCR  points out that 96% of refugees and asylum seekers come from 108 countries whose nationals require entry clearance to come from the UK. Such individuals will not likely arrange visas before fleeing their country. Furthermore, it is likely to be impossible to come to the UK directly by flight. Therefore, the bill effectively ends the ability to claim asylum in the UK, a right under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

It comes at a time when there has been a rise in Channel crossings to the UK, with 45,000 crossing in 2022 and a UK asylum backlog of around 132,000. Concerns about migration are often at the heart of populist agendas. There’s something of a chicken and egg issue here. Do populist leaders capitalize on the public's rising concerns about migration, or do the leaders create and then exploit concerns about migration in the public? The answer is likely a complex symbiotic relationship between the two, rather than a linear top-down or bottom-up explanation. Some rising public concern about migration is often linked to ongoing domestic issues such the economy or housing, or international crises. This linkage is often fuelled by leaders willing to scapegoat migrants to seize power. 

A good example of this is, of course, Brexit. With the widespread coverage of the refugee crisis and war in Syria, alongside the economic damage of austerity, by 2013 77% of the British public thought immigration should be reduced. There was increased coverage of migration in the UK that was especially aggressive in comparison to other European countries. From 2014-2016 the Conservative party introduced its Hostile Environment Policy, promised to bring net immigration down to the 10s of thousands, and renegotiate Britain’s place in the EU. Concern for migration also tracked fairly consistently with migration levels. In the end, the public voted for Brexit which was heavily influenced by migration concerns. 

Considering the unprecedented nature of the new Bill, one might assume public attitudes to migration are still especially negative. However, whilst net migration has increased since the referendum - to a record 600,000 in 2022  - studies have suggested public attitudes have tempered and there is an increasing openness to migration. By the end of 2022 just 11% of voters considered migration in general a priority issue. The IOM has argued that government rhetoric is ‘a far cry from British public attitudes and preferences’. 

However, gauging public opinion on migration is not a strict numbers game. The kind of immigration, and the origin of the immigrants, matters. Some groups of refugees appear more popular than others, for example, resettlement for Ukrainian refugees. Similarly, whilst legal migration may be positively viewed, data suggests this does not extend to asylum-seekers crossing the channel who are ‘particularly unpopular’. By November 2022, in the wake of increasing press coverage, it was deemed one of the most important issues facing the country. 

After continually failing to deliver on immigration politics, 89% of the public believe the government is handling immigration badly. For Conservative voters, ‘stopping the boats’ is currently the second most important issue facing the country.  The party has increasingly shifted to the right to retain voters since Brexit. In the wake of poor local election results, increasing migration, a housing shortage, Covid-19 failures, and the cost of living crisis, ‘Stopping the boats’ is one of the Conservatives 5 Manifesto pledges. 

Meanwhile, the Labour Party’s response to the Bill has primarily been to criticize the government’s lack of control. The shadow Home Secretary has focused on it being unworkable and creating more ‘chaos’. The focus has largely not been on the stark human rights implications of the Bill. This is reflective of Labour's attempt to win back brexit-supporting voters it lost to the Conservatives in the so-called ‘Red Wall’. 

With a general election looming, and the cost of living crisis ongoing, it remains to be seen whether immigration will be a decisive issue for voters and how popular this new legislation will be. Data suggests the public at least has a more measured view of immigration overall. Such a draconian piece of legislation may well repel the conservative’s dwindling voters in the political center who may be drawn to Labour's message of pragmatism and control.

In the meantime, the rights of those seeking protection in the UK hangs in the balance.