The government has announced that asylum seekers will be required to pay up to £10,000 towards the cost of their accommodation and support once they begin earning, with settled status withheld until the balance is repaid in full.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the scheme would operate in a similar way to student loan repayments, with affected adults paying off an amount each month above a set income threshold. Those liable for repayments who leave the UK and want to return at a later date will be required to pay the outstanding balance in full first.
The financial case
The government’s justification is built around the cost of the current asylum accommodation system. Around £4bn was spent on accommodation and support for asylum seekers last year – a figure Mahmood has previously described as “too high.”
“We have already reduced asylum costs by £1bn, but it is also right that we ask those who can contribute to do so,” Mahmood said. “Receiving asylum support is a right, but it is also a responsibility. Once people can contribute and repay the generosity of the British people, we expect them to do so.”
Whether it will actually raise money
Dr Madeleine Sumption from the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford has questioned whether the policy will deliver meaningful savings at all. She noted that only a small number of those granted asylum are likely to end up earning enough to make significant repayments under the scheme. More significantly, she warned the policy could actively discourage people from working once they are granted refugee status, since taking a job would immediately trigger repayment obligations.
The charity response
Zoe Dexter from the Helen Bamber Foundation, a human rights charity supporting survivors of trafficking and torture, was blunt: “This is more performative cruelty from the government, and the opposite of integration. These are people who have fled persecution and extreme violence, often arriving with nothing, before spending months or years in overcrowded, dilapidated accommodation, sometimes facing intimidation and violent protests outside the places they are housed. Burdening them with debt just as they begin rebuilding their lives is grossly unjust and entirely self-defeating.”
The political context
The “performative cruelty” framing has now been applied to Mahmood’s Home Office repeatedly. Lord Alf Dubs, who arrived in Britain aged six as part of the Kindertransport, used the same phrase last week when calling on Andy Burnham to remove Mahmood from the Home Office entirely, citing proposed changes to indefinite leave to remain, the suspension of family reunion visas, and plans that would make it easier to detain children before deportation.
Mahmood’s WhatsApp comments joking about deporting various politicians, including telling “white liberals” to “f— right off,” previously went viral and illustrated the friction her approach generates even within her own party.
Reform’s Lee Anderson has separately criticised Labour’s asylum housing pilot, suggesting the pressure on the government’s approach is coming from multiple directions – from the right, who argue the system remains too generous, and from refugee charities and Labour backbenchers, who argue it is becoming punitive without becoming more effective.
What happens next
The scheme has not yet been confirmed in detail, including the precise income threshold, how the £10,000 figure was calculated, or what protections would exist for vulnerable claimants. The wider asylum and immigration bill that Mahmood is expected to unveil this week is likely the venue for further details. Whether it survives scrutiny intact, given the warnings from both the Migration Observatory and refugee charities, remains to be seen.
Leave a Reply