A Labour peer who fled from the Nazis as a child refugee has accused home secretary Shabana Mahmood of using “children as a weapon” under her plans to make Britain less attractive to asylum seekers.
Less than 24 hours after Labour MPs described the proposals as “performative cruelty” and “immoral”, Lord Alf Dubs slammed the government’s proposals as “shabby”.
Under sweeping measures unveiled on Monday, the home secretary said Britain could deport families, including those with children, if they refuse monetary incentives to leave. The Home Office has also claimed that children are being sent to the UK on small boats so their families can “exploit” laws by putting down roots, thereby blocking removal.
Asked about this suggestion, Lord Dubs told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “I think that’s a theoretical statement – I just don’t accept that.”
He went on: “I think there is a proper case for children, there’s a proper case for family reunion – when there are children who are on their own and who’ve got family in this country, then I think the right thing to do is to have family reunion and bring children over here.
“But to use children as a weapon, as the home secretary is doing, I think is a shabby thing – I’m lost for words, frankly, because my concern was that if we remove people who come here, what happens if they’ve had children in the meantime?
“What are we supposed to do with children who are born here, who’ve been to school here, who are part of our community, our society? We can’t just say, ‘Oh well, out you go because your parents don’t claim to be here.’”
Lord Dubs was one of the Jewish children rescued from the Nazis in the 1930s who came to Britain for a new life and has championed the protection of unaccompanied minors caught up in the migration crisis.
He also hit out at the government’s “hardline approach” after Ms Mahmood said it was an “uncomfortable truth” that the UK’s generous asylum offer, compared to other European countries, was drawing people to UK shores.
“What we need is a bit of compassion in our politics and I think that some of the measures were going in the wrong direction, they won’t help,” he said.
Ms Mahmood announced a major overhaul of the system, including cutting the length of time asylum seekers are initially allowed to stay in the UK from five years to 30 months and extending the time required for settled status from five years to 20.
Other changes include caps on the number of people arriving in the UK via so-called safe routes. Under the plans, housing and weekly allowances will not be guaranteed to those within the system, while asylum seekers with assets will be forced to contribute to their costs.
The home secretary told the Commons the “pace and scale of change has destabilised communities” and made the UK “a more divided place”, but the reforms sparked condemnation from charities and some backbench MPs.
Former Labour frontbencher Richard Burgon also said the reforms were “a desperate attempt to triangulate with Reform,” while MP Ian Lavery said that when the Tories and Reform were backing the policies “is it not time to question whether we’re actually in the right place?”.
The plans were also criticised by Emily Spurrell, chairwoman of the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, who said the changes “must not come at the cost of compassion”.
But communities secretary Steve Reed insisted the reforms were necessary to end the human tragedies caused by trafficking as he defended the move to deport families when they refused to return to their home countries.
“We know that we need more safe and legal routes so that families who have the right to come here and seek asylum can get into the country, but we can’t continue to allow incentives to exist that result in children drowning in the Channel,” he said.
On accusations from some in his party that the government was echoing the rhetoric of Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, Mr Reed said “you are always going to have a range of views” but that “the vast majority of members of the Labour Party and Labour MPs know that we need to deal with this problem because of the harm that it’s doing to our country and to social cohesion”.
Reform leader Mr Farage, meanwhile, praised the measures as “extremely encouraging” while questioning whether it would be implemented.
He told a London press conference: “Rhetorically fine, following very many of the things that we’ve been saying for some years. But in practice, I doubt much of it will actually happen.”
Responding to Ms Mahmood’s invitation for him to “sod off” over quips she might defect to Reform, Mr Farage said: “She seems to quite like using bad language, doesn’t she?
He evaded a question on whether he supported Labour’s proposal to deport children of failed asylum seekers, saying only: “The absolute priority with deporting those who come (illegally) are young undocumented males of fighting age, many of whom will do great harm in this country.”
Dr Mihnea Cuibus, of the Migration Observatory, said Ms Mahmood’s proposals, which are modelled on Denmark, would go some way to making Britain less attractive to migrants.
He added: “This is certainly the most significant changes we have ever seen to the asylum system.
“There is no doubt that the changes will reduce the draw to the UK. We know from research that permanent settled status and being able to bring their families is important to migrants.
“It is impossible to know what impact it will have. We do know that in Denmark they have the lowest figures in a decade after bringing in these changes. But the UK still has other pull factors like the language.”
