Is the UK about to take a bold step towards reimagining its immigration and asylum policies? Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is gearing up to unveil a significant overhaul of the UK's immigration system, drawing inspiration from Denmark, a nation noted for having some of the strictest immigration laws in Europe.
Scheduled for announcement later this month, Mahmood's new strategies appear to take a leaf from Denmark's book, particularly focusing on its stringent family reunion guidelines and a policy that limits most refugees to temporary residency. The ambition here is to decrease the incentives that attract newcomers to the UK and facilitate the expulsion of individuals who do not have the legal right to remain in the country.
But here's where it gets controversial... Some members of the Labour Party are voicing opposition to this Danish-inspired approach. For instance, one left-leaning Labour MP described these potential policies as excessively 'hardcore,' suggesting they resemble stances often associated with far-right ideologies. At the Labour conference held in September, Mahmood laid out her commitment to "do whatever it takes" to regain sovereignty over Britain's borders.
Denmark has notably reduced the number of successful asylum claims to a level not seen in 40 years—except for the spike in 2020 due to pandemic-related travel restrictions. To explore these practices further, Mahmood reportedly sent senior officials from the Home Office to Copenhagen last month to glean insights that might be applicable to the UK context.
During a recent visit to Denmark, the BBC spoke with Rasmus Stoklund, the Danish Minister for Immigration and Integration and a member of the Social Democrats, Labour's sister party. He explained that Denmark has implemented stricter immigration laws that enable more efficient repatriation efforts. Family reunification has also become quite challenging, with regulations stipulating that both partners must be at least 24 years old—aimed at preventing forced marriages—to apply for reunification.
For those applying from abroad, there are additional caveats. The partner residing in Denmark cannot have claimed benefits for a period of three years, must provide a financial guarantee, and both parties must pass a language proficiency test. In Denmark, refugees living in areas designated as "parallel societies"—where more than half the residents are from what the government categorizes as non-Western backgrounds—are completely ineligible for family reunification.
Just last month, the UK Home Office suspended new applications under its Refugee Family Reunion scheme while new regulations were being drafted. Under the previous scheme, spouses, partners, and dependents under 18 could enter the UK without having to navigate the income and language tests that normally apply to other migrants. While it is improbable that Mahmood will mirror Denmark’s policies to the fullest extent, indications suggest that she is preparing to adopt a more constrained approach.
For Stoklund, stronger immigration regulations are essential for maintaining Danish societal integrity. He described Denmark as a small nation—population under ten million, by contrast to the UK's much larger populace—where harmony is key. He even likened the Danish lifestyle to that of Hobbits in the "Lord of the Rings," emphasizing expectations for newcomers to contribute positively or risk not being welcomed.
This raises questions about identity and integration. If the Danes see themselves as the peaceful Hobbits, then who or what embodies their threats? While Stoklund refrains from labeling these perceived threats, he acknowledges that expelling foreign criminals has proven to be a significant challenge.
Like the UK, Denmark is also embroiled in a lively discourse regarding the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and its impact on deportation policies. Stoklund is keen not to exit the ECHR but believes that certain modifications could streamline expulsion processes. A review into these potential changes is currently underway, signaling a desire for collaborative solutions with UK officials who share similar frustrations and concerns.
Mahmood is reportedly eager for a meeting with Stoklund soon. For Labour officials, the Danish experience holds both political and practical lessons. Back in 2015, Denmark faced a rapidly deteriorating political climate under a centre-left government, with public concerns over immigration rising against the backdrop of a resurgent right-wing populist party. This scenario bears notable similarities to the current UK landscape, where Reform UK is polling strongly against Labour.
Downing Street is particularly interested in how the Danish Social Democrats managed to regain control by neutralizing the immigration debate, allowing them to focus on progressive policies in other realms. According to Ida Auken, the Social Democrats' spokesperson for the environment, tough immigration stances cleared the path for initiatives aimed at forging a more educated workforce and a green transition—objectives that would have been stymied without their stringent migration rules.
Nevertheless, critics argue that while parallels exist, the political mechanisms and the immigration crises faced by Denmark and the UK differ significantly. For instance, Denmark does not experience the same influx of small boats arriving from the North Sea or Baltic, and the less widespread knowledge of Danish may deter some refugees who would otherwise seek asylum in the UK. Within Labour, there’s a divide. Some MPs are wary of adopting Danish policies, arguing fiercely against a hardline immigration stance.
Clive Lewis, a former Labour frontbencher, has pushed back against any attempt to pursue a path similar to Denmark's, fearing it would alienate progressive voters. Meanwhile, Jo White, who leads a group of Labour MPs from traditionally Labour-supporting regions, feels the necessity for stronger policies similar to those in Denmark to avoid significant electoral losses. According to her, failing to enforce such policies could leave Labour vulnerable to challenges from Reform UK in key constituencies.
And this is the part most people miss... As the UK government considers these strategies, the real question arises: can an approach influenced by Denmark address the unique complexities of the UK’s immigration landscape without sacrificing core humanitarian values? We invite you to share your thoughts—do you believe the UK's immigration strategy should mirror Denmark's, or does that pose a risk to the principles of compassion and inclusion? Join the conversation in the comments below.
