Summary: How the government can design better asylum policy

The UK’s asylum system was one of the most politically fraught issues of the last parliament and featured heavily in the 2024 general election campaign. And it is not one that has gone way since Labour entered office in July – as the riots that swept across many parts of England and Northern Ireland in August, sparked by false reports that an asylum seeker recently arrived by small boat had committed the murder of three children in Stockport, made all too clear.

It is no surprise that the political salience of UK asylum policy has bridged a change of government. For decades, governments of all stripes have struggled to achieve their various aims on asylum. Some have tried to make fast and efficient asylum decisions, offering support to people who are granted refugee status and returning those who are not. Others have sought to reduce the cost of the system – estimated at £5.38 billion in 2023/24 ⁴ Thompson F, ‘Cost of UK asylum system hits record £5.38bn’, The Independent, 28 November 2024, www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-office-channel-b2655258.html  – or the number of claims the UK receives, or both. Most have seen the decisions taken in pursuit of these various objectives come into conflict with one another. Few can claim success on any.

This report continues the Institute for Government’s series on chronic policy problems, identifying the reasons for UK governments’ continued struggles and offering recommendations for how the government can pursue reforms to create a more effective asylum system. Doing so will benefit both the UK and the many thousands of people in need that enter the system each year. It is based on the Institute’s extensive work on policy making, and interviews with immigration experts and asylum seekers.

Why have UK governments struggled with asylum policy?

Many aspects of asylum policy are outside the government’s direct control, such as global conflict increasing the number of displaced people by over 600% since the turn of the century, or are contingent on international agreements and co-operation. In addition to this, the domestic politics of asylum has too often pushed politicians into designing policy seemingly based more on assumptions than evidence – from restricting the right of asylum seekers to work to making it essentially impossible to apply for asylum from abroad.

And the asylum system itself is fraught with difficulties. Asylum seekers are vulnerable people with complex needs who must navigate a web of often disjointed public services delivered by different parts of the public sector, civil society and external providers. The Home Office’s historically under-resourced asylum set-up has created expensive inefficiencies that have contributed to delays, backlogs and limbo, compounded by layers of new, increasingly and unnecessarily complex immigration rules.

The system was not set up well even before the rise in applications in the past few years – and, as the timeline below shows, has been subject to continual change in the past quarter of a century.

What kind of change is needed?

No single change, or set of changes, could ‘solve’ the problem entirely. Forecast increases in global demand for asylum mean challenges are likely to grow more acute in the near future, but there are lessons from this difficult recent history that can inform the government’s approach. This report does not put forward specific policy proposals on asylum. Its focus is instead on how policy is made, and how the government can make structural changes to ensure it achieves its objectives on asylum.

We argue that the UK government needs greater control over its asylum policy. It needs to design, and stick to, a coherent approach to making policy and managing the public services. It should use robust evidence to support policy design. It needs to bolster its understanding and management of the politics of the issue and avoid using unstable policy swings as a response to headlines. In short, the government should assert far more authority over the whole asylum system – instead of short-sighted measures aimed at conjuring an illusion of control.

This will ultimately not just benefit the UK – through better use of public money and addressing the electorate’s concerns over an ‘out of control’ asylum system – but will also bring about a fairer and more secure environment for the many thousands of vulnerable people who seek asylum in the UK each year.

Recommendations in brief 

Publish an annual Migration Plan 

• First and foremost, the government should begin by setting a new approach to making policy grounded in an annual Migration Plan, led by the home secretary, brokered across Whitehall through some form of interministerial group, and debated in parliament. 
• This Migration Plan should set the government’s long-term strategy and priorities for both regular and irregular migration, which is currently caught in a web of competing interests. It should include not just migration policy, but wider related skills and labour market interventions. 
• With a clear strategy and set of priorities, the government can enhance the quality of its asylum policy making by making changes in three main areas. 

Using evidence 

• Require evidence standard assessments for key policy submissions to ministers 
• Maintain an online portal of migration evidence and analysis and ensure evaluation plans are in place for all major aspects of asylum policy 
• Ensure operational leaders have the chance to scrutinise and assess the delivery implications of proposed asylum policy, including through red teams and operative legislative assessments 
• Learn from those who have experience of the asylum system, including through creating a new, independent migrants’ commissioner
• Create a standing forum on the government’s migration and asylum strategy, based around shared goals, to aid engagement with civil society and academic experts
• Review the role, remit and powers of the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration (ICIBI), and publish in one place the progress the department has made towards its recommendations. 

Managing the system 

• Upgrade the seniority of asylum decision makers to recognise the complexity of the role
• Develop and publish a workforce management strategy for asylum caseworkers, including creating a ‘front-line decision makers’ profession with clear career progression and professional development support
• Maintain feedback loops to ensure front-line decision makers are always able to flag concerns to senior managers, including anonymously
• Expand and improve the streamlined asylum process to triage cases early on in the system
• Reintroduce a service standard to guide the expected time frames for asylum decisions and use metrics to ensure the quality of caseworking is maintained
• Simplify the immigration rules, including legislation covering asylum
• Regularly review caseworking technology to ensure it meets the needs of asylum decision makers
• Develop an outward facing digital communication system to enable asylum seekers to access updates on their cases and submit information
• Give local authorities greater responsibility and resource to deliver accommodation and support services
• Redesign accommodation and support contracts to reflect the government’s desired outcomes and closely oversee delivery
• Consolidate the multiple existing nationality-specific routes and consider establishing a standardised, regulated route to apply for asylum from outside the UK, governed by parliament. 

Navigating the politics 

• Reconsider the case for policies that could make the asylum system more controlled, fair and efficient, such as an expanded community sponsorship scheme and right to work
• Ensure that all asylum-related legislation is subject to pre-legislative parliamentary scrutiny.