Backlash over ‘spiteful’ move to block small boat refugees from ever claiming British citizenship – UK politics live | Politics

Sonia Lenegan revealed the new Home Office policy in a post on the Free Movement website yeseterday. She found out about the change by looking at additions to the Good Character guidance for immigration caseworkers. Here are the two key passages that have been added.

Any person applying for citizenship from 10 February 2025, who previously entered the UK illegally will normally be refused, regardless of the time that has passed since the illegal entry took place.

A person who applies for citizenship from 10 February 2025 who has previously arrived without a required valid entry clearance or electronic travel authorisation, having made a dangerous journey will normally be refused citizenship.

A dangerous journey includes, but is not limited to, travelling by small boat or concealed in a vehicle or other conveyance. It does not include, for example, arrival as a passenger with a commercial airline.

Lenegan also says that, in practice, this means there would be no point in someone who arrived on a small boat even applying for citizenship.

Naturalisation applications are expensive and there is no right of appeal against a refusal, so even though the guidance states that applications will “normally” be refused, meaning that there is room to ask for discretion to be exercised and a grant still made even where there has been illegal entry, in reality many people will be deterred by this change from even applying.

Good morning. On Monday MPs debated, and passed, the second reading of the border security, asylum and immigration bill. It is a signficant piece of legislation that repeals a lot of the Rwanda-policy law passed by the Tories and gives the authorities new anti-terrorism-style powers to tackle people smuggling. There is a good summary of it here.

During the debate Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said one reason why the Conservatives were opposed to the bill was because it repealed section 32 of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 which “prevents people who enter the country illegally from gaining citizenship”. He went on:

By repealing that section, the bill will create a pathway to citizenship for people who entered the country illegally, and I think that is unconscionable.

Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, pushed back at one point, saying the Home Office had “strengthened the powers to ensure that small boat arrivals cannot get citizenship by strengthening the rules”. But her point did not seem to register in the debate, and several other Tories repeated Philp’s claim about the pathway to citizenship for illegal arrivals.

Now it is clear what Cooper was talking about. The Home Office has tightened the law in relationship to citizenship. Labour is getting rid of the Tory law that was supposed to stop people arriving on small boats from claiming asylum. But being granted asylum is not the same as getting citizenship, and the Home Office is at the same time tightening guidance to make it harder – in fact, almost impossible – for small boat arrivals to claim citizenship.

This was first revealed yesterday in a post on the Free Movement website. Rajeev Syal explains it in our story here.

In the past the debate about small boat arrivals has mostly focused on whether or not refugees should be to stay. (The last Conservative government said no, but it did not get very far in terms of removing people because of international human rights law and practical problems with the Rwanda policy.) But last week Kemi Badenoch shifted the focus to citizenship, not residence, with a new policy that will make it much harder for all migrants (not just refugees) to become British citizens. The new Home Office policy looks like a political attempt to in part match that.

The move is facing strong criticism. The Refugee Council says the latest policy does not make sense. In a statement it says:

This change flies in the face of reason. The British public want refugees who have been given safety in our country to integrate into and contribute to their new communities, so it makes no sense for the government to erect more barriers.

We know that men women and children who are refugees want to feel part of the country that has given them a home, and support to rebuild their lives. So many refugees over many generations have become proud hard working British citizens as doctors, entrepreneurs and other professionals. Becoming a British citizen has helped them give back to their communities and this should be celebrated, not prevented. We urge ministers to urgently reconsider.

And the Labour MP Stella Creasy has also spoken against the new guidance. In a post on Bluesky yesterday she said the policy “should be changed asap”. And she told the Today programme this morning that she did not think it made sense to let refugees stay in the country, but deny them citizenship. She said she was happy to vote for the bill on Monday night. But she went on:

What this message is saying is that we will judge your asylum claim, so we will let you stay in the country, but we will not expect you to be part of our community. I just genuinely, gently, say to my colleagues on the front bench, I think that is counterproductive. That is not where the British public are at.

They recognize that there are not safe routes [for many refugees wanting to come to the UK]. If you are an Iranian dissident right now fleeing the regime, there is not a safe route. So you may well have come in a boat. We should absolutely interrogate your claim. If your claim is not well founded, you should not be able to stay.

But if we let you stay in this country, we should also have a route that you can be part of this country, and that is what citizenship is.

Colin Yeo, the immigration barrister who runs the Free Movement website, has also written about the move on his Substack blog. He calls it “spiteful”. He explains:

At first I hoped this was some sort of accident, a residue of the Illegal Migration Act, which legislated to have this same effect, still making its way through the system. But it doesn’t look like it. It looks deliberate. Even though those provisions of the Illegal Migration Act are being scrapped by this government.

A permanent bar on citizenship for illegal entrants is a bad idea. It creates a permanent group on non citizens who are forever excluded from civic life no matter how long they live here and no matter what they do.

It also has zero deterrent effect. This is never going to stop someone coming here. It merely punishes them for doing so. It’s punishment without rehabilitation. It’s spiteful.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: Shabana Mahmood, the justice secretay, gives a speech on the probation service.

Morning: John Healey, the defence secretary, meets Pete Hegseth, the new US defence secretary, in Brussels. Politico is describing this as “the first proper in-person US-UK bilateral of the second Trump era”.

Noon: Keir Starmer faces Kemi Badenoch at PMQs.

2.20pm: Bridget Phillipson and Anneliese Dodds, who are both ministers for women and equalities, in addition to their other roles (education secretary and development minister respectively) give evidence to the Commons women and equalities committee.

2.30pm: Eluned Morgan, the Welsh secretary, gives evidence to the Commons Welsh affairs committee.

2.30pm: Starmer meets relatives of the victims of the Nottingham attacks in Downing Street.

4.30pm: Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, and Richard Tice, his deputy, hold a press conference where, according to the party, they will deliver “a stark warning … relating to the economy and renewable energy”. (Reform UK suggest this will be important stuff; the press notice says the press conference will start “after markets close”.)

If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.

If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.

I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.