Labour has confirmed it could accept a quota of migrants from the EU under a returns agreement it hopes to strike with the bloc if it wins power at the next general election.
Shadow Cabinet Office minister Nick Thomas-Symonds said the “objective” was to secure a returns agreement to establish “management and control of the system” as he accused the Conservatives of having “lost control of our borders”.
Mr Thomas-Symonds spoke to Sky News while Sir Keir Starmer and shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper meet European officials in The Hague – and as the party unveils proposals to treat smuggling gangs “on a par” with terrorists.
The potential for a returns agreement has already attracted controversy, with Tory Party chair Greg Hands accusing Labour of a “shocking open door policy on immigration”.
The EU is currently working on a new returns agreement that would mean each member state takes a minimum annual quota of 30,000 migrants, or pay €20,000 (£17,200) for each person they do not accept.
Mr Thomas-Symonds told Sky News: “What we are looking to do as an objective is a returns agreement.
“At the moment, the government is in a position to return people already to particular countries. They are not fast-tracking that situation. They’re not doing that competently.
Image: Migrants on a patrol boat after trying to cross the English Channel
“What we would be looking for is management and control of the system, which is absolutely vital and not there at the moment under this government.”
Advertisement
When it was put to him on Sky News that the UK is 13% of Europe’s population and therefore could have to accept the same percentage of migrants under an agreement – equating to around 182,000 people per year – Mr Thomas-Symonds said he did not accept the figure.
He said the exact details would be for a potential future Labour government to negotiate with the EU.
“Our position is that net migration has been too high in the UK and we want to see that coming down. That’s our overall position and that’s something we’d obviously take into any negotiation with the EU,” he said.
Labour also wants to have more UK police officers posted with Europol for joint investigations – aiming to disrupt the gangs before they reach the coast– and work with EU partners on data and intelligence sharing, replacing access the UK lost to certain programmes after Brexit.
Twitter
This content is provided by Twitter, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Twitter cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Twitter cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Twitter cookies for this session only.
Rishi Sunak hit back at Labour’s assertion that the government has “lost control of the borders” and claimed Sir Keir’s plan would see the UK accept 100,000 migrants from the EU every year – although he did not say how he had calculated this figure.
Speaking to broadcasters on a visit to Devon, the prime minister said the Labour leader “spent all of this year voting against our stop the boats bill, the toughest legislation that any government has passed to tackle illegal migration”.
Will Labour regret taking the fight to the Tories on small boats?
Territory usually seen as belonging to the Conservatives, Sir Keir Starmer is talking tough on immigration.
In The Netherlands with his shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper, the Labour leader has announced Labour’s plans for a new security partnership with Europe to smash the business model of the people smuggling gangs bringing migrants in boats across the Channel.
Labour’s plans include giving more powers to the National Crime Agency, real-time intelligence sharing with European partners and setting up a new cross border policing unit – paid for by scrapping the Rwanda scheme.
Sir Keir also wants to make it possible to restrict the movement of and freeze the assets of those suspected of people smuggling, treating suspected smugglers more like terrorists or drug traffickers.
But it’s a potential returns agreement with the EU that is causing an almighty row.
In an interview with The Times newspaper, the leader of the opposition said accepting quotas of migrants from the EU in exchange for a returns agreement would be reserved for future negotiations with Brussels.
This has alarmed Tories who believe this to be confirmation that Labour would open up the UK’s doors to higher numbers of refugees than we currently already receive.
Shadow minister Nick Thomas-Symonds told Sky News: “A wider returns agreement with the EU – that’s of course subject to negotiation.”
He went on to say that any returns agreement would be “under new arrangements” and that the objective for his party was to reduce net migration.
But government ministers beg to differ.
Home Office minister Robert Jenrick posted on X: “Not content with voting against every one of our measures to stop the boats, Keir Starmer is now opening the door to taking over 100,000 illegal migrants from the safety of the EU. His ‘plan’ is a recipe for even more illegal migration.”
Labour insists their plans will allow the UK to take back control of its immigration system.
But government sources tell Sky News that Sir Keir has made it easier for them to argue that Labour would be soft on immigration.
Small boat crossings will be a critical topic at the next general election but it appears that both parties believe this is one fight they can win.
He added: “I don’t think it’s credible that he really wants to grip this problem.”
In August, The Times reported Mr Sunak was also attempting to secure a returns agreement with the EU, but that the negotiations stalled.
It is likely any agreement would have involved the UK taking a share of EU migration.
Downing Street today told reporters the government was open to a returns deal with the EU but would not accept a quota of migrants in exchange.
The prime minister’s official spokesman did not rule out the possibility of a funding deal which would see UK taxpayers’ money go to Brussels as part of an agreement.
“There are discussions ongoing, so I’m not going to get into whether or not we would or would not fund any further co-operation,” the spokesman said.
In his interview with The Times, the Labour leader said he would treat people smugglers like terrorists by freezing their assets and restricting their movements.
Speaking from The Hague, Sir Keir told broadcasters: “The government has lost control of our borders, and we can see that with the number of crossings there are across the Channel in small boats. We have to stop that.”
He said the “only way to do that is to smash the gangs that are running this vile trade,” and that he had been speaking to Europol today about getting a “closer agreement” to tackle it.
“That is taking control of a situation that the government has totally lost control of,” he declared.
Sir Keir rejected assertions that such a deal with Europe would be a betrayal of the 2016 Brexit referendum, and said the only way to defeat the gangs is to “operate where they’re operating”, which is in Europe and beyond.
Asked about Home Secretary Suella Braverman’s claim that his plan would make Britain Europe’s “dumping ground” for “millions” of illegal migrants, Sir Keir said it’s “embarrassing that the government is pumping out this nonsense”.
Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge
Sky News Monday to Thursday at 7pm.
Watch live on Sky channel 501, Freeview 233, Virgin 602, the Sky News website and app or YouTube.
“I can only assume it’s because they’ve got nothing sensible to say on this issue,” he said.
More than 23,000 people have made the dangerous journey across the Channel in the year so far – with over 3,000 making the crossing in September alone.
Mr Sunak has made tackling the issue one of his five priorities for the year, promising to “stop the boats” with measures such as deporting some migrants to Rwanda and housing people on barges.
But both schemes have hit barriers, with Rwanda flights caught up in the courts and an outbreak of Legionella disease on the Bibby Stockholm vessel.
Mr Sunak has repeatedly defended the government’s progress, saying: “We’ve already reduced the legacy backlog by over 28,000 – nearly a third – since the start of December and we remain on track to meet our target.”
A VARA spokesperson told Cointelegraph that while mutual license recognition is a feature, it does not mean automatic passporting to different emirates.
Diane Gall’s husband, Martyn, had been out on a morning bike ride with his friends on their usual route one winter morning in November 2020 – when he was killed by a reckless driver.
Diane and her daughters had to wait almost three years for her husband’s case to be heard in court.
The case was postponed three times, often without warning.
“You just honestly lose faith in the system,” she says.
“You feel there’s a system there that should be there to help and protect victims, to be victims’ voices, but the constant delays really take their toll on individuals and us as a family.”
Image: Diane Gall
The first trial date in April 2022 was cancelled on the day and pushed four months later.
The day before the new date, the family were told it wasn’t going ahead due to the barristers’ strike.
It was moved to November 2022, then postponed again, before eventually being heard in June the following year.
“You’re building yourself up for all these dates, preparing yourself for what you’re going to hear, reliving everything that has happened, and it’s retraumatising,” says Diane.
Image: Diane Gall’s husband, Martyn
‘Radical’ reform needed
Diane’s wait for justice gives us an insight into what thousands of victims and their families are battling every day in a court system cracking under the weight of a record-high backlog.
There are 76,957 cases waiting to be heard in Crown Courts across England and Wales, as of the end of March 2025.
To relieve pressure on the system, an independent review by Sir Brian Leveson last month made a number of recommendations – including creating a new division of the Crown Court known as an intermediate court, made up of a judge and two magistrates, and allowing defendants to choose to be tried by judge alone.
He said only “radical” reform would have an impact.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:32
Will court reforms tackle backlog?
But according to exclusive data collected for Sky News by the Law Society, there is strong scepticism among the industry about some proposed plans.
Before the review was published, we asked 545 criminal lawyers about the idea of a new tier to the Crown Court – 60% of them told us a type of Intermediate Court was unlikely to reduce the backlog.
“It’s moving a problem from one place to another, like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. It’s not going to do anything,” says Stuart Nolan, chair of the Law Society’s criminal law committee.
“I think the problem with it is lack of resources or lack of will to give the proper resources.
“You can say we need more staff, but they’re not just any staff, they are people with experience and training, and that doesn’t come quickly or cheap.”
Instead, the lawyers told us creating an additional court would harm the quality of justice.
Chloe Jay, senior partner at Shentons Solicitors, agrees the quality of justice will be impacted by a new court division that could sit without a jury for some offences.
She says: “The beauty of the Crown Court is that you have two separate bodies, one deciding the facts and one deciding law.
Image: Casey Jenkins, president of London Criminal Court Solicitors’ Association
“So the jury doesn’t hear the legal arguments about what evidence should be excluded, whether something should be considered as part of the trial, and that’s what really gives you that really good, sound quality of justice, because you haven’t got one person making all the decisions together.
“Potentially in an intermediate court, that is what will happen. The same three people will hear those legal arguments and make the finding of guilt or innocence.”
The most striking finding from the survey is that 73% of criminal lawyers surveyed are worried about offences no longer sitting in front of a jury.
Casey Jenkins, president of London Criminal Court Solicitors’ Association, says this could create unconscious bias.
“There’s a real risk that people from minority backgrounds are negatively impacted by having a trial by a judge and not a jury of their peers who may have the same or similar social background to them,” she says.
“A jury trial is protection against professional judicial decisions by the state. It’s a fundamental right that can be invoked.”
Instead of moving some offences to a new Crown Court tier, our survey suggests criminal lawyers would be more in favour of moving cases to the magistrates instead.
Under the Leveson proposals, trials for offences such as dangerous driving, possessing an offensive weapon and theft could be moved out of the Crown Courts.
‘Catastrophic consequences’
Richard Atkinson, president of the Law Society, says fixing the system will only work with fair funding.
“It’s as important as the NHS, it’s as important as the education system,” he says. “If it crumbles, there will be catastrophic consequences.”
Ms Jenkins agrees that for too long the system has been allowed to fail.
“Everyone deserves justice, this is just not the answer,” she says.
“It’s just the wrong solution to a problem that was caused by chronic, long-term under-investment in the criminal justice system, which is a vital public service.
“The only way to ensure that there’s timely and fair justice for everybody is to invest in all parts of the system from the bottom up: local services, probation, restorative justice, more funding for lawyers so we can give early advice, more funding for the police so that cases are better prepared.”
Government vows ‘bold and ambitious reform’
In response to Sky News’ findings, the minister for courts and legal services, Sarah Sackman KC MP, told Sky News: “We inherited a record and rising court backlog, leaving many victims facing unacceptable delays to see justice done.
“We’ve already boosted funding in our courts system, but the only way out of this crisis is bold and ambitious reform. That is why we are carefully considering Sir Brian’s bold recommendations for long-term change.
“I won’t hesitate to do whatever needs to be done for the benefit of victims.”
The driver that killed Diane’s husband was eventually convicted. She wants those making decisions about the court system to remember those impacted the most in every case.
Every victim and every family.
“You do just feel like a cog in a big wheel that’s out of your control,” she says. “Because you know justice delayed is justice denied.”