The government is claiming victory in clearing the backlog of asylum claims – but that has been described as “misleading” as thousands are still waiting for a final decision.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak pledged in December 2022 that he would “abolish” the legacy backlog of asylum claims made before 28 June of that year, with the Home Office being given the target of the end of 2023.
On Monday, the department said the pledge had been “delivered”, having processed more than 112,000 asylum claims overall in 2023.
There were more than 92,000 asylum claims made before 28 June 2022 requiring a decision, but Labour has said the government’s claim that all of those cases have been cleared is “false”.
The Home Office said on Monday that all cases in the legacy backlog have been reviewed, but added that “4,500 complex cases have been highlighted that require additional checks or investigation for a final decision to be made”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:37
In-depth look at the asylum seekers homelessness crisis
Such cases typically involve “asylum seekers presenting as children – where age verification is taking place; those with serious medical issues; or those with suspected past convictions, where checks may reveal criminality that would bar asylum”, the department added.
It is understood that the Home Office has processed about 25,200 newer asylum claims, on top of the 86,800 decisions in legacy cases, which means the provisional number of total decisions made overall in the year reaches 112,000.
As many decisions as possible were made in the legacy backlog, according to officials, and the outstanding cases are due to a refusal to compromise security.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:53
The prime minister is asked: ‘When will you stop the boats?’
They pointed to efforts to clear some of the newer cases as evidence of the department’s commitment to tackling the overall backlog.
Advertisement
The prime minister said in a statement that the department’s efforts are “saving the taxpayer millions of pounds in expensive hotel costs, reducing strain on public services and ensuring the most vulnerable receive the right support”.
However, the CEO of the Refugee Council, Enver Solomon, said it is “misleading for the government to claim that the legacy backlog has been cleared as there are thousands still waiting for a decision”.
“After mismanaging the asylum system for so many years the government was right to clear the backlog but was wrong to do it in a way that has failed to see the face behind the case and instead has treated people simply as statistics rather than with the care and compassion they deserve,” he added.
Labour’s shadow immigration minister also accused the government of making “false” claims about clearing the asylum backlog.
Stephen Kinnock said: “The asylum backlog has rocketed to 165,000 under the Tories – eight times higher than when Labour left office – and no slicing or renaming the figures can disguise that fact.
“Meanwhile Rishi Sunak’s promise made a year ago to end asylum hotel use has been disastrously broken – with a 20% increase to 56,000, costing the British taxpayer more than £2bn a year.
“This is yet more evidence of an asylum system broken by the Conservatives.”
The government’s announcement comes after months of fears that the prime minister’s target would not be achieved.
In February last year, the Home Office said thousands of asylum seekers would be sent questionnaires which could be used to speed up a decision on their claims, and about 12,000 people from Afghanistan, Syria, Eritrea, Libya and Yemen, who had applied for asylum in the UK and were waiting for a decision, were understood to be eligible under the policy.
In June, the National Audit Office (NAO) said efforts to clear the backlog needed to significantly increase to clear the backlog and questioned whether the plans were sustainable.
The spending watchdog also estimated £3.6bn was spent on asylum support in 2022-23, which amounted to almost double the previous year.
The Home Office said more caseworkers had been tasked with processing applications, which was “tripling productivity to ensure more illegal migrants are returned to their country of origin, quicker”.
But the department’s top civil servant, Sir Matthew Rycroft, revealed in a letter to MPs that just 1,182 migrants who had crossed the Channel had been returned to their home country since 2020, out of a total of more than 111,800 who arrived in that time period.
The majority of those returned were from Albania, with whom the UK has a returns agreement.
In an appearance before the Commons Liaison Committee in December, the prime minister was unable to say when the remaining overall backlog of asylum claims would be cleared, which continued to rise and stood at 91,076 as of the end of November, not including legacy cases.
Labour MPs who are opposed to legalising assisted dying believe the momentum is swinging behind their side of the campaign, Sky News has learnt.
MPs are currently weighing up whether to back a change in the law that would give terminally ill people with six months to live the choice to end their lives.
At a meeting in parliament on Wednesday, Sky News understands Labour MPs on the opposing side of the argument agreed that those who were undecided on the bill were leaning towards voting against it.
One Labour backbencher involved in the whipping operation for the no camp told Sky News: “The undecideds are breaking to us, we feel.”
The source said that many of those who were undecided were new MPs who had expressed concerns that not enough time had been given to debate the bill.
“They feel they are too new to be asked to do something as substantive as this,” they said.
Issues that were being brought up as potential blocks to voting for the legislation include that doctors would be able to suggest assisted dying to an ill patient, they said.
The source added: “We were elected to sort the NHS out rather than assisted dying.
Advertisement
“And there is no going back on this – if any doubt, you should vote it out.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:30
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater discusses End of Life Bill
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, put forward by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, is due to be debated on 29 November, when MPs will be given a “free vote” and allowed to vote with their conscience as opposed to along party lines.
In a recent letter to ministers, Cabinet Secretary Simon Case said the prime minister had decided to “set aside collective responsibility on the merits of this bill” and that the government would “remain neutral” on its passage and the matter of assisted dying.
There has been much debate about the bill since its details were published on Monday evening, including that the medicine that will end a patient’s life will need to be self-administered and that people must be terminally ill and expected to die within six months.
Ms Leadbeater, who has the support of former government minister Lord Falconer and ChildLine founder Dame Esther Rantzen, believes her proposed legislation is the “most robust” in the world and contains safeguards she hopes will “reassure” those who are on the fence.
They include that two independent doctors must confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and that a High Court judge must give their approval.
The bill will also include punishments of up to 14 years in prison for those who break the law, including coercing someone into ending their own life or pressuring them to take life-ending medicine.
She has also argued the fact terminally ill patients will have to make the choice themselves and administer the drugs themselves “creates that extra level of safeguards and protections”.
However, several cabinet ministers – including Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, who would be responsible for the new law – have spoken out against the legislation.
The health secretary warned that a new assisted dying law could come at the expense of other NHS services – and that there could be “trade-offs” elsewhere.
Sky News understands Ms Leadbeater has said she is “disappointed” by Mr Streeting’s comments about the bill.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:03
Tory MP: ‘Impossible’ for assisted dying bill to be safe
And another Labour MP who is voting for the legislation told Sky News they believed Mr Streeting had “overstepped the mark”.
“I think it’s a bit of a false exercise,” they said.
“It’s definitely going to raise eyebrows – it’s one thing to sound the alarm but he is purposefully helping the other side.”
The MP said that while it did feel “the momentum is moving away from us, a lot of it will come down to the debate and argument in the chamber”.
“Some of the scaremongering tactics might backfire,” they added.
“It’s still all to play for but it’s undoubtedly true the other side seems to be making headway at the moment.”
A source close to Mr Streeting told Sky News: “Wes has approached this issue in a genuine and considerate way, setting out his own view while respecting others’ views.”
As a private member’s bill that has been put down by a backbencher rather than a government minister, the legislation will not receive as much time for consideration as a government bill – but proponents say it can always be amended and voted down at later stages.
At Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, Tory MP Sir Alec Shelbrooke questioned whether enough time had been set aside to debate the bill and urged Sir Keir Starmer to allow two days, or 16 hours, of “protected time” to “examine and debate” the legislation before the vote.
Sir Keir replied: “I do think there is sufficient time allocated to it but it is an important issue.”
Health Secretary Wes Streeting has ordered his department to carry out a review of the costs of potentially changing the law to legalise assisted dying.
It comes as MPs weigh up whether to vote for a change in the law when given the opportunity to do so later this month.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, put forward by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, would give terminally ill people with six months to live the choice to end their lives.
There has been much debate about the bill since its details were published on Monday evening, including that the medicine that will end a patient’s life will need to be self-administered and that people must be terminally ill and expected to die within six months.
Ms Leadbeater, who has the support of former government minister Lord Falconer and ChildLine founder Dame Esther Rantzen, believes her proposed legislation is the “most robust” in the world and contains safeguards she hopes will “reassure” those who are on the fence.
More on Assisted Dying
Related Topics:
They include that two independent doctors must confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and that a High Court judge must give their approval.
The Labour MP has argued the fact terminally ill patients will have to make the choice themselves and administer the drugs themselves “creates that extra level of safeguards and protections”.
Advertisement
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
10:38
MP discusses End of Life Bill
However, several cabinet ministers – including Mr Streeting and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, who would be responsible for the new law – have spoken out against the legislation.
Announcing the review, Mr Streeting said: “Now that we’ve seen the bill published, I’ve asked my department to look at the costs that would be associated with providing a new service to enable assisted dying to go forward, because I’m very clear that regardless of my own personal position or my own vote, my department and the whole government will respect the will of parliament if people vote for assisted dying.”
Ms Leadbeater has said she is “disappointed” with Mr Streeting’s comments – telling The House magazine the health secretary’s comments “suggest he hasn’t read the bill”.
While the health secretary has warned of the potential cost downsides for the NHS, his critics have pointed out there may be potential savings to be made if patients need less care because they choose to end their own lives – something Mr Streeting branded a “chilling slippery slope argument”.
“I would hate for people to opt for assisted dying because they think they’re saving someone somewhere money – whether that’s relatives or the NHS,” he said.
“And I think that’s one of the issues that MPs are wrestling with as they decide how to cast their vote.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:03
‘Impossible’ for assisted bill to be safe
“But this is a free vote – the government’s position is neutral.”
Speaking to reporters after delivering a speech to the NHS Providers conference in Liverpool, Mr Streeting said there were “choices and trade-offs” and that “any new service comes at the expense of other competing pressures and priorities”.
“That doesn’t mean people should vote against it on that basis,” he said.
“People need to weigh up this choice in the way that we’re weighing up all these other choices at the moment.”
MPs will debate and vote on Ms Leadbeater’s Private Member’s Bill on 29 November, in what will be the first Commons vote on assisted dying since 2015.
The government has given MPs a “free vote” on the issue, meaning they will be able to vote according to their conscience and without the pressure to conform to party lines.