Downing Street has insisted that the prime minister has achieved his target of clearing the legacy backlog of asylum claims, despite the government’s own data showing that 4,537 remain.
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 4,537 remain, according to the government’s official data.
Analysis: Sunak’s asylum backlog claim isn’t true – according to the government’s own statistics
It seems the government has shot itself in the foot by misleadingly focusing on a specific promise made by the PM which hasn’t quite been met.
Speaking to journalists this morning, the prime minister’s spokesperson said the legacy backlog of asylum claims has, in fact, been cleared as promised because all cases have been reviewed, and the remaining ones simply “require additional work”.
The spokesperson said: “We committed to clearing the backlog, that is what the government has done. We are being very transparent about what that entails.
“We have processed all of those cases and indeed gone further than the original commitment. We’re up to 112,000 decisions made overall.
“As a result of that process, there are a small minority of cases which are complex and which, because of our rigorous standards, require further work.
“But nonetheless, it is a significant piece of work by Home Office officials to process such huge numbers in a short period of time while retaining our rigorous safety standard.”
Advertisement
The government has said that the remaining 4,537 more complex 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”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:29
Home Secretary discusses government’s work to process asylum claims
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”.
And Labour’s shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper labelled the claim that the backlog has been cleared “totally false”.
She told broadcasters: “They made a whole series of promises about clearing the asylum backlog and they haven’t delivered them.
“Instead, the asylum backlog is still nearly 100,000 cases, and we’ve still got thousands of people, record numbers of people in asylum hotels. So, the government’s just failing on all counts.”
Image: Rishi Sunak’s spokesperson has rejected accusations that the government has made “misleading” claims
The prime minister’s spokesperson was also asked about an apparent suggestion from Home Secretary James Cleverly on LBC radio this morning that the government’s goal is to stop small boat crossings entirely in 2024.
Downing Street said they are “not going to set out a deadline”, but said the Rwanda bill – that is due to return to the Commons “this month” – is a “key part” of stopping small boat crossings.
Mr Cleverly did not make the suggestion that boats would be stopped this year elsewhere, and a source close to him said: “Tackling illegal migration is by virtue of what it is, a product of criminal people smuggling gangs, should always be a mission to zero, and as quickly as possible.
“We’ll do what it takes, using a whole range of tactics to get to zero to break the business model of these ruthless smugglers who don’t care if people live or die, just as long as they pay.”
Up until today, there had been fears for months that the prime minister’s target would not be achieved, and 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.
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.
More caseworkers had been tasked with processing applications, which the Home Office has previously said 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.
A growing rift has emerged in Washington, D.C., between the cryptocurrency industry and labor unions as lawmakers debate whether to ease rules allowing cryptocurrencies in 401(k) retirement accounts.
The dispute centers on proposed market structure legislation that would allow retirement accounts to gain exposure to crypto, a move labor groups say could expose workers to speculative risk. In a letter sent on Wednesday to the US Senate Banking Committee, the American Federation of Teachers argued that cryptocurrencies are too volatile for pension and retirement savings, warning that workers could face significant losses.
The letter drew immediate pushback from crypto investors and industry figures. “The American Federation of Teachers has somehow developed the most logically incoherent, least educated take one could possibly author on the matter of crypto market structure regulation,” a crypto investor said on X.
The AFT letter to Congress opposes regulatory changes that would allow 401(k) retirement accounts to hold alternative assets, including cryptocurrency. Source: CNBC
In response to the letter, Castle Island Ventures partner Sean Judge said the bill would improve oversight and reduce systemic risk, while enabling pension funds to access an asset class that has delivered strong long-term returns.
Consensys attorney Bill Hughes said the AFT’s opposition to the crypto market structure bill was politically motivated, accusing the group of acting as an extension of Democratic lawmakers.
Funds held in US retirement accounts by type of account plan. Source: ICI
Opposition to crypto in retirement and pension funds mounts
Proponents of allowing crypto in retirement portfolios, on the other hand, argue that it democratizes finance, while trade unions have voiced strong opposition to relaxing current regulations, claiming that crypto is too risky for traditional retirement plans.
“Unregulated, risky currencies and investments are not where we should put pensions and retirement savings. The wild, wild west is not what we need, whether it’s crypto, AI, or social media,” AFT president Randi Weingarten said on Thursday.
The AFT represents 1.8 million teachers and educational professionals in the US and is one of the largest teachers’ unions in the country.
According to Better Markets, a nonprofit and nonpartisan advocacy organization, cryptocurrencies are too volatile for traditional retirement portfolios, and their high volatility can create time-horizon mismatches for pension investors seeking a predictable, low-volatility retirement plan.
Bitcoin and Ether volatility compared to other asset classes and stock indexes. Source: US Federal Reserve
In October, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) also wrote to Congress opposing provisions within the crypto market structure regulatory bill.
The AFL-CIO, the largest federation of trade unions in the US, wrote that cryptocurrencies are volatile and pose a systemic risk to pension funds and the broader financial system.
The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has conditionally approved five national bank charter applications for companies tied to the digital assets industry.
In a Friday notice, the OCC said it had conditionally approved BitGo, Fidelity, and Paxos to convert their existing state-level trust companies into federally chartered national trust banks. In the same announcement, the regulator said it had conditionally approved new applications from Circle and Ripple for national trust bank charters.
“New entrants into the federal banking sector are good for consumers, the banking industry and the economy,” said Jonathan Gould, the Comptroller of the Currency, adding: “The OCC will continue to provide a path for both traditional and innovative approaches to financial services to ensure the federal banking system keeps pace with the evolution of finance and supports a modern economy.”
Europe’s crypto regulatory framework is entering a new phase of scrutiny as policymakers weigh whether enforcement of the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation should remain with national authorities or be centralized under the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).
MiCA, which came largely into force at the beginning of 2025, was designed to create a unified rulebook for crypto-asset service providers across the European Union.
But as implementation progresses, disparities between member states are becoming harder to ignore. Some regulators have approved dozens of licenses, while others have issued only a handful, prompting concerns about inconsistent supervision and regulatory arbitrage.
In this week’s episode of Byte-Sized Insight, Cointelegraph explored what those growing pains mean for Europe’s crypto market with Lewin Boehnke, chief strategy officer at Crypto Finance Group — a Switzerland-based digital asset firm with operations across the EU.
Uneven enforcement fuels calls for oversight
According to Boehnke, the core challenge facing Europe isn’t the MiCA framework itself, but rather how it is being applied differently across jurisdictions.
“There is a very, very uneven application of the regulation,” he said, pointing to stark contrasts between member states. Germany, for example, has already granted around 30 crypto licenses, many to established banks, while Luxembourg has approved just three, all to major, well-known firms.
The ESMA released a peer review of the Malta Financial Services Authority’s authorization of a crypto service provider, finding that the regulator only “partially met expectations.”
Those disparities have helped fuel support among some regulators and policymakers for transferring supervisory powers to ESMA, which would create a more centralized enforcement model similar to the US Securities and Exchange Commission.
France, Austria and Italy have all signaled support for such a move, particularly amid criticism of more permissive regimes elsewhere in the bloc.
From Boehnke’s perspective, centralization could be less about control and more about efficiency.
“From just purely the practical point of view, I think it would be a good idea to have a unified… application of the regulation,” he said, adding that direct engagement with the ESMA could reduce delays caused by back-and-forth between national authorities.
MiCA’s design praised, but technical questions remain
Despite criticism from some corners of the crypto industry, Boehnke said MiCA’s overarching structure is sound, particularly its focus on regulating intermediaries rather than peer-to-peer activity.
“I do like MiCA regulation… the overarching approach of regulating not necessarily the assets, not the peer-to-peer use, but the custodians and the ones that offer services… that is the right approach.”
However, he also noted that unresolved technical questions are slowing adoption, especially for banks. One example is MiCA’s requirement that custodians be able to return client assets “immediately,” a phrase that remains open to interpretation.
“Does that mean withdrawal of the crypto? Or is it good enough to sell the crypto and withdraw the fiat immediately?” Boehnke asked, noting that such ambiguities are still being worked through and are awaiting clarity from ESMA.
To hear the complete conversation on Byte-Sized Insight, listen to the full episode on Cointelegraph’s Podcasts page, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And don’t forget to check out Cointelegraph’s full lineup of other shows!