Migrants convicted of sex offences in the UK or overseas will be unable to claim asylum under government plans to change the law to improve border security.
The Home Office announcement means foreign nationals who are added to the sex offenders register will forfeit their rights to protection under the Refugee Convention.
As part of the 1951 UN treaty, countries are allowed to refuse asylum to terrorists, war criminals and individuals convicted of a “particularly serious crime” – which is currently defined in UK law as an offence carrying a sentence of 12 months or more.
The government now plans to extend that definition to include all individuals added to the Sex Offenders’ Register, regardless of the length of sentence, in an amendment to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, which is currently going through parliament. It’s understood they also hope to include those convicted of equivalent crimes overseas.
Those affected will still be able to appeal their removal from the UK in the courts under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Image: More than 10,000 people have now been detected crossing the Channel. Pic: PA
It is unclear how many asylum seekers will be affected, as the government has been unable to provide any projections or past data on the number of asylum seekers added to the Sex Offenders’ Register.
More from Politics
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Sex offenders who pose a risk to the community should not be allowed to benefit from refugee protections in the UK.
“We are strengthening the law to ensure these appalling crimes are taken seriously.”
Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls Minister Jess Philips said: “We are determined to achieve our mission of halving violence against women and girls in a decade.
“That’s exactly why we are taking action to ensure there are robust safeguards across the system, including by clamping down on foreign criminals who commit heinous crimes like sex offences.”
The Home Office would like voters to see this as a substantial change. But that’s hard to demonstrate without providing any indication of the scale of the problem it seeks to solve.
Clearly, the government does not want to fan the flames of resentment towards asylum seekers by implying large numbers have been committing sex crimes.
But amid rising voter frustration about the government’s grip on the issue, and under pressure from Reform – this measure is about signalling it is prepared to take tough action.
Conservatives: ‘Too little, too late’
The Conservatives claim Labour are engaged in “pre-election posturing”.
Chris Philp MP, the shadow home secretary, said: “This is too little, too late from a Labour government that has scrapped our deterrent and overseen the worst year ever for small boat crossings – with a record 10,000 people crossing this year already.
“Foreign criminals pose a danger to British citizens and must be removed, but so often this is frustrated by spurious legal claims based on human rights claims, not asylum claims.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:18
Has Labour tackled migration?
The Home Office has also announced plans to introduce a 24-week target for appeal hearings (known as “first-tier tribunals”) to be held for rejected asylum seekers living in taxpayer-supported accommodation, or for foreign national offenders.
The current average wait is 50 weeks. The idea is to cut the asylum backlog and save taxpayers money – Labour have committed to end the use of asylum hotels by the end of this parliament.
It’s unclear how exactly this will be achieved, although a number of additional court days have already been announced.
The government also plans to crack down on fake immigration lawyers who advise migrants on how to lodge fraudulent asylum claims, with the Immigration Advice Authority given new powers to issue fines of up to £15,000.
Only a quarter of British adults think Sir Keir Starmer will win the next general election, as the party’s climbdown over welfare cuts affects its standing with the public.
A fresh poll by Ipsos, shared with Sky News, also found 63% do not feel confident the government is running the country competently, similar to levels scored by previous Conservative administrations under Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak in July 2022 and February 2023, respectively.
The survey of 1,080 adults aged 18-75 across Great Britain was conducted online between 27 and 30 June 2025, when Labour began making the first of its concessions, suggesting the party’s turmoil over its own benefits overhaul is partly to blame.
The prime minister was forced into an embarrassing climbdown on Tuesday night over his plans to slash welfare spending, after it became apparent he was in danger of losing the vote owing to a rebellion among his own MPs.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:21
Govt makes last-minute concession on welfare bill
The bill that was put to MPs for a vote was so watered down that the most controversial element – to tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments (PIP) – was put on hold, pending a review into the assessment process by minister Stephen Timms that is due to report back in the autumn.
The government was forced into a U-turn after Labour MPs signalled publicly and privately that the previous concession made at the weekend to protect existing claimants from the new rules would not be enough.
More on Benefits
Related Topics:
While the bill passed its first parliamentary hurdle last night, with a majority of 75, 49 Labour MPs still voted against it – the largest rebellion in a prime minister’s first year in office since 47 MPs voted against Tony Blair’s Lone Parent benefit in 1997, according to Professor Phil Cowley from Queen Mary University.
It left MPs to vote on only one element of the original plan – the cut to Universal Credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:21
Govt makes last-minute concession on welfare bill
An amendment brought by Labour MP Rachael Maskell, which aimed to prevent the bill progressing to the next stage, was defeated but 44 Labour MPs voted for it.
The incident has raised questions about Sir Keir’s authority just a year after the general election delivered him the first Labour landslide victory in decades.
And on Wednesday, Downing Street insisted Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, was “not going anywhere” after her tearful appearance in the House of Commons during prime minister’s questions sparked speculation about her political future.
The Ipsos poll also found that two-thirds of British adults are not confident Labour has the right plans to change the way the benefits system works in the UK, including nearly half of 2024 Labour voters.
Keiran Pedley, director of UK Politics at Ipsos, said: “Labour rows over welfare reform haven’t just harmed the public’s view on whether they can make the right changes in that policy area, they are raising wider questions about their ability to govern too.
“The public is starting to doubt Labour’s ability to govern competently and seriously at the same levels they did with Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak’s governments. Labour will hope that this government doesn’t end up going the same way.”
Image: Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves (right) crying as Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer speaks. Pic: Commons/UK Parliament/PA
It is hard to know for sure right now what was going on behind the scenes, the reasons – predictable or otherwise – why she appeared to be emotional, but it was noticeable and it was difficult to watch.
Her spokesperson says it was a personal matter that they will not be getting into.
More from Politics
Even Kemi Badenoch, not usually the most nimble PMQs performer, singled her out. “She looks absolutely miserable,” she said.
Anyone wondering if Kemi Badenoch can kick a dog when it’s down has their answer today.
The Tory leader asked the PM if he could guarantee his chancellor’s future: he could not. “She has delivered, and we are grateful for it,” Sir Keir said, almost sounding like he was speaking in the past tense.
Image: Rachel Reeves looked visibly upset behind Keir Starmer at PMQs. Pic PA
It is important to say: Rachel Reeves’s face during one PMQs session is not enough to tell us everything, or even anything, we need to know.
But given the government has just faced its most bruising week yet, it was hard not to speculate. The prime minister’s spokesperson has said since PMQs that the chancellor has not offered her resignation and is not going anywhere.
But Rachel Reeves has surely seen an omen of the impossible decisions ahead.
How will she plug the estimated £5.5bn hole left by the welfare climbdown in the nation’s finances? Will she need to tweak her iron clad fiscal rules? Will she come back for more tax rises? What message does all of this send to the markets?
If a picture tells us a thousand words, Rachel Reeves’s face will surely be blazoned on the front pages tomorrow as a warning that no U-turn goes unpunished.