England’s Children’s Commissioner has warned that Home Office plans for refused asylum seekers could put up to 27,000 children at risk, including families facing removal from the UK after failed claims. The proposals are not yet final law, so affected families should not assume the rules have already changed and should seek regulated immigration advice if they receive Home Office letters about support or removal.
Dame Rachel de Souza said the plans, drawn up under Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, should not go ahead as currently written. Her office said the proposals could affect children living in families whose asylum claims have been refused, as well as young adult care leavers with refused claims.
The Children’s Commissioner has written to Mahmood asking for clear figures on how many children may be affected, where they live and what support they may need. Her office estimates that as many as 27,000 children could be caught by the proposed changes.
The Home Office consultation, launched in March, looked at changing support for families after an asylum claim has failed. It also considered changes affecting adult care leavers and the possible use of physical intervention during enforced removals involving children.
De Souza said: “I have a statutory duty to protect and promote the rights of children – that includes all children who arrive in this country, no matter how they get here or what their asylum status is.”
She added: “As they are currently set out, all three of the proposals will put children at risk of harm.”
Her concern is partly based on the Children Act 1989, which says a child’s welfare must be central in decisions affecting them. De Souza argues the Home Office has not yet shown how the proposals would protect children’s best interests.
A refused asylum seeker is someone whose claim for protection in the UK has been rejected. Some may still have legal steps available, while others may be expected to leave the country.
Under current arrangements, some families can continue receiving basic support after refusal. This can include accommodation and a small payment where they would otherwise be destitute.
The proposed changes would make that support more limited. Families could lose accommodation and payments unless they meet tighter conditions, such as proving they would be destitute or showing there is a recognised reason they cannot leave the UK.
One of the most serious concerns is what could happen to children receiving medical treatment.
Campaigners and the Children’s Commissioner have raised alarm over proposals that ongoing treatment, or the lack of similar care in a family’s home country, would not automatically count as a “genuine obstacle” to removal. In simple terms, this means a family may still be expected to leave even where a child is being treated in the UK, unless they meet the legal test set by the Home Office.
De Souza has said this approach is at odds with the best interests of children and should be changed before any policy is introduced.
The consultation also raised the possibility of allowing immigration and custody officers to use physical intervention where an accompanied child does not comply with removal. Reports say possible measures could include handcuffs, although the proposal remains under consultation and is not current law.
De Souza said any force used against a child should be an absolute last resort, used only to protect the child or others from harm and carried out by properly trained professionals.
The Home Office says it needs to restore control to the asylum system and increase returns where people have no right to remain in the UK. In a March speech, Mahmood said failure to control the system would damage public confidence and strengthen extreme politics.
She also said the Government would pilot a voluntary returns model for some failed asylum-seeking families, with payments of £10,000 per person and a maximum of £40,000 per family.
That offer would not mean every family receives money. It would apply only where the Government decides a family falls within the pilot and accepts voluntary return.
The dispute now centres on whether the Home Office can speed up removals while still meeting its duties to children. Charities say the plans risk pushing families into hardship and fear. The Government argues the system must be firm where asylum claims have failed.
For now, the key point is that these proposals are not automatic rules already in force. Families affected by asylum refusal should keep all Home Office letters, act before deadlines, and speak to a qualified immigration adviser or trusted refugee charity before making any decision.