The UK Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, has embarked on a determined effort to overhaul Britain's asylum system, drawing significant inspiration from Denmark's stringent immigration model. This initiative was underscored by her recent two-day visit to Denmark, where she toured facilities such as the Sjælsmark returns centre, a former military barracks housing individuals denied the right to remain. Mahmood observed firsthand the strict conditions imposed on hundreds of people whose asylum and right-to-remain appeals have been rejected, and who are awaiting deportation or removal to other countries. Sjælsmark, located near Copenhagen, epitomizes Denmark's asylum system, which is designed to deter claimants by offering temporary permission to stay and later requiring departure if their home countries are deemed safe.

Denmark's approach, established with camps like Sjælsmark in 2015, effectively functions as an open prison system, according to refugee campaigners. Residents are housed in shared rooms, with up to ten people in some, and are required to sign contracts agreeing to help clean facilities and adhere to strict curfews, under penalty of fines, imprisonment, or deportation. While ostensibly allowed to leave, high fences, CCTV cameras, and a single entrance/exit point mean few choose to do so. This harsh regime has led Denmark to have one of Europe's most restrictive immigration systems, granting asylum to just 860 people in 2024, though temporary protection was extended to 10,000 Ukrainians. In 2025, 2,600 people were deported following rejected claims. Critics, particularly from the left, argue that these hardline policies have mainstreamed extreme right-wing agendas and shifted political discourse rightwards, a strategy notably adopted by Denmark's left-leaning Social Democrat government to reclaim working-class support.

Mahmood's visit was intended to solidify a message that the UK must adopt a similar model to counter the rise of a populist right, despite resistance from some Labour MPs. Speaking before a byelection defeat, Mahmood emphasized that the UK public holds “legitimate grievances” regarding the perceived unfairness of arrivals via small boats and the strain on public services from excessive immigration. She distinguished between racist sentiments and valid frustrations felt by many who see communities and public services under pressure, believing that “billions of pounds is spent on a system that is fundamentally broken.” The Home Secretary warned that failure to address these concerns could lead to a Nigel Farage-led Reform government, which, she asserted, would “raise the drawbridge entirely” and deport people at a scale that would risk returning them to places where they faced “certain death.”

In a significant policy shift, Shabana Mahmood announced that from Monday, every refugee granted status in the UK will receive only temporary protection, lasting just 30 months. This new rule dictates that claimants whose countries are subsequently deemed safe by the UK government will be expected to return. The changes also include plans to double the waiting period for some foreign nationals to settle in the UK to 10 years. Crucially, these new rules will not apply retrospectively to anyone who applied before Monday. This replaces the previous system where refugees were granted five years of protection, allowed family reunification, and offered possible permanent settlement. Mahmood insists these policies, far from being unpopular, address public concerns, stating the asylum system must not create “pull factors” for dangerous journeys. The Home Office, she claimed, possesses the necessary resources and administrative capacity to conduct the annual reviews required by the new system.

These proposed changes have drawn strong criticism from various organizations and individuals. The Refugee Council's director of external affairs, Imran Hussain, condemned the 30-month temporary leave, arguing it would prevent families who have survived “unimaginable danger” from putting down roots, learning English, and finding work, thereby damaging long-term integration. The council estimates the new workload will cost up to £725 million and result in 1.1 million repeat case reviews. Anne la Cour Vågen, head of asylum at the Danish Red Cross, highlighted how temporary status in Denmark hinders integration, as refugees are less inclined to learn the local language if they face constant uncertainty. Veteran Labour peer Alf Dubs also criticized the suspension of family reunion visas, predicting a rise in unaccompanied children arriving via small boats. Peter Walsh, a senior researcher at Oxford University’s Migration Observatory, noted that while such policies might have a “deterrent effect at the margins,” large-scale returns are often not operationally or diplomatically feasible, citing Denmark's experience where many remained without legal status despite revocations.

During her visit, Mahmood also met with Danish Minister for Immigration and Integration, Rasmus Stoklund, who discussed Denmark's controversial “ghetto law.” This law permits the state to demolish apartment blocks where at least half of the residents have a “non-western” background, aiming to prevent “parallel societies.” However, the UK Home Office explicitly distanced itself from this specific Danish policy, stating, “We disagree with the Danes on that idea – that is not Mahmood’s vision of a pluralistic country. We are interested in integration, not head counts of white faces.” Despite this divergence on certain specifics, Mahmood remains committed to her broader immigration reforms, signaling that the future of the Labour party hinges on its ability to impose “controls on the level of migration” to alleviate pressure on communities. The wider overhaul of the asylum appeals system is expected in the King's Speech in May, likely facing significant Labour rebellion.