Labour’s new-found willingness to get tough on asylum seekers may appease a few on the hard right, but will do nothing to tackle the bigger problem of illegal immigration, writes Herald columnist Carlos Alba

Monday began with the UK Government outlining the most radical – some might say extreme – measures to control immigration in the country’s history.

It was typical and inevitable that it would end with something as tangential as ministers reassuring critics that failed asylum seekers would not be stripped of their jewellery by border guards.

The issue is unique in being characterised and debated on the basis of perception rather than fact as politicians vie to outdo Reform UK over its plans to cut migration. Under Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s proposed measures to tackle the UK’s “broken” asylum system, refugee status will be subject to review every 30 months, which could lead to forced returns, if a home country is deemed safe. Her plan also involves reinterpreting human rights law to limit the use of the "right to family life" in migration cases, and cutting financial and housing support for certain asylum seekers, such as those who can work or have committed crimes.

Those granted asylum may have to wait up to 20 years before they can apply to settle here permanently.

When discussed and reported in the abstract, immigration is always about numbers – the weekly tally of those landing on the Kent coast in small boats; estimates of how many illegals are working in the black economy; arrivals equivalent to the population of........

© Herald Scotland