Category World News

The United Kingdom’s government is considering an amendment to immigration rules modelled on Denmark’s controversial policy amid pressure from the far-right groups, who have attacked the Labour government over the rising number of refugees and migrants crossing into the country.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood last month dispatched officials to study the workings of the Danish immigration and asylum system, widely considered the toughest in Europe. The officials are reportedly looking to review the British immigration rules on family reunion and limit refugees to a temporary stay.

The Labour government led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer has been under immense pressure amid growing public opposition to immigration and the surge in the popularity of the far-right Reform UK, which has centred its campaign around the issue of immigration.

So, what’s in Denmark’s immigration laws, and why is the centre-left Labour government adopting laws on asylum and border controls championed by the right wing?

What are Denmark’s immigration laws?

Over the last two decades in Europe, Denmark has led the way in implementing increasingly restrictive policies in its immigration and asylum system, with top leaders aiming for “zero asylum seekers” arriving in the country.

First, Denmark has made family reunions tougher, keeping the bar of conditions comparatively higher than it is in allied countries. Those who live in estates designated as “parallel societies”, where more than 50 percent of residents are from so-called “non-Western” backgrounds, are barred from being granted family reunion. This has been decried by rights groups as racist for refugees’ ethnic profiling.

In Denmark, a refugee with residency rights must meet several criteria for their partner to join them in the country. Both must be age 24 or older, the partner in Denmark must not have claimed benefits for three years, and both partners need to pass a Danish language test.

Permanent residency is possible only after eight years under very strict criteria, including full-time employment.

Christian Albrekt Larsen, a professor in the Political Science department of Aalborg University in Denmark, told Al Jazeera that successive Danish governments’ restrictive policies on “immigration and integration have turned [it] into a consensus position – meaning the ‘need’ for radical anti-immigration parties has been reduced”.

Noting that “there is not one single Danish ‘model’”, but that the evolution has been a process of adjustments since 1998, Larsen said, “In general, Denmark’s ‘effectiveness’ lies in being seen as less attractive than its close neighbours, [including] Germany, Sweden, and Norway.”

Copenhagen is more likely to give asylum to those who have been targeted by a foreign regime, while those fleeing conflicts are increasingly limited in remaining in the country temporarily.

However, Denmark decides which country is safe on its own. For example, in 2022, the Danish government did not renew permits for more than 1,200 refugees from Syria because it judged Damascus to be safe for refugees to return to.

In 2021, Denmark also passed laws allowing it to process asylum seekers outside of Europe, like negotiating with Rwanda, though putting this into practice has been controversial and challenging.

Denmark has reduced the number of successful asylum claims to a 40-year low, except in 2020, amid the coronavirus pandemic’s travel restrictions.

How do these differ from the UK’s current immigration laws?

The UK allows individuals to claim asylum if they prove they are unsafe in their home countries. Refugee status is granted if an individual is at risk of persecution under the United Nations’ 1951 Refugee Convention. Refugees are usually granted five years of leave to remain, with the option to apply for permanent settlement afterward.

Most migrants and refugees can apply for indefinite leave to remain (ILR) after five years, followed by eligibility for citizenship one year later. Requirements include English proficiency and passing the “Life in the UK” test.

The UK system currently does not impose an age limit beyond 18, but requires a minimum annual income of 29,000 British pounds ($38,161), and is subject to a rise pending a review, for sponsoring partners.

Asylum seekers are excluded from mainstream welfare and receive a meagre weekly allowance. However, once granted protection, they access the same benefits as British nationals.

The UK under the previous Conservative government passed controversial legislation to enable deportation to Rwanda, but the policy has not yet been implemented due to ongoing legal challenges.

Before September this year, the UK Home Office allowed spouses, partners, and dependents under 18 to come to the UK without fulfilling the income and English-language tests that apply to other migrants. That is currently suspended, pending the drafting of new rules.

Why is the Labour government changing the UK’s immigration laws?

Facing heat from the opposition over the rising arrivals of migrants and refugees by boats, Prime Minister Starmer in May proposed a draft paper on immigration, calling it a move towards a “controlled, selective and fair” system.

As part of the proposal, the standard waiting time for migrants and refugees for permanent settlement would be doubled to 10 years, and English language requirements would be tightened.

The Labour Party, which advocated for a more open migration model, has been on the back foot over the issue of immigration.

From January through July of this year, more than 25,000 people crossed the English Channel into the UK.

The opposition has seized on this issue.

Nigel Farage, the leader of the Reform UK party, has accused Labour of being soft on immigration. Farage has pledged to scrap indefinite leave to remain – a proposal Starmer has dubbed as “racist” and “immoral”.

Successive British governments have tried unsuccessfully to reduce net migration, which is the number of people coming to the UK, minus the number leaving. Net migration climbed to a record 906,000 in June 2023. It stood at 728,000 last year.

Starmer’s administration has framed the new immigration rules as a “clean break” from a system they see as overreliant on low-paid overseas labour.

A survey released by Ipsos last month revealed that immigration continues to be seen as the biggest issue facing the country, with 51 percent of Britons mentioning it as a concern. That is more than the economy (35 percent) or healthcare (26 percent).

However, at the same time, a YouGov poll found only 26 percent of people said immigration and asylum was one of the three most important issues facing their community.

Concern about immigration is a “manufactured panic”, a report published by the Best for Britain campaign group noted.

The group’s director of policy and research, Tom Brufatto, said that “the data clearly demonstrates that media exposure and political discourse are fanning the flames of anti-immigration sentiment in the UK, causing the government to lose support both to its right and left flank simultaneously.”

Is there opposition to the change within the Labour Party?

The left-leaning leaders of the Labour Party have condemned the “far-right”, “racist” approach of the British government’s moves to adapt the Danish model.

Labour MPs urged Home Secretary Mahmood to dial down her plans for a Danish-style overhaul of the immigration and asylum system.

Nadia Whittome, Labour MP for Nottingham East, told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme that she thinks that “this is a dead end – morally, politically and electorally”.

“I think these are policies of the far right,” she said. “I don’t think anyone wants to see a Labour government flirting with them.”

Whittome argued that it would be a “dangerous path” to take and that some of the Danish policies, especially those around “parallel societies”, were “undeniably racist”.

Clive Lewis, the MP for Norwich South, said: “Denmark’s Social Democrats have gone down what I would call a hardcore approach to immigration.

“They’ve adopted many of the talking points of what we would call the far right,” Lewis said. “Labour does need to win back some Reform-leaning voters, but you can’t do that at the cost of losing progressive votes.”

Meanwhile, members of Parliament from the traditional “Red Wall” constituencies, where the Reform UK party has a support base, are receptive to Mahmood’s plans.

The fissures grew more apparent after Lucy Powell, who won the Labour deputy leadership contest last month, challenged Starmer to soften his stance on immigration.

“Division and hate are on the rise,” Powell said last month. “Discontent and disillusionment are widespread. We have this one big chance to show that progressive mainstream politics really can change people’s lives for the better.”

How do immigration laws vary across Europe?

European countries differ widely in how they manage immigration. Some are major destinations for large absolute numbers of migrants and refugees, while others have adopted restrictive legal measures or strong integration policies.

In 2023, the largest absolute numbers of immigrants entering European Union countries were recorded in Germany and Spain, over 1.2 million each, followed by Italy and France, according to the EU’s latest Migration and Asylum report.

These four countries together accounted for more than half of all non-EU immigration to the EU.

EU member states operate within EU migration and asylum rules, and Schengen zone rules where applicable, and are bound by international obligations such as the UN Refugee Convention. But individual states apply national legislation that interprets those obligations, and in recent years, public sentiment has turned against immigration amid a cost-of-living crisis.

YouGov polling conducted in Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Sweden found that respondents believe immigration over the past decade has been too high. In Britain, 70 percent of those surveyed said that immigration rates have been too high, according to the survey released in February.

On the other hand, countries like Hungary, Poland, and Austria, in addition to Denmark, have formed immigration policies focused on building border fences and restrictive family reunification rules, alongside expedited deportations and limits on access to social benefits.

Austrian and German ministers have referenced the Danish model as a source of inspiration for their own domestic policies.

Several EU states have also tried a version of externalising asylum processes, including Italy with Albania, Denmark with Rwanda, Greece with Turkiye, Spain with Morocco, and Malta with Libya and Tunisia.

On Monday, Egyptians will head to the polls in the first of a two-phase process aimed at electing a new House of Representatives. Expatriates already voted on November 7 and 8.

Egypt has taken an increasingly proactive role regionally as of late, joining Qatar as a key negotiator for the ceasefire in Gaza. The country has also deployed Foreign Ministry representatives to Lebanon in recent weeks.

The elections for the House come on the back of last year’s Senate elections and are expected to be the final elections in President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s third term.

So why is this significant? Read on, and find out.

What is happening?

Monday will see the start of voting for the 596-member House of Representatives.

Of those seats, 284 are individual seats, while another 284 are filled via a closed party list system. Twenty-eight more members are appointed by presidential decree. A quarter of the seats must be held by women.

There are 70 counting committees, and voting will be conducted across 5,606 polling stations, according to Egyptian media. Fourteen governorates vote in the first phase and 13 vote in the second.

Results for the voting may not be fully known before the end of December.

Phase one includes the governorates of Alexandria, Assiut, Aswan, Beheira, Beni Suef, Fayoum, Giza, Luxor, Matrouh, Minya, New Valley, Qena, Red Sea, and Sohag.

Phase two includes Cairo, Daqahlia, Damietta, Gharbia, Ismailia, Kafr El-Sheikh, Menoufia, North Sinai, Port Said, Qalyubia, Sharqia, South Sinai, and Suez.

Phase one results will be announced on November 18.

If phase one requires run-offs, voting will be held internationally over the first two days of December and then in Egypt on December 3 and 4, with results announced on December 11.

Phase-two voting for Egyptians abroad will take place on November 21 and 22. Voting inside Egypt will take place on November 24 and 25, with results announced on December 2.

In case of phase-two run-offs, voting will take place on December 15 and 16 abroad and 17 and 18 inside Egypt, with the final results announced on December 25.

Who is running?

First, voting has to be broken down by “party-list constituencies” and individual candidates. Each group is competing for 284 seats.

The party-list constituencies in Egypt divide the country into four areas. Cairo and the Central and Southern Delta has 102 seats. North, Central, and South Upper Egypt has 102 seats. The Eastern Delta and Western Delta have 40 seats apiece.

Then, individual candidates are running for another 284 across 143 constituencies.

The electoral lists are closed, meaning that parties must be approved to run.

The current lists include 12 political parties plus the Coordination Committee of Parties’ Youth Leaders and Politicians, who will compete for the 284 party-list seats. The National List for Egypt, the Generation List, the Popular List, Your Voice for Egypt List, and the Egypt Call List are seen as some of the bigger parties running.

How did expat voting go?

Ahram Online reported that it went smoothly.

A total 139 electoral committees were set up in 117 countries. The Egyptian Foreign Ministry also set up 24-hour operation rooms in every mission to coordinate with the National Elections Authority in Cairo.

The round two vote is still set to take place in late November.

How long will House members serve?

Members of the House of Representatives serve five-year terms.

The current House was elected in late 2020 for a five-year term that expires in January 2026.

Why is this vote important?

President el-Sisi is in his third and, constitutionally, final term. In 2019, the Parliament of Egypt changed the constitution to allow him to serve until 2030, and there’s a widely held belief that Parliament could once again amend the constitution, allowing el-Sisi to extend his mandate.

In recent years, el-Sisi has worked to reshape Egypt by liberalising the economy, but many Egyptians are struggling with a rising cost of living and will likely be heading to the polls with the economy in mind.

Other important issues expressed by Egyptians include health and medical care, and a new rental law that threatens to evict millions living in rent-controlled properties.

Analysts say these elections could play a significant role in the country’s future, especially after the end of el-Sisi’s term.

After deadly protests and a youth uprising, Kenya’s president defends his record on democracy, rights, and reform.

As United States lawmakers fail to agree on a deal to end the government shutdown, around 750,000 federal employees have been furloughed, millions of Americans go without food assistance, and air travel is disrupted across the country.

The shutdown began on October 1, after opposing sides in the US Senate failed to agree on spending priorities, with Republicans rejecting a push by Democrats to protect healthcare and other social programmes.

Since then, both sides have failed to agree on 14 separate funding measures, delaying payment to hundreds of thousands of federal staff.

After 40 days, senators from both parties are working this weekend to try to end what has become the longest government shutdown in US history. But talks on Saturday showed little sign of breaking the impasse and securing long-term funding for key programmes.

On Friday, Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer offered Republicans a narrower version of an earlier Democratic proposal – a temporary extension of healthcare subsidies. Republicans rejected the offer, prolonging the record-breaking shutdown.

So what do we know about the shutdown, and how it has impacted Americans?

Flights disrupted

The shutdown has created major disruptions for the aviation industry, with staffing shortages among unpaid air traffic controllers.

More than 1,530 flights were cancelled across the US on Saturday, while thousands more were delayed as authorities ordered airports to reduce air traffic.

According to the flight tracking website FlightAware, Saturday’s cancellations marked an increase from 1,025 the previous day. The trend looks set to continue, with at least 1,000 cancellations logged for Sunday.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said staffing shortages were affecting 42 control towers and other facilities, leading to delays in at least a dozen major cities – including Atlanta, Newark, San Francisco, New York and Chicago.

The travel chaos could prove politically costly for lawmakers if disruptions persist, especially ahead of the holiday season. Reduced air traffic will also hit deliveries and shipping, since many commercial flights carry cargo alongside passengers.

The CEO of Elevate Aviation Group, Greg Raiff, recently warned that the economic impact would ripple outward. “This shutdown is going to affect everything from business travel to tourism,” he told the Associated Press.

“It’s going to hurt local tax revenues and city budgets – there’s a cascading effect from all this.”

Threat to food assistance

In recent weeks, US President Donald Trump has said he will only restore food aid once the government shutdown ends.

“SNAP BENEFITS, which increased by Billions and Billions of Dollars (MANY FOLD!) during Crooked Joe Biden’s disastrous term … will be given only when the Radical Left Democrats open up government,” he wrote earlier this week on Truth Social.

The US Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps, provides low-income Americans with roughly $8bn a month in grocery assistance. The average individual benefit is about $190 per month, while a household receives around $356.

Health insurance standoff

Democrats blame the shutdown on Republicans’ refusal to renew expiring healthcare subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Talks stalled again on Saturday after Trump declared he would not compromise on the issue.

Democrats are pushing for a one-year extension of the ACA subsidies, which mainly help people without employer or government health coverage buy insurance. But with a 53–47 majority in the Senate, Republicans can block the proposal.

Trump intervened on Saturday via Truth Social, calling on Republican senators to redirect federal funds used for health insurance subsidies toward direct payments for individuals.

“I am recommending to Senate Republicans that the Hundreds of Billions of Dollars currently being sent to money sucking Insurance Companies … BE SENT DIRECTLY TO THE PEOPLE SO THAT THEY CAN PURCHASE THEIR OWN, MUCH BETTER, HEALTHCARE, and have money left over,” he said.

Roughly 24 million Americans currently benefit from the ACA subsidies. Analysts warn that premiums could double by 2026 if Congress allows them to expire.

Has this happened before?

This is not the first time Washington has faced such a standoff. The graphic below shows every US funding gap and government shutdown since 1976, including how long each lasted and under which administration it occurred.

The current federal budget process dates back to 1976. Since its creation, the government has experienced 20 funding gaps, leading to 10 shutdowns.

Prior to the 1980s, such funding lapses rarely caused shutdowns. Most federal agencies continued operating, expecting Congress to soon approve new funding.

That changed in 1980, when Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti issued legal opinions clarifying that, under federal law, agencies cannot spend money without congressional authorisation. Only essential functions (like air traffic control) were permitted to continue.

From 1982 onward, this interpretation has meant that funding gaps have more frequently triggered full or partial government shutdowns, lasting until Congress reaches a resolution.

What happens next?

No breakthrough was announced after the US Senate convened for a rare Saturday session. The chamber is now expected to reconvene at 1:30pm local time on Sunday.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters that the chamber will continue meeting until the government reopens. “There’s still only one path out – it’s a clean funding extension,” he said.

Some 1.3 million service members are now at risk of missing a paycheque, and that might put pressure on both sides to agree on a deal. Earlier this month, staff were paid after $8bn from military research and development funds were made available at the intervention of Trump.

But questions remain about whether the administration will resort to a similar procedure if the shutdown is prolonged. Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire told reporters on Friday that Democrats “need another path forward”.

Shaheen and several moderate Democrats are floating a proposal that would temporarily fund certain departments – such as veterans’ services and food aid – while keeping the rest of the government open until December or early next year.

It’s understood that Shaheen’s plan would include a promise of a future vote on healthcare subsidies, but not a guaranteed extension. It remains unclear whether enough Democrats would support that compromise. 

Thune, meanwhile, is reportedly considering a bipartisan version of the proposal. On Friday, he said he thinks the offer is an indication that Democrats are “feeling the heat … I guess you could characterise that as progress”.

Looking ahead, it remains unclear what Republicans might offer regarding healthcare.