Why does the UK want to copy Denmark’s stringent immigration policies? – Al Jazeera

Report on UK Immigration Policy Review and its Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Introduction

The government of the United Kingdom is currently reviewing its immigration and asylum framework, with consideration given to adopting policies similar to Denmark’s restrictive model. This review is prompted by domestic political pressure regarding an increase in refugee and migrant arrivals. This report analyzes the proposed policy shift, comparing the Danish and UK systems, and evaluates the implications for the UK’s commitment to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with a particular focus on SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

2.0 Comparative Analysis of National Immigration Frameworks

2.1 The Danish Immigration and Asylum Model

Denmark has implemented one of Europe’s most restrictive immigration systems, which presents significant challenges to achieving several SDGs. Key features of this model include:

• Policy Goal: An explicit aim to reduce asylum applications to zero, which runs counter to the principles of international cooperation and shared responsibility outlined in SDG 17.
• Family Reunification: Strict conditions are imposed, which can undermine social cohesion and contravene SDG 10. These include:
  1. A minimum age of 24 for both partners.
  2. A requirement for the sponsoring partner to be off social benefits for three years.
  3. Mandatory Danish language proficiency tests.
  4. A ban on family reunion for residents in designated “parallel societies,” a policy criticized for targeting non-Western backgrounds and hindering progress on SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).
• Residency Status: Permanent residency is granted only after eight years under stringent criteria, and protection is often limited to temporary status for those fleeing general conflict. This creates instability for refugees, impacting SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).
• Externalization of Asylum: Denmark passed legislation to enable the processing of asylum seekers outside Europe, a policy that challenges the framework of international law and SDG 16.

2.2 Current United Kingdom Immigration Framework

The UK’s existing system is based on international conventions but has recently undergone changes that affect its alignment with global development goals. The framework includes:

• Asylum Basis: Refugee status is granted in accordance with the UN 1951 Refugee Convention, upholding a key tenet of SDG 16.
• Path to Settlement: Refugees are typically granted five years’ leave to remain, with a subsequent pathway to permanent settlement (Indefinite Leave to Remain) and citizenship.
• Family Reunion: Rules requiring a minimum income of £29,000 for sponsoring partners are in place, though rules for refugees’ families were recently suspended pending review. These financial barriers can exacerbate inequalities, affecting SDG 10.
• Social Support: While asylum seekers receive minimal support, those granted refugee status gain access to the same benefits as nationals, which supports SDG 1.

3.0 Proposed UK Policy Shift and its Drivers

3.1 Rationale for Policy Review

The Labour government’s consideration of stricter immigration rules is a response to domestic political dynamics. Public concern over immigration has been identified as a significant issue, influencing policy direction. This shift highlights a tension between national policy-making and the international commitment to fostering inclusive and just societies under SDG 16. The government aims to create a “controlled, selective and fair” system, framing the changes as a move away from reliance on low-paid overseas labour, which connects to SDG 8.

3.2 Key Proposed Changes

The proposed amendments to UK immigration law, influenced by the Danish model, would have direct consequences for the achievement of the SDGs. Potential changes include:

1. Doubling the standard waiting time for permanent settlement from five to ten years.
2. Implementing stricter English language requirements for integration.
3. Adopting more restrictive rules on family reunion for refugees.

4.0 Analysis through the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) Framework

4.1 SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The adoption of a Danish-style model would directly challenge the UK’s progress on SDG 10. Stricter family reunion laws and the creation of a longer, more precarious path to permanent settlement undermine Target 10.7, which calls for facilitating orderly, safe, regular, and responsible migration. Policies that differentiate between types of refugees or create barriers based on national origin, such as the “parallel societies” concept, institutionalize discrimination and increase inequality within the country.

4.2 SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The proposed policy overhaul raises concerns regarding SDG 16. A move towards policies described by internal critics as “far-right” and “racist” could weaken the UK’s commitment to building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels. Limiting access to asylum and permanent residency based on shifting political pressures rather than established international law erodes the rule of law and equal access to justice (Target 16.3). The internal debate within the Labour Party reflects a fundamental conflict over the promotion of non-discriminatory laws and policies (Target 16.b).

4.3 SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

The trend across Europe, including in the UK and Denmark, towards externalizing asylum processing and adopting increasingly restrictive national policies undermines global partnerships for sustainable development. Such unilateral actions contradict the spirit of international cooperation required to address global challenges like forced migration. These policies are criticized by rights groups for prioritizing national border control over shared responsibilities under international conventions, thereby weakening the global partnership framework essential to achieving all SDGs.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses issues related to immigration, asylum policies, and the rights of refugees, which directly connect to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The primary SDGs addressed are:

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: This goal is central to the article, which focuses on the treatment of migrants and refugees and the implementation of policies that can create or exacerbate inequalities. The discussion revolves around discriminatory practices, barriers to social inclusion, and the management of migration flows, all of which are key components of SDG 10.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The article delves into legal frameworks for asylum, access to justice for refugees (such as the right to family reunion and permanent settlement), and the influence of political pressures on national laws. It highlights the tension between national sovereignty in setting immigration rules and international obligations like the UN Refugee Convention, which relates to building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article’s discussion of immigration policies in the UK and Denmark, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • Target 10.2: “By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.” The article highlights policies that directly challenge this target. For example, Denmark’s policy barring family reunions for those in “parallel societies” where over 50% of residents are of “non-Western” backgrounds is a form of exclusion based on origin and ethnicity.
   • Target 10.3: “Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices…” The article describes some Danish policies as “undeniably racist” and based on “ethnic profiling.” The UK’s consideration of similar rules points to a potential move away from this target by adopting policies that could be seen as discriminatory.
   • Target 10.7: “Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.” The entire article is a case study on the management of migration policies. The shift towards more restrictive measures, such as limiting refugees to temporary stays and making family reunions tougher, reflects a specific approach to managing migration that is debated in terms of its responsibility and fairness.

2. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.3: “Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.” The article discusses barriers to justice for refugees and migrants, such as the stringent criteria for permanent residency in Denmark (eight years with full-time employment) and the proposed doubling of the waiting period in the UK to ten years. These policies limit access to stable legal status and the rights that come with it.
   • Target 16.7: “Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.” The article explains that the UK government’s policy shift is driven by “immense pressure amid growing public opposition to immigration and the surge in the popularity of the far-right Reform UK.” This raises questions about whether the decision-making process is inclusive of the rights and needs of all groups, including migrants and refugees, or if it is primarily responsive to political pressure and “manufactured panic.”
   • Target 16.b: “Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development.” The Danish policies, particularly those concerning “parallel societies,” are cited as being “racist.” The UK government’s move to study and potentially adopt such policies runs counter to the principle of promoting and enforcing non-discriminatory laws.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure the state of immigration policy and its alignment with the identified SDG targets.

• Number of asylum seekers and migrants: The article mentions that “more than 25,000 people crossed the English Channel into the UK” in the first seven months of the year. This figure is used as an indicator of the scale of irregular migration, which influences policy decisions.
• Net migration figures: The article states that UK net migration “climbed to a record 906,000 in June 2023” and “stood at 728,000 last year.” These figures are key indicators used in the political discourse surrounding immigration levels.
• Asylum claim success rate: It is noted that “Denmark has reduced the number of successful asylum claims to a 40-year low,” which serves as a direct indicator of the restrictiveness of its asylum system.
• Policy requirements for residency and family reunion: The article details specific policy rules that act as indicators of accessibility and inclusion. These include:
  • Waiting time for permanent settlement (e.g., 8 years in Denmark, proposed 10 years in the UK).
  • Minimum age for family reunion (e.g., 24 years in Denmark).
  • Income thresholds for sponsoring partners (e.g., £29,000 in the UK).
  • Language proficiency requirements (e.g., passing a Danish language test).
• Public opinion on immigration: Survey data is cited as an indicator of public sentiment, which influences policy. For example, “51 percent of Britons” see immigration as the biggest issue, and a poll found “70 percent of those surveyed said that immigration rates have been too high.”
• Existence of discriminatory policies: The policy targeting “parallel societies” in Denmark, which is based on the percentage of residents from “non-Western” backgrounds, is a clear indicator of a discriminatory legal framework.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article.

Source: aljazeera.com