Last week, the government published the Immigration and Asylum Bill 2026.  

The proposals in the Bill have been presented as tough new measures on immigration. But instead of offering genuine solutions, they will only separate more families, make it harder for survivors of exploitation to access protection, and place additional burdens on people trying to rebuild their lives. Those who have followed immigration legislation in recent years will know that this is one of a string of laws in the same vein. 

The Bill contains a number of proposals, which we explain below.  It is important to remember that none of them are in force at this stage. A Bill is a proposal for a new law, or for changes to existing laws, which must be debated and approved by Parliament before it can become law. During that process, proposals may be changed, delayed or rejected, meaning some or all of them may never become law. 

The main proposals include: 

  • Introducing a new “safe route” for refugees through a community sponsorship model  
  • Restricting the scope of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to family life  
  • Reducing protections for victims of modern slavery, making it more likely that victims will be disbelieved or denied protection  
  • Requiring applications for family reunion to be made by a UK-based sponsor, rather than by the family member overseas  
  • Requiring people who have received asylum support to repay it once they begin working. This has been widely described as a “refugee tax” and has attracted significant media attention  

Community sponsorship model for refugees 

The Bill proposes introducing a new capped “safe route” for refugees through a community sponsorship model. Under the proposal, organisations such as universities, community groups and employers could sponsor refugees to come to the UK and would be responsible for helping them settle. 

The government has said it would work with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to identify eligible refugees before security and background checks are carried out. The route would be capped, starting at a low level before increasing over time, although the full details are not yet clear. 

We welcome safe routes where they are accessible to everyone and backed by the safeguards and support people’s needs if things go wrong. The proposed community sponsorship model does not meet that standard and risks leaving people in vulnerable situations open to discrimination or exploitation. 

Communities are already playing a vital role in welcoming and supporting people seeking safety. It is the responsibility of the state to protect people, not to shift that responsibility onto community groups already doing so much. Community sponsorship may work for some people, but until safe routes are available to everyone seeking safety, it is not the solution. 

We don’t yet know what these new routes will look like or how people will be able to apply for them. 

Keeping families apart 

With the suspension of the Refugee Family Reunion route in September 2025, the government closed down a key safe route and caused devastation among people seeking asylum and refugees who hoped to one day be able to bring family members to safety. The measures on family in this new Bill are a continuation of this attack on family life. 

The Bill proposes restricting the scope of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to family life. “Family” would be limited to immediate family members, such as a spouse, parent or child under 18, except in exceptional circumstances. 

It would also require applications that rely on Article 8, including family reunion applications, to be made by a UK-based sponsor rather than by the family member overseas. 

These proposals are part of a broader approach by the government that prioritises appearing tough on immigration and preventing people from settling over protecting people’s rights. In reality, restricting the right to family life will not solve the challenges facing the system. Instead, it will keep more families apart, retraumatise people who have already lost so much, and prevent people from rebuilding their lives with dignity. 

The fundamental right to family life should not be made conditional on an individual’s immigration status, because human rights do not discriminate. 

Protecting survivors of modern slavery 

The Bill also proposes reducing protections for victims of modern slavery. This includes placing greater emphasis on when someone discloses that they have been trafficked, suggesting that late disclosure in the immigration process may affect how credible they are considered to be. Please see ATLEU’s statement for more detail on this part of the Bill. The Bill fails to recognise the lived realities of exploitation and punishes some of the most vulnerable survivors for their trauma. Survivors may not immediately recognise they have been trafficked, may have been threatened or controlled, or may not feel ready to disclose traumatic experiences. Delayed disclosure is often a consequence of trauma, not dishonesty, and reducing protections on this basis makes it highly likely that survivors will be denied the protection they desperately need, while placing them at greater risk of exploitation. 

Repaying asylum support: a “refugee tax” 

We know many people will have seen reports about proposals to require repayment of asylum support of up to £10,000, and we understand why this has caused concern. 

Importantly, the current Bill says these changes would not apply to people who were under 18 for the whole time they received asylum support, people already receiving asylum support before these changes come into force (if they become law), and others who may be excluded under future regulations.  

However, we are deeply concerned about how this change will impact people in future if it is implemented. People granted refugee status already pay tax on their earnings, like everyone else. Making people repay their asylum support would place an additional financial burden on them simply for having sought safety. Individuals have no control over how long they remain in asylum support, which is often extended due to Home Office delays and poor decision-making. It is unfair to require people to bear the cost of systemic failures outside their control. 

What happens next? 

The Bill will now continue through Parliament, where it will be debated and scrutinised before any of these proposals can become law. If they do, you will be able to find information about what any changes mean on the GMIAU website. 

As well as monitoring the progress of the Bill and keeping our community updated, we will continue to stand alongside the people we support and campaign for a system that protects people’s rights and gives everyone the opportunity to rebuild their lives in safety and with dignity. 

Please follow us on Bluesky and Instagram for updates. 

Category: News