Why Britain is Looking to Denmark’s Strict Immigration Model

The UK government is exploring a significant overhaul of its immigration system, drawing inspiration from Denmark’s controversial approach. This consideration comes as the Labour government faces mounting pressure over record numbers of refugees and migrants entering the country.

Studying the Danish Model

Last month, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood dispatched officials to examine Denmark’s asylum framework, widely considered Europe’s most stringent. The delegation is reportedly investigating potential revisions to British rules on family reunification and limiting refugee stays to temporary status.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s administration confronts growing public discontent over immigration and the rising influence of the far-right Reform UK party, which has centered its campaign on this issue.

What Makes Denmark’s System So Strict?

Over the past twenty years, Denmark has pioneered increasingly restrictive immigration policies, with senior leaders openly stating their objective to achieve “zero asylum seekers.”

Key elements of the Danish approach include:

Restrictive family reunification that exceeds requirements in comparable nations

Prohibitions on family reunification for residents of areas designated as “parallel societies” where over half the population has “non-Western” backgrounds—a policy rights groups condemn as racist ethnic profiling

Stringent requirements including refugees being at least 24 years old, three years without benefit claims, and passing Danish language tests before partners can join them

Permanent residency granted only after eight years under strict conditions, including full-time employment

According to Aalborg University political science professor Christian Albrekt Larsen, Denmark’s restrictive stance has become mainstream political consensus, diminishing support for radical anti-immigration parties.

Denmark primarily grants asylum to those targeted by foreign regimes, while increasingly limiting conflict refugees to temporary stays. The country makes independent safety assessments—in 2022, it did not renew permits for over 1,200 Syrian refugees, declaring Damascus safe for return.

In 2021, Denmark passed legislation enabling offshore asylum processing, including through negotiations with Rwanda, though implementation has proven contentious and challenging.

These measures have driven successful asylum claims to a 40-year low, excluding the 2020 COVID-19 travel restriction period.

How UK Immigration Laws Currently Differ

The United Kingdom presently allows individuals to claim asylum if they demonstrate danger in their home countries, following the UN’s 1951 Refugee Convention. Refugees typically receive five years’ leave to remain, with subsequent options to apply for permanent settlement.

Most migrants and refugees can apply for indefinite leave to remain after five years and become eligible for citizenship one year later, provided they meet English proficiency standards and pass the “Life in the UK” test.

The UK system imposes no age restrictions beyond 18 but requires a minimum annual income of £29,000 for sponsoring partners, with this threshold subject to regular review.

While asylum seekers receive minimal weekly allowances, those granted protection access the same benefits as British nationals.

The previous Conservative government passed legislation enabling deportation to Rwanda, though legal challenges have prevented implementation.

Until September this year, the UK exempted spouses, partners, and dependents under 18 from income and English language requirements applied to other migrants, but this has been suspended pending new regulations.

Labour’s Shift on Immigration Policy

Facing criticism over increasing migrant boat arrivals, Prime Minister Starmer proposed a draft immigration paper in May advocating for a “controlled, selective and fair” system. The proposal would double the waiting period for permanent settlement to ten years and tighten English language requirements.

The Labour Party, which previously supported more open migration, now finds itself defensive on immigration. From January through July this year, over 25,000 people crossed the English Channel into Britain.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has accused Labour of being soft on immigration and pledged to scrap indefinite leave to remain—a proposal Starmer labeled “racist” and “immoral.”

Successive British governments have struggled to reduce net migration, which peaked at 906,000 in June 2023 and stood at 728,000 last year.

Starmer’s administration frames the new rules as a “clean break” from a system they view as overreliant on low-paid overseas labor.

Recent polling shows immigration remains the primary concern for Britons, with 51% citing it as a key issue—surpassing the economy (35%) or healthcare (26%). However, another survey found only 26% considered immigration among the top three issues facing their local community.

A report from the Best for Britain campaign group suggested concern about immigration represents a “manufactured panic,” with media exposure and political discourse fueling anti-immigration sentiment.

Internal Labour Opposition

Left-leaning Labour figures have condemned what they characterize as the “far-right,” “racist” approach of adopting the Danish model.

Labour MPs have urged Home Secretary Mahmood to scale back her plans for a Danish-style overhaul. Nadia Whittome, Labour MP for Nottingham East, described it as a “dead end—morally, politically and electorally” and labeled the policies “undeniably racist.”

Clive Lewis, MP for Norwich South, noted that while Labour needs to win back Reform-leaning voters, it shouldn’t do so at the cost of losing progressive support.

Meanwhile, MPs from traditional “Red Wall” constituencies, where Reform UK has gained traction, appear more receptive to Mahmood’s proposals.

These divisions intensified after Lucy Powell, who won last month’s Labour deputy leadership contest, challenged Starmer to soften his immigration stance, warning that “division and hate are on the rise.”

European Immigration Approaches Vary Widely

European nations employ diverse immigration strategies, with some serving as major migrant destinations while others implement restrictive measures or strong integration policies.

According to EU data, Germany and Spain each received over 1.2 million immigrants in 2023, followed by Italy and France. These four countries accounted for more than half of all non-EU immigration to the EU.

While EU member states operate within EU migration rules and international obligations like the UN Refugee Convention, individual countries apply national legislation interpreting those requirements. Public sentiment has turned against immigration amid cost-of-living crises across Europe.

Recent polling across Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Sweden found most respondents believe immigration over the past decade has been excessive. In Britain, 70% shared this view.

Countries including Hungary, Poland, Austria, and Denmark have focused on building border fences, restricting family reunification, expediting deportations, and limiting access to social benefits. Austrian and German ministers have cited the Danish model as inspiration for their policies.

Several EU states have attempted versions of externalizing asylum processes, including Italy with Albania, Denmark with Rwanda, Greece with Turkey, Spain with Morocco, and Malta with Libya and Tunisia. Rights groups have criticized the EU for policies emphasizing border control and transferring refugees to third countries.

Source: Al Jazeera