Letter to the government: WILPF opposes cruel and arbitrary proposed changes to refugee status

On 17 March we wrote to Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood and Prime Minister, Keir Starmer to express our opposition to the proposed changes to refugees status which are cruel and arbitrary policies which increase insecurity for some of the world’s most vulnerable people. Rather than introduce these cruel and arbitral policies, the government should be expanding safe and accessible pathways to protection and education from those fleeing persecution and conflict. We encourage you to use this letter as a template to send to your own MP.

 

Dear Home Secretary,

Proposed changes to refugee status: WILPF opposes these cruel and arbitrary policies

The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF UK) is writing to you in response to your proposed changes to refugee status. We recognise that in our current world – riven with hatred, violent conflict and climate catastrophes – people are forced to flee their homes. Most find refuge in nearby countries. A small proportion of the world’s refugees find their way to the UK.

Over the centuries Britain has welcomed waves of refugees. Like you, most British citizens enjoy the richness of this experience within our own families a generation or two back. These people have been welcomed and so are well settled and integrated into our society. Sadly, that process will not be possible under your proposal to make refugee status temporary and subject to review every 30 months for all adults claiming asylum.

The children in these families settle into school, speak English as we would want them to, and the parents work and contribute to their and our well-being. Now you are planning that refugees whose country you consider having become safe will be uprooted and expected to return home, however well integrated they may be into British society.

The Home Office has also temporarily halted study visas from Cameroon, Sudan, Myanmar and Afghanistan. These are countries where the conditions for women are dire, and this targeting particular nationalities raises serious concerns about discrimination and undermines the principles that underpin the 1951 Refugee Convention. This requires protection to be offered without discrimination and recognises the right of people fleeing persecution to seek asylum.

Furthermore, you are doubling the length of time required before many migrants can receive settled status from five to 10 years, and family reunion remains paused.

Instead, the UK should be expanding safe and accessible pathways to protection and education from those fleeing persecution, and be following rules-based international policies, particularly the United Nations women, peace and security agenda.

We look forward to learning that you have abandoned these cruel and arbitrary policies

Yours in peace