Denmark's "Zero Refugees" Policy: A Model for the UK Amidst Migration Concerns?

Denmark, a nation consistently lauded for its high levels of happiness and idyllic reputation for Lego, and fictional political dramas, is also carving out a reputation for some of Europe's most stringent asylum policies. Despite being led for six years by a centre-left government, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen's 'zero refugees' stance has not only gained significant popularity but has also allowed her to effectively counter right-wing opposition. This approach, which has seen successful asylum claims plummet to a 40-year low with a 95% deportation rate for failed claimants, is now being closely examined by the UK as it grapples with its own migration challenges.

In the wake of a surging Reform UK and plummeting approval ratings, amplified by public anger over small boat crossings and the cost of asylum hotels, the Labour Party, led by Sir Keir Starmer, is reportedly looking to Denmark for inspiration. The new UK Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, appointed just two months ago, has been scrutinising Danish policies across the board. Particular interest lies in Denmark's strict limitations on family reunification and its use of temporary visas for successful asylum seekers – visas that can be revoked if their home countries are deemed safe for return. Home Office officials have even visited Copenhagen to learn from their Danish counterparts in preparation for a significant overhaul of the UK's asylum system later this month.

Denmark's increasingly restrictive migration policies have been implemented over recent years. Most asylum and refugee statuses are temporary, with residency rights subject to revocation if a country is reclassified as safe. To achieve permanent settlement, asylum seekers are now required to be in full-time employment, and the timeline for acquiring these rights has been extended.

Family reunification rules have also tightened considerably. Both the sponsor and their partner must be at least 24 years old, a measure the Danish government states is aimed at preventing forced marriages. Sponsors are also required to have not claimed welfare for three years, provide a financial guarantee for their partner, and both must pass a Danish language test.

These policies are part of a broader strategy that has included controversial measures like the, "ghetto package", introduced in 2018. This plan aimed to reshape certain residential areas, including the demolition of social housing, by defining areas with over 1,000 residents as 'ghettos' if more than 50% were of, "immigrant and descendant from non-Western countries", backgrounds. Furthermore, in 2021, the left-of-centre government enacted legislation allowing refugees to be moved to asylum centres in partner countries. While a program exploring this with Rwanda was initially agreed upon, it has since been put on hold. Reports suggest that successful asylum seekers in Denmark might be compelled to repay the costs of their accommodation and benefits, with acceptance contingent on a high standard of Danish language and a clean criminal record.

Denmark's position as one of Europe's toughest nations on asylum claims is notable, particularly given its democratic socialist leadership. The government reportedly felt compelled to address migration to counter the far-right's dominance on the issue, recognising the need to manage the process to focus on delivering their broader policy agenda.

However, this approach is not without its critics within the UK Labour Party. Many on the left are reportedly alarmed by the prospect of the UK adopting a more 'draconian' Danish path. MPs such as Nadia Whittome and Clive Lewis have described some of the proposed ideas as, "hardcore", "dangerous", "far right", and in some instances, "racist". Some of the more controversial Danish policies, such as confiscating valuables from migrants or demolishing residential blocks with a majority of 'non-Western' residents, have drawn significant opposition. While the article notes that the demolition of deprived residential estates is occurring in Rochdale, it clarifies that the motivations behind it remain unexplained in relation to these Danish policies.

While it seems unlikely that the most extreme Danish policies will be adopted by the UK's Home Office, the article highlights that Shabana Mahmood is considered a 'tough operator'. The lack of significant public comment from Reform UK or the Conservatives on these revelations about Denmark's approach is also noted as striking. As the UK prepares for a shake-up of its asylum system, the Danish model presents a complex case study, blending elements of stringent control with the stated goal of managing migration within a socially progressive framework, a balancing act that continues to spark debate.