Restore Britain's mass deportation policy

The paper lists domestic laws to repeal or amend, including parts of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 and the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, and the whole of the Equality Act 2010. It would end the state’s duty to support asylum seekers who do not cooperate with detention and removal, and scrap lengthy immigration tribunals.

It concludes that Britain should withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights and repeal the Human Rights Act, keeping only a small set of precedents relevant to Northern Ireland. References to the 1951 Refugee Convention would be removed from UK law, and refugee status limited to people arriving directly from neighbouring countries.

A proposed Great Clarification Act would reassert Parliament’s power to overturn court decisions “in real time by a simple majority”, alongside stricter criteria for judicial review and a restored role for the Lord Chancellor in appointing judges.

The paper expects most departures to be voluntary, because they cost less and scale better. E-visas would become the only accepted proof of legal residence. Right-to-work checks would extend to contractors and the self-employed, with heavy fines or jail for employers who break the rules, and landlords who skip right-to-rent checks would face penalties. Homelessness law would no longer cover illegal migrants.

NHS care would require proof of status, with upfront charges for non-emergency treatment, and bank accounts held without valid status would be closed. An app or portal would offer reintegration support to people who agree to leave.

Immigration Enforcement would gain thousands of new staff, including veterans and police officers, funded by fines, seized assets and higher visa fees for countries with high overstay rates. Councils, the NHS and other agencies would be legally required to share information, and a public reporting portal would reward successful tip-offs.

Detention capacity would rise sharply, using sites such as former RAF bases run by private contractors, and removals would use commercial seats, charter flights and military transport. Asylum recently granted to people who arrived illegally would be revoked.

Countries that refuse to take back their nationals would face visa bans, aid cuts and tariffs, plus a tax on remittances sent to them, which the paper says would also help fund deportations. It proposes a “NATO-like coalition” of Western countries applying the same pressure, and new third-country processing agreements. Under the immigration Objective, such countries would also go on the party’s Red List.

Assuming three voluntary departures for every enforced removal and 150,000 enforced removals a year, the paper calculates that about 1.8 million people could be removed in three years; its preferred realistic estimate is two years and five months. It expects costs “in the tens of billions over five years”, which it says would be offset by lower public spending, fines and remittance taxes.

The September 2026 paper Restoring Britain’s Maritime Domain (opens in a new tab) adds that a credible hostile environment should push attempted Channel crossings towards zero, while a new Coastal Command would intercept and detain anyone who still tries. It says detention plans will be published separately.