X Close

Bureaucracy has stifled Labour’s migration agenda

Reports suggest half of the 400,000 migrants slated for deportation have been allowed to remain. Credit: Getty

Reports suggest half of the 400,000 migrants slated for deportation have been allowed to remain. Credit: Getty

June 26 2026 - 3:05pm

Reporting in The Times this week has revealed that nearly half of the 400,000 migrants who were due for deportation in the past two years have been allowed to remain in the UK. In August 2024, the Home Office compiled a list of those who had either overstayed their visas or whose asylum claims had been rejected, and who consequently had no right to be in Britain. Of these, around 200,000 had been declared “non-removable” by Home Office lawyers.

In normal circumstances, revelations like this would be embarrassing for the home secretary, but these are not normal times. As the team emerging around presumptive prime minister Andy Burnham weighs up which current cabinet figures will remain in post, illegal migration and border policy poses one of the biggest dilemmas of all. Shabana Mahmood is regarded as among the toughest on the issue, and there is some pressure on Burnham to replace her with a figure whose stance is more reflective of the liberal inclinations of Labour’s base. However, these leaks to The Times emphasize the scale of the challenge that the Home Office faces, and the real risk that Labour will be blamed for losing control.

At the heart of the problem are the various pieces of legislation which offer protections to migrants in certain circumstances that prevent their deportation. The most important of these is Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), and the Modern Slavery Act brought in under Theresa May. Article 8 means that deportations can be challenged on the grounds that it would violate an individual’s fundamental right to family life. Meanwhile, the Modern Slavery Act says that those who have been trafficked into the country or forced into work should not be deported. Countering or disproving claims made by migrants under these rules is exceptionally difficult and time-consuming for the Home Office. This is true to the extent that they appear to be judging that around half of them are simply not worth the effort at the outset.

All of this further adds to Britain’s illegal migration crisis, as it cements our reputation for having a very low deportation rate. For migrants who have spent a great deal of effort and money making their way to Europe, getting into the UK is one of the most reliable ways they can lock in their progress.

Mahmood is due to publish the Home Office’s new Immigration and Asylum Bill on Tuesday. The timing of these leaks suggests we can expect to see reforms aimed at clearing the backlog. These reforms may include bringing the appeals process in-house to the Home Office — it currently sits with an independent tribunal — as well as limitations to appeals under Article 8, preventing it from being used to block deportations at the last minute.

Whilst these reforms seem sensible in themselves and may further enhance Mahmood’s reputation as a relatively tough home secretary, they will not address the legislative root causes of the problems. The ECHR, in particular, means that the real authority in many cases remains the courts rather than the Home Office. The Modern Slavery Act means that migrants and their lawyers can wage a war of bureaucratic attrition on a department that is already faced with a helplessly large caseload.

Whether or not Andy Burnham decides to retain Shabana Mahmood’s services as Home Secretary, it is exceptionally unlikely that any government he led would have the political appetite for serious legislative reforms to the Modern Slavery Act, let alone to Britain’s relationship with the ECHR. This leaves the Home Office treading water against a tide that shows no signs of abating, and ultimately being forced to decide what percentage of its workload it has the capacity even to attempt.


Chris Bayliss is an independent consultant who works on energy infrastructure in the Middle East.

baylissbaghdad

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

July 1 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam