Conservatives unveil immigration taskforce inspired by ICE
The Conservative Party is set to announce a bold and controversial policy at its annual conference: the creation of an immigration taskforce modeled on the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice). Led by party leader Kemi Badenoch, the plan envisions a “removals force” empowered to deport up to 150,000 people each year and backed by a substantial funding package and sweeping new powers.
What the plan entails
According to the Guardian’s reporting, Badenoch is expected to outline a proposal that would allocate £1.6bn to the taskforce and provide authorities with expanded capabilities to remove individuals deemed ineligible to remain in the UK. Central to the plan is the use of facial recognition technology as a tool to identify those eligible for removal, even in the absence of prior warning.
In a move that signals a tighter integration with policing, the taskforce would be positioned to work closely with police. The policy reportedly calls for immigration checks to be conducted on everyone who is stopped or arrested by officers, a step designed to accelerate removal where appropriate under the proposed framework.
ICE as a model: what it means for Britain
Badenoch is expected to declare that the Ice approach has yielded successful removals in the United States, with U.S. media noting that nearly 200,000 people were removed in the first seven months of Donald Trump’s second presidency. The policy’s critics, however, point to concerns about civil liberties, the risk of detaining legal migrants, and potential racial bias in enforcement.
The Conservatives describe the plan as part of a broader “borders plan” that would be a cornerstone of the party’s conference agenda in Manchester. Apart from expulsions, the plan would overhaul the asylum system, limit protections, and redefine eligibility for refugee status.
A contested asylum overhaul
Badenoch is anticipated to propose only granting refugee status to individuals facing direct threats from foreign governments, with those who fled war, persecution for religion or sexuality, or less tolerant regimes facing tighter scrutiny. Officials say the reforms would mean relatively few applicants would qualify for asylum under the new rules, a shift intended to deter new claims and accelerate decision timelines.
As part of the broader reform package, the plan reportedly suggests abolishing immigration tribunals, replacing court-like decision mechanisms with Home Office-led determinations. Limited rights of appeal would remain, but only in cases where officials have acted without statutory authority. Critics warn that removing independent judiciary oversight could undermine due process and fairness in immigration decisions.
Legal aid and access to justice questioned
Another element under discussion is a reduction or removal of legal aid for immigration cases. Badenoch has argued that some applicants exploit the system, and she has claimed that lawyers have “defrauded” the UK by coaching applicants. The proposal, if enacted, would shift the balance toward faster determinations by officials, but it raises questions about the rights of individuals to robust legal representation and the possibility of erroneous removals.
Rhetoric vs. reality at the conference
With Channel crossings and asylum policy already a flashpoint in public debate, immigration is set to dominate the Conservative conference discourse. The latest proposals come at a moment when numbers of arrivals by small boats are rebounding toward record levels, illustrating the political pressure to demonstrate a credible plan to secure borders.
Observers will watch how the party balances its tough-on-immigration message with legal safeguards, civil liberties, and practical governance. The question at the conference floor will be whether this model can be translated into workable policy that respects legal norms while delivering the asserted reductions in illegal entry.
What comes next
As the conference progresses, the party will likely provide more detail on how the taskforce would be structured, who would lead it, and how it would coordinate with regional police forces across the country. For supporters, the plan is framed as a decisive rejection of lax border policy and a commitment to protecting citizens. For critics, it signals a move toward aggressive enforcement that could raise civil-liberties concerns and complicate Britain’s relationships with international human rights norms.
The policy’s reception will shape the debate about immigration policy in the coming months, as the Conservatives push a more assertive border strategy while opponents call for humane, legally solid approaches that balance security with asylum protections.
