Proposals announced by the Home Secretary in her statement ‘Restoring Order and Control’ will undermine efforts to tackle modern slavery and increase the risk that people seeking refuge in the UK will be exploited by criminals and traffickers, Hope for Justice believes.
We have signed a joint letter with 13 other leading charities setting out our evidence-based views on the likely impact of these proposals, and our strong objections:
We earlier issued our own statement on these proposals, which is below:
When modern slavery is treated as an immigration issue, it creates extra barriers that can stop survivors getting the support that’s crucial for healing and staying safe from being exploited again.
We believe in a safeguarding approach to addressing modern slavery, based on human rights. Our team of Independent Modern Slavery Advocates have abundant evidence showing that survivors who are given appropriate support and advocacy have better and more sustainable outcomes during their recovery. Supporting survivors properly also reduces crime, a stated objective of this Government, by cutting re-trafficking and giving survivors the confidence and stability to engage with the police and give evidence. Without proper support, survivors are often too scared or traumatised to consider this, or fear the repercussions of doing so.
We believe these reforms will make survivors less willing to engage with the police, putting them at risk of further harm and making it more likely traffickers will face no consequences for their terrible crimes.
The myth of false claims
No person can submit their own claim to be a victim of modern slavery, not even via a legal representative. Instead, only specific organisations (known as first responders) can do this on their behalf, such as police forces, UK Visa and Immigration, Border Force, local authorities and a small number of charities.
The Government’s announcement and rhetoric around these proposals in interviews and statements ignores all this, implying it is somehow easy for people to just lie about exploitation to benefit themselves. This is not at all the case.
After a referral is made by one of these first responder organisations, the Home Office examines the evidence and makes the judgement on whether a person has experienced the exploitation, or not. When people do have ‘negative decisions’ made by the Home Office, these are far more likely to be due to not meeting a technical threshold in the exact evidence which they and the first responder must gather, rather than lacking any evidence at all. When a reconsideration request is made and accepted, usually because additional evidence is found and provided, almost 4 out of every 5 decisions go from negative to positive.
Adult survivors have to consent to all of this first, and a growing number of survivors are refusing to give that consent, in part due to fear of deportation. In 2024, 19,125 people were referred to Home Office as potential victims (with their consent), but only 14 were disqualified on the grounds that their referral was in bad faith. This shows just how incredibly rare it is to see fraudulent claims.
Trauma deadlines are harmful and counter-productive
The Home Secretary said that survivors should disclose details of their exploitation “at the earliest possible moment”, and that failure to disclose information early will impact their credibility.
Trauma does not work this like. It does not stick to bureaucratic deadlines. Survivors may be unable to disclose their experiences – perhaps due to fear of repercussions or a lack of trust of state authorities, or because of the psychological effects of the trauma itself, which is known to cause confusion and anxiety about things like timelines and dates. Many survivors may only be ready to share about their exploitation once they feel physically and emotionally safe and have established a relationship of trust. This takes time. Survivors should not be punished if they need some time before they share what they have suffered with professionals they have never met.
Creating vulnerability for those seeking help
By reducing refugee status to a temporary, short-term form of leave, the proposals place survivors and people seeking refuge in precarious situations and at risk of further exploitation or harm. Secure immigration status provides a foundation which is vital for an individual’s recovery, enabling them to access longer-term support, housing, education and employment. By removing that stability, the proposals could create cycles of uncertainty, preventing survivors from ever effectively addressing the impact of their exploitation.
Survivors have reported to us the impact which this kind of hostility has on their ability to engage with frontline services. A lived experience consultant who shared their views for our ‘Hostility for Survivors, Impunity for Traffickers’ research report put it like this:
“The fear that is installed by traffickers can take years to undo. It’s like unlearning everything you learned, so the fear of reporting it to someone who doesn’t want you to be here in the first place is just as bad. It’s like everywhere you go for help there will be barriers and feels like the system is designed for you to not share without any repercussions – so again you are silenced and dismissed.”
Survivor of modern slavery who is now a lived experience consultant
A rights-based approach is not only beneficial to the individual, it is effective in delivering on the Government’s objectives of tacking crime and reducing costs.
