Zia Yusuf outlines ICE-style deportation command, end to leave to remain and expanded stop-and-search powers

In a speech on Monday, zia yusuf will set out a suite of hardline home affairs proposals that would create an ICE-style deportation agency, end indefinite leave to remain (ILR) and expand stop-and-search powers. The package frames large-scale removals and a reshaping of policing and counter-extremism as central to the party’s public order and border agenda.

Zia Yusuf unveils plans for a new UK Deportation Command

The speech promises creation of a new agency called UK Deportation Command designed to deport hundreds of thousands of people. Yusuf says the agency would have the capacity to detain 24, 000 migrants at a time and to deport up to 288, 000 people annually, operating on a scale described in the proposals as five flights a day.

End to ILR and a switch to five-year work visas

Under the proposals, ILR would be scrapped and replaced with a renewable five-year work visa carrying a high salary threshold. The change is presented as likely to mean that tens of thousands who currently hold settled status could lose the right to be in the UK. The plans also include an assertion that granting ILR creates new access to benefits and long-term dependency on public funds.

Detention capacity, costs and current baseline

The plan’s stated detention capacity — 24, 000 people simultaneously — is far larger than the existing footprint: as of April 2024 there were approximately 2, 500 detention spaces. Experts referenced in coverage of the proposals have said the costs of such an expansion would be considerable. Yusuf will also say the party would put a legal duty on the home secretary to remove illegal migrants and would leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Policing, knife crime and stop-and-search expansion

Yusuf sets out a parallel policing agenda to accompany immigration changes. The proposals would fund a radical expansion of stop and search, end any diversity initiatives in police forces, and introduce a new approach to knife crime and policing. The package positions wider stop-and-search powers as a front-line tool in the party’s public safety strategy.

Counter-extremism, cultural protections and places of worship

The deradicalisation programme Prevent would have its mandate redrawn to focus specifically on Islamist extremism, with a stated pledge to take a zero-tolerance approach and to overhaul Prevent. The proposals also include proscribing the Muslim Brotherhood organisation. On cultural measures, the speech promises to protect British culture and to preserve Britain’s Christian heritage by ending the practice of converting churches into mosques or other places of worship.

Political reactions and Labour’s response

Labour called the plans divisive, arguing they demonstrate an intention to deport people who have followed the rules, worked hard and built lives in the country—described as friends, neighbours and colleagues. The Labour party’s chair, Anna Turley, said the policies were a direct attack on settled families and fundamentally un-British, and stressed that Britain is a proud, tolerant and diverse nation that stands in opposition to divisive politics.

Migration blame, welfare figures and rival party changes

In the speech, Yusuf explicitly blamed the former prime minister Boris Johnson for an increase in net migration, saying the Conservative leader had "thrown open our borders" and arguing that granting ILR creates a lifetime of dependency because of new access to benefits. The proposals also cite a statistic that ILR holders make up only about 2. 7% of all universal credit claimants, with at least a third of those in employment. Separately, Labour has proposed changing ILR with new conditions; the home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, has said that party plans would increase the period of eligibility from five years to 10 years.

The proposals are presented as a comprehensive reshaping of immigration, policing and counter-extremism policy. Observers should note details may evolve as debate continues, and some implementation logistics and costs are described as considerable in existing commentary.