More than 160 locally elected councillors in the United Kingdom have signed a public statement describing the country's immigration policies as "racist," according to a report by LocalGov.co.uk. The signatories, drawn from across political parties, are calling on the central government to rethink how it designs and enforces its asylum and migration rules.

The collective statement marks one of the largest such efforts by elected local representatives on UK immigration policy in recent years. The full text and the list of signatories are available in the original LocalGov report.

Councillors sit in a specific place within the UK immigration picture. They do not set immigration law — that power rests with Parliament and the Home Office. But councils deliver many of the services that bear on migrant lives: social housing waiting lists, school admissions, public health visits, and the day-to-day running of asylum accommodation under Home Office contracts. When dispersal numbers climb, councillors field the calls.

What does the statement change for asylum seekers and migrants?

In practical terms, the statement does not alter anyone's legal status. The Home Office continues to process asylum claims, grant or refuse leave, and operate removal directions under existing legislation, including the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 and the Nationality and Borders Act 2022. Anyone seeking protection must still apply at port or at the earliest practicable moment.

What it can do is raise the political cost of certain enforcement choices. Councillors can vote on local authority motions, push back on additional dispersal placements, and demand transparency from contracted providers such as Serco and Clearsprights Ready Homes on placements in their wards. Several councils have already passed such motions in recent years; this statement signals that more elected representatives are willing to add their names.

For migrants considering their next step, the practical channels remain unchanged. Legal advice is available through the Law Society's find-a-solicitor tool and, for those detained, through the Free Representation Unit. Appeals against refusals go to the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber).

How should residents read this statement?

The statement's reach is symbolic, not statutory. It will not pause a removal or accelerate a Home Office decision. It does, however, give councillors a documented position to cite in future negotiations with ministers over funding for dispersal areas, for unaccompanied minors, and for victims of modern slavery referred into the National Referral Mechanism.

Councils have absorbed rising numbers of asylum seekers under government dispersal schemes since 2020. The hotel-to-dispersal transition has put pressure on housing stock and school places in coastal Kent, the West Midlands, and parts of northern England. The signatories argue that successive policy decisions have deepened racial inequality in those communities, according to the LocalGov report.

The Home Office was asked by LocalGov for comment and rejected the characterisation, the report states. Officials defended the existing framework and pointed to case-by-case decision-making.

For the underlying tension, two measurements help. Whitehall tracks removal numbers and decision speed. Councils track school places found, GP registrations completed, and families moved out of hotels into permanent housing. When those clocks diverge, the political pressure builds. This statement is the latest evidence that local leaders are willing to say so on the record.

Readers seeking the full text of the statement, the list of signatories, and the Home Office response can find them in the LocalGov.co.uk report.