Taking jewellery from asylum seekers is more government cruelty

‘This was my sister’s’, my dad said as he opened a suitcase in our living room. I looked at the array of belongings in a suitcase and my eyes widened with a million questions.

I picked up a necklace and marveled at it. A few rings and bracelets sat beside it and I gawped at them too.

‘This was my other sister’s’, my dad said about a particular bracelet. 

‘You didn’t meet her. She never came here and died young’.

Aged 12, over 20 years ago, sitting in my living room, looking into a suitcase filled with jewellery, books, photo albums, clothing and trinkets, it was like finding treasure – for my dad, who came from India in the 1970s it was unlocking memories of his family who were no longer with us.

It’s the only thing he had of some of them. 

This morning, I was saddened to read reports that the government plans – as part of a tough crackdown on Britain’s immigration system, could seize the assets from asylum seekers to help pay for processing and accommodation costs.  

When I saw the news, I thought back to my dad’s suitcase, and how the belongings meant more to my family than their monetary value.

Under the tasteless headline ‘Bling Sting’ the Sun revealed that ‘necklace and chains – but not wedding rings – and other high-value items acquired in the UK including cars and bikes will also be confiscated as part of a crackdown on small-boat arrivals’.

It feels like the kind of performative cruelty I have begun to accept from our current government.

Because in my experience asylum seekers aren’t driving e-bikes into the UK, and any items they are bringing with them will carry the stories of the people they couldn’t bring with them. 

Taking that away from them to pay for asylum costs feels monstrous. 

Snatching what precious little refugees own is the natural continuation of the Reform-style villain arc that the Labour Party is unfortunately still pursuing.

And the face of all this is South Asian Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood. 

On Sky News yesterday, she passionately said ‘I am the child of immigrants – my parents came to this country legally’, but continues saying that ‘Illegal migration is creating division across our country’. 

But the division she apparently laments is, as far as I’ve seen, exacerbated, not calmed, by politicians.  

People arriving on small boats are already stripped of their dignity and identity, having to try and navigate a failing refugee system built by successive governments. Now, a Labour party which promised ‘change’ wants to take their belongings too.

It seems like a policy designed to appeal to those who protest outside migrant hotels. The quiet part is no longer just loud, it’s reverberated through megaphones across this entire country.

Dehumanising migrants is not going to solve any self-inflicted crisis the government claims we are experiencing, it will only stoke more tensions. We are no longer seeing people as humans, but as holders of wealth we can sell to pay for our own mistakes.

But every person has a connection to objects that outweighs any potential profit. In my South Asian culture, we keep jewellery in a maternalistic way – in order to pass our luck in our marriage or life onto generations below us. 

When it passes through the hands of the mothers and grandmothers before you, it contains the love and pain of each and every one of them. It’s a way of continuing our ancestral lineage when migration creates a distance of disconnect.

This government’s callous attitude to migrants and their belongings is brutish.

Asylum Minister Alex Norris attempted this morning to row back slightly, telling Sky News ‘I wouldn’t read too far ahead on what the Home Secretary will say’, without actually denying jewellery could be seized. 

He did continue to say that ‘if people have money in the bank, if people have assets like cars, like e-bikes, they should be contributing.’

He added ‘No we’re not going to be taking people’s heirlooms off them at the border’, but immediately said ‘if someone comes over with a bag full of gold rings, that’s different from an heirloom or personal items’.

But whether a bag of gold rings is a memory of a loved one or an asset to be sold is none of his or the government’s business. 

Going to visit my dad at his house, a watch that belonged to his late father sits on the mantelpiece, encased in a glass dome. It broke a long time ago, but it still has pride of place in his house. 

Dad tells me stories about my grandfather whenever it catches his eye. He talks about him with pride and love, although I will never meet him, I feel a connection through the things my dad can show me. These are precious memories that would have been at risk if my dad had been subjected to this current regime. 

Taking that away from people, from migrants, who are already having to navigate a cruel and dehumanising system, is merciless. Instead of having a ring, a necklace or a watch to show generations that come after them, these migrants will have the heartless stories of the system that took them away.

This is performative cruelty, and Mahmood won’t achieve what she seeks by taking a tougher stand. 

She, and the Labour government are simply fuelling the dehumanisation of migrants.

And nothing is more likely to create division than that. 

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing Ross.Mccafferty@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.