Should the United Kingdom provide safe and legal routes for Afghan and Palestinian women and girls to resettle here?
The UK government has reopened the UK Resettlement Scheme with priority for vulnerable Afghan women and girls and Palestinian refugees. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced the move on 28 September 2026 at the Labour Party conference, stating that safe and legal routes are capped, controlled and paired with efforts to reduce small boat crossings. Those arriving via the scheme receive indefinite leave to remain and a five-year path to settlement, unlike those on irregular routes who face ongoing status reviews.
22 Opinions
Safe and legal notes should be provided...FULL STOP. we just need to agree who, and how many.
I would say yes as the situation in these countries is poor for women and girls. But we need to sort out the mess we are in atm. And by saying these women and girls are suffering where they are is an admittance of the issues with many men in these places... Who we have let into the country unfiltered and unvetted. No government of any colour in recent decades has had a mandate to increase migration but it is all they seem to do.
While I empathise with the plight of some of these women the fact remains they cannot leave their home unaccompanied therefore any coming here would possibly only be with the permission of their husband/guardian and with an agenda, and they are taught not to question but obey, it would be difficult to sort the wheat from the chaff so to speak, so for our own security I say no.
We should provide safe routes for anyone suffering from persecution that would not be acceptable here. Especially in countries that UK has helped to create the government they now live under. Safe legal route better than being open to illegal trafficking. The more safe routes the harder it is for those arriving by boat to justify their arrival by that means and reduces power of smugglers
Safe and legal routes are the best weapon we have to restrict small boat crossings - no-one will take the risk of one of those if they have any other viable option
We have no obligation and have done more than enough. We keep voting to sort out domestic issues, what will it take for us to have a government who prioritise the UK domestic issues?
There are plenty of islamic countries that are safe for them that are closer and line up with their beliefs. We don't have the housing, resources or need for them. They are better off elsewhere & we are better off without them!
We take much less than our fair share of asylum seekers for our population compared to other European countries. People fleeing for their lives are doing nothing wrong and should not be demonised. Asylum seekers amount to a tiny fraction of net migration and the hysteria about them is entirely unwarranted.
They need to enforce existing immigration laws and keep these scum out.
These people should have provision made for them at home or neighbouring countries with whom they share language and culture. That is the sensible thing to do. And saying 'women & children' as if this won't open the door to their male relatives to join them is simply dishonest I would stop ALL refugees being allowed to stay until we deal properly with the disaster of the past decade of boat and truck arrivals