When Labour delivered its first King’s Speech after the party’s landslide victory in 2024, the political mood looked very different from the one surrounding today’s address. After catastrophic losses in last week’s local elections, growing uncertainty around the government’s policies and political identity has made this year’s speech particularly significant for anyone trying to understand the direction the government intends to take. Now more than ever, it is imperative that this address incorporates a robust response to the growing trend of authoritarianism in UK politics. At Public Law Project, we want to see the King’s Speech set out fair, inclusive policies that offer genuine solutions to the issues facing British society: socio-economic inequality, problematic use of artificial intelligence (AI), rising support for authoritarian politics, and the climate crisis. This blog will explore how the King’s Speech and forthcoming legislation on asylum and AI regulation could be used to make public bodies’ decisions and processes fairer. Immigration legislation that protects human rights Following last year’s Restoring Order and Control policy statement, it is certain that there will be legislation in the King’s Speech to make reforms to the asylum system. If the government presses ahead with its concerning plans to abolish asylum tribunals and replace them with less independent, non-legally qualified adjudicators, we anticipate a Bill establishing the new appeals body. The government also plans to make it more difficult to appeal when the Home Office refuses someone protection. PLP is concerned that this will impact individuals who will be removed to countries where there are risks to their life or safety. The government has also stated its intention to restrict the use of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) which protects our right to privacy and family life. They intend to also ‘clarify our obligations’ to victims of modern slavery – suggesting a watering down of protections for some of the most vulnerable people in our country. Forthcoming asylum legislation should protect, rather than water down, human rights protection in the UK. This is particularly important given that, just two days after the King’s Speech, we expect the Council of Europe to make a political declaration on the interpretation of the ECHR in relation to asylum seekers, amid growing pressure from several member states for greater flexibility in how Convention rights are applied. The UK has been part of a broader push to narrow the scope of rights such as Article 8, and Article 3 which prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment. Although these debates are often framed around immigration policy, the rights contained in the Convention are universal, and weakening them for one group risks undermining protections for everyone. Safeguards and accountability for immigration reform What may be surprising is just how much of recent immigration policy reform has been made without the Home Secretary needing to bring a bill before Parliament. The government has shortened refugee leave to remain and increased the length of time migrants must have lived in the UK in order to receive indefinite leave to remain, by amending the Immigration Rules. No other policy area gives comparable power to the Home Secretary, and such significant reforms should require Parliamentary approval before they come into effect. Otherwise, this creates an unstable environment in which the goalposts for migrants are constantly moving, and asylum becomes a convenient political football, rather than being treated with the care and nuance it deserves. At PLP, we would like to see the forthcoming asylum bill place a duty on the Home Secretary to consult individuals, communities and groups who have sought asylum. This should take place before making changes to the Immigration Rules to ensure policymaking in this area is inclusive and accountable. We also recommend that Parliament should approve changes to the Immigration Rules, so that MPs have an opportunity to debate major changes in an area that the public are highly concerned about. A comprehensive look at AI and automation Although an AI Regulation Bill was mentioned in the 2024 King’s Speech, it failed to materialise in the last parliament, leaving a significant gap in the governance of AI and automated decision-making in the public sector. Although regulation of AI technology and companies is a commendable goal, what PLP would like to see is comprehensive reform of the regulation and robust oversight. A longstanding PLP recommendation is that government departments and public bodies should be legally obligated to be transparent about how AI is used to inform public decision-making. This could be achieved through placing the Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard (ATRS) on a statutory footing, rather than compliance being on a voluntary basis. In addition, individuals should be informed when AI is used by the government to make, or support making, a decision affecting them. As well as this, there is a need for legislative frameworks that govern human decision-makers to account for the impact of AI. Existing data protection frameworks are not sufficient given the advances in technology we have seen in recent years. For example, simply having a ‘human in the loop’ — where decisions are formally made by a person reviewing an algorithmic recommendation — is not an adequate safeguard. Decision-makers may defer too readily to automated recommendations rather than exercising independent judgment, a phenomenon known as ‘automation bias’. Finally, we need a better legal framework for challenging automated decision-making when it does go wrong, as judicial review is not currently set up to deal with algorithmic opacity. Image: Daniel J. Schwarz