A British political party has proposed creating a deportation system similar to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), according to recent reporting.

As part of a plan that critics have condemned as extreme, Reform UK leaders this week said they want to set up a new government agency designed specifically to remove people they describe as being in the country illegally.

Zia Yusuf, the party’s home affairs representative, discussed the proposal during a press conference in Dover on Monday (23 February), describing small-boat arrivals as an “invasion” — language that has drawn sharp criticism.

“I know many in the establishment gasp at that word,” he said. “They may well clutch their pearls in the television studios, but the dictionary definition of invasion is an incursion by a large number of people in an unwanted way.”
“Make no mistake, as home secretary, I will end and indeed reverse this,” he added, claiming public patience has “run out.”

Addressing criticism and controversy surrounding U.S. immigration enforcement, Yusuf argued that a UK “Deportation Command” would not produce the same reaction in Britain, saying policing in the UK is traditionally “done by consent.”

He claimed that, if implemented as proposed, the programme could involve detaining up to 24,000 people at any one time.

He also said the agency’s resources would allow a Reform government to remove up to 288,000 people per year, including operating five flights per day.
Yusuf’s comments came weeks after Reform UK leader Nigel Farage outlined broader plans aimed at reducing illegal immigration.

Farage has floated proposals including expanding surveillance powers, ending the current “indefinite leave to remain” model in favor of a renewable five-year work visa, and restricting certain religious building conversions — all of which have drawn strong opposition.

His team has also suggested widening automatic searches in certain counter-terrorism contexts and imposing “visa freezes” on nationals of specific countries if their governments refuse to accept deportations, according to reporting.

Discussing these proposals this week, Yusuf was asked whether adopting tougher immigration enforcement could generate public backlash similar to what has been seen in the United States.

By way of context, protests in the U.S. have intensified this year following a number of reported deaths connected to immigration enforcement activity, including fatalities involving federal agents and deaths in ICE custody, according to The Guardian.

Asked if his team is prepared for similar criticism, Yusuf responded by framing it as a question of political resolve.

“Do we have the resolve to stand up to progressive outrage against what we see as legitimate enforcement of the law in this country?” he said, adding: “We will not flinch in the face of that.”

He also argued that UK officers would not be armed in the same way many U.S. federal agents are, and suggested that difference would affect how enforcement plays out.

“I’ve spent a lot of time in America… there are many more firearms in America than in the UK,” he said, arguing that U.S. law enforcement operates in a different environment.
He continued by saying he does not expect the UK agency would need to carry weapons.

Unsurprisingly, Yusuf’s remarks prompted strong backlash, including from migrant-rights advocates such as Dora-Olivia Vicol of the Work Rights Centre.

She told The Guardian that the plan would be deeply damaging to families and communities and would be a waste of public resources.

Similarly, Freedom from Torture associate director Natasha Tsangarides criticized the tone and substance of the proposals, warning they could increase fear and division in communities.

Tyla contacted Reform UK’s media team for comment.