Reform UK would consider paying the Taliban to take back migrants who entered Britain illegally, senior party figure Zia Yusuf has revealed.
Yusuf, who previously chaired the party, defended the controversial suggestion, stressing that he regarded it as “quite reasonable” for the British government to hand money to the Afghan regime if it enabled a return agreement.
The remarks come as Nigel Farage prepares to launch Reform UK’s new plan to curb illegal migration, centred on scrapping existing human rights protections and enforcing mass deportations.
The Reform leader has pledged to withdraw Britain from the European Convention on Human Rights and to scrap the Human Rights Act. These would be replaced with a new British Bill of Rights, designed to cover only citizens and legal residents. Under the plan, people arriving in the UK on small boats or other unauthorized routes would be denied any right to claim asylum.
Instead, migrants would be housed at disused military bases while awaiting deportation to their countries of origin, or to third-party states such as Rwanda and Albania.
Yusuf, who heads Reform’s “department of government efficiency”—inspired by President Donald Trump’s “DOGE”—outlined how the process might work. “Well, we have a £2bn budget to offer countries,” he explained.
Concerning whether such a budget would be too small to sway nations, Yusuf countered: “It’s not a drop in the ocean to Afghanistan, certainly not a drop in the ocean for Eritrea, the two countries that are top of the list of boat crossings.”
Pressed on whether he meant paying the Taliban, Yusuf responded: “This country already gives £151m a year to Afghanistan in the form of foreign aid. ”
When it was pointed out that existing aid does not go to the Taliban for returns, Yusuf said, “I think it is quite reasonable. Again, British people have had enough of their goodwill being taken advantage of.”
He added that Afghans now top the list of foreign nationals crossing the Channel illegally.
“The majority of them fighting-age males into this country, while this country gives £151m of aid to Afghanistan. We don’t think that’s fair.”
Zia Yusuf
Critics Dismiss Party’s Migration Proposals
Housing minister Matthew Pennycook rejected Reform’s approach outright, describing the proposals as hastily conceived. He argued they lacked credibility compared with ongoing government efforts.
“This government has secured returns agreements, including a groundbreaking pilot agreement with France. We’re seeking to secure others, but, frankly, the idea that Nigel Farage and the circus that is Reform can come in and secure those agreements, I think, is for the birds.”
Matthew Pennycook
Despite such criticism, Yusuf insisted that Reform’s policy was financially sound and practical. The party has estimated the program would cost around £10 billion over five years.
Regarding his justification for the figure, particularly when Home Office statistics place the current annual cost of the asylum system at £5 billion, Yusuf pushed back.
“That’s just the Home Office number. That cut doesn’t come close to the total cost of asylum and illegal migration into this country, takes nothing into account for Border Force, takes nothing into account on the strain on the NHS or welfare or Universal Credit, or ultimately a state pension.”
Zia Yusuf
According to him, the actual costs are significantly higher than official figures suggest. “It doesn’t count any of those things, which is why our program will actually, by deporting people who are in this country legally, save the British taxpayer hundreds of billions of pounds in the decades to come.”
With Reform UK doubling down on its hardline migration stance, the debate over how Britain should handle asylum seekers and irregular arrivals looks set to intensify further.
