On November 29, 2025, the UK government unveiled a sweeping new policy that will ban asylum seekers from using taxis for most medical appointments, marking a significant shift in how the country manages transportation for people awaiting decisions on their asylum claims. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced that, starting in February 2026, taxi use for medical travel will be restricted to only the most exceptional, evidence-based cases—such as for those with physical disabilities, pregnancy, or serious illness—and each of these journeys will require direct Home Office approval, according to reports by the BBC, Independent, and other major outlets.
The move comes on the heels of a BBC investigation that uncovered widespread use of taxis by asylum seekers, including some high-profile cases where individuals traveled hundreds of miles at significant cost to the British taxpayer. In one instance, an asylum seeker reportedly took a 250-mile cab journey to a general practitioner, racking up a £600 fare paid by the Home Office. Another government contractor was found to be spending approximately £350,000 a month with a single taxi company for 6,000 journeys, as highlighted by GB News.
These revelations prompted an urgent review of the Home Office’s transport arrangements. The government has now confirmed it has been spending an average of £15.8 million per year on transport for asylum seekers, much of which went to taxi journeys between temporary accommodations and medical facilities. Earlier this year, BBC Radio 4's File on Four found that while asylum seekers were typically issued a bus pass for one return journey per week, taxis were often used for necessary medical travel—sometimes involving long and costly trips.
Taxi drivers themselves described questionable practices that contributed to ballooning costs. One driver told the BBC his firm would make up to 15 drop-offs a day from a hotel in south-east London to a doctor’s surgery just two miles away, costing the Home Office £1,000 daily. Another driver, identified as Steve, claimed that firms would purposely inflate mileage by dispatching drivers from distant towns to carry out short journeys. Steve recounted being sent from Gatwick Airport to Reading—a 110-mile round trip—to take an asylum seeker from their hotel to a dentist just 1.5 miles away. He said, “I’d be sitting there and [would be told] 'oh look don’t worry, [the asylum seekers] don’t wanna go' and they basically refused to move. It just logistically wasn’t thought out very well and I think it was left open to abuse.”
In response to these findings, Home Secretary Mahmood stated, “I am ending the unrestricted use of taxis by asylum seekers for hospital appointments, authorising them only in the most exceptional circumstances. I will continue to root out waste as we close every single asylum hotel.” She further emphasized, “This government inherited Conservative contracts that are wasting billions of taxpayers’ hard-earned cash.” The government’s plan is to work with service providers to introduce alternatives, such as public transport, as a way to save taxpayer money and reduce opportunities for abuse.
The new rules will require all service providers to stop using taxis for medical journeys from February 2026. Exemptions will be tightly controlled, limited to evidence-based cases involving physical disability, pregnancy, or serious illness, and each must be signed off by the Home Office. Ministers also indicated that other uses of taxis—such as for moving between accommodations—are under review, with the intention to extend the principle that taxis should only be used in exceptional circumstances and with robust evidence.
The policy change is part of a broader set of reforms aimed at overhauling the UK’s asylum system. Earlier in November 2025, Mahmood outlined a raft of measures designed to deter illegal migration and make it easier to deport people whose claims are rejected. Proposed changes include making refugee status temporary, subject to reviews every 30 months, and sending refugees home if their country is deemed safe. The government also offers payments of up to £3,000 to some people with no right to remain in the country who agree to return home voluntarily.
These wide-ranging reforms have drawn criticism from Labour backbenchers and advocacy groups. Enver Solomon, chief executive at the Refugee Council, told the BBC that the current use of taxis was “symptomatic of an asylum system that allows private contractors to make vast profits at the expense of the taxpayer.” He argued, “It is more a consequence of government incompetence and poor contract management than people in the asylum system exploiting it.” Solomon called for an end to “profiteering” contracts and urged that more asylum seekers be allowed to work so they can support themselves.
Meanwhile, the government’s efforts to reduce costs and tighten controls on asylum accommodation have faced significant challenges. As of November 2025, there were 36,273 people living in asylum hotels across the UK—a 13% increase in just three months, according to figures cited by ITV News. Ministers have pledged to end the use of asylum hotels by the next election, aiming instead to increase the use of alternative accommodations, such as large military sites. However, closing hotels and breaking expensive contracts will require finding suitable alternative accommodation for tens of thousands of people.
Despite these challenges, the government claims some progress. Since coming to power, it has recovered £74 million, though the chair of the home affairs select committee noted that this is only a start. Shadow home secretary Chris Philp offered sharp criticism, stating, “The issue is that Labour can’t get a grip on the illegal immigration crisis. As Labour hammer working people with £26 billion in tax rises, they have allowed costs for illegal arrivals to spiral because Labour don’t have the backbone to take the tough decisions needed. Namely, deporting all illegal arrivals and leaving the ECHR. Until that happens, the bills will keep mounting.”
For her part, Mahmood described the UK’s generous asylum offer, compared with other European countries, as a factor drawing people to British shores, and acknowledged that for many taxpayers the system “feels out of control and unfair.” She told MPs it was the “uncomfortable truth” that the system needed reform, and shared that she had already directed officials to pilot a small program of increased payments for voluntary returns “just to see how it changes behaviour.”
As the new taxi rules come into effect, the government faces a delicate balancing act: rooting out waste and abuse while ensuring that those with genuine medical needs are not left stranded. With the number of people housed in asylum hotels still climbing and the costs of the system under intense scrutiny, all eyes will be on whether these reforms deliver the savings—and the sense of control—promised by ministers.
Whether these changes will truly address the underlying issues or simply shift the burden elsewhere remains to be seen, but for now, the era of taxpayer-funded taxis for asylum seekers’ medical appointments is drawing to a close.
