Memorably, the Home Office was deemed unfit for purpose by the forthright former Labour home secretary John Reid. With particular reference to the immigration directorate, he declared: "It is inadequate in terms of its leadership, management systems, and procedures, as well as its scope and information technology."

Although that occurred in 2006, the remarks might still be fresh in the mind of Yvette Cooper, the incoming Labour home secretary, when she visits the Home Office the following week.

To put it mildly, the asylum system is in a disorganized, expensive, and inefficient state. As of the end of March, approximately 120,000 men, women, and children remained stuck and awaiting an initial decision on their case, as per the latest official figures. Over a year had passed in 25% of these cases.

Today the numbers will be even higher, as the government’s draconian Illegal Migration Act and Rwanda plan have shut down the asylum system, leaving people in a permanent state of limbo. Tens of thousands haven’t been processed and with nobody sent to Rwanda, they all remain stuck.

This has been causing huge distress and anxiety. Many remain stranded in basic hotel accommodation at a huge cost of more than £5m a day. And they aren’t all “illegal” immigrants, as the prime minister repeatedly claimed in the election debates. A large proportion are refugees from countries such as Sudan, Afghanistan, Eritrea and Syria. Our analysis showsthat, for those who arrived across the Channel last year, Home Office decision-makers would grant asylum to just under three-quarters when assessing their cases.

The chaos is compounded by systems failures. Major flaws in the Home Office database have led to basic errors in tens of thousands of cases with incorrect names, addresses and immigration status. The former chief inspector of borders David Neal has said he fears the Home Office’s data is “inexcusably awful”. Officials quietly say that they have been using their own spreadsheets to keep information because they don’t trust the IT system.

At the same time there is a culture that, as the Windrush inquiry found, too often loses sight of the face behind the case. People from war-torn countries and those who have fled persecution are not seen as having faced trauma and upheaval. They are described to me by Home Office decision-makers as customers. It is as if they are running a supermarket.

Alarmingly, a view peddled by successive Conservative home secretaries that the vast majority are gaming the system has also taken hold. This was summed up by the current home secretary, James Cleverly, when he recently suggested that asylum seekers at the mass accommodation site RAF Wethersfield – which the National Audit Office found cost 10 times more than originally planned – were lying about being suicidal. “Often when people come to this country illegally, they do lie to further their own causes,” he claimed.

A Labour home secretary must quickly change course. They should reset the culture and demand that every person seeking sanctuary be treated as the Home Office values set out: with compassion and respect.

This means changing key policies and practices, such as ending the lucrative private sector contracts that dump people seeking asylum in basic hotel accommodation or run-down housing. Most importantly, it means repealing the Illegal Migration Act and restoring the right to asylum.

Keir Starmer should set a new direction. Instead of the empty “stop the boats” slogan and untruths that label everyone as “illegal”, ​he needs to operate a system that is controlled, competent and compassionate. That’s what the public want. Now is the time to be clear that there is no magic bullet or quick fix.

Of course, the boats need to stop and the smuggling gangs need to be dealt with. But this will take a multi-pronged approach that not only involves a beefed-up unit to smash the gangs, as Starmer has repeatedly promised. It also requires an agreement with France and the EU to allow for safe passage to the UK, an expansion of safe routes such as family reunion and refugee visas, and serious efforts to address the reasons behind refugee movement. Results will not happen overnight. They will take time and require the hard yards of international cooperation.

Equally important is that communities who might turn their frustrations against people seeking asylum feel that they, too, are receiving investment and support to thrive. It’s in our neighbourhoods and our schools that refugees are welcomed and integrated into British life. These places are the first line of defence against a politics of division and hate. Communities need to be resourced to play this vital role.

Critically, Labour must govern in a different language – one that speaks to the importance of a shared humanity and a shared society where all of us can play a part.

To adopt a slightly softer version of the Conservative approach will only further erode public trust, as it fails to deliver. More human compassion, more intelligent realism, more global leadership and more competent policy-making will, over time, make a real difference.