logo
Labour's plan for illegal migrants explained — and is it working?

Labour's plan for illegal migrants explained — and is it working?

Timesa day ago

What you need to know
Sir Keir Starmer has secured improved commitments from France on tackling small boats but this has yet to translate into action on the ground
Labour believes a new bill going through the Lords would make a significant difference in its pledge to 'smash the gangs'
Despite rejecting the Rwanda plan as a 'gimmick', the prime minister's plan for return hubs has a similar aim, but is still at an early stage
Ministers are looking at tightening the rules around Article 8 of the ECHR, the right to family life, in asylum claims
When Sir Keir Starmer entered No 10 almost a year ago he pledged to make good on Labour's election promise to 'smash the gangs' and succeed, where the Conservatives had failed, in securing Britain's borders against illegal migration.
Yet so far this year almost 15,000 people have arrived in the UK in small boats — up 42 per cent on this time last year and a 95 per cent rise from the same point in 2023.
This week ministers sought to blame the weather and insisted that their policies would be effective in making good on Starmer's pledge. But what exactly is the government doing, and how successful has it been?
A new deal with France
From the British side perhaps the most critical element of the government's small boats strategy has been to leverage Starmer's relationship with President Macron to persuade the French to take a more proactive approach to preventing small boats setting sail from French waters in the first place.
At the start of the year the prime minister hosted Macron at Chequers, where the two leaders agreed to step up bilateral co-operation to prevent Channel crossings. This led to a formal agreement a month later under which the UK extended a £480 million deal to pay for policing French beaches in return for new measures to stem the flow of boats.
In particular, Paris agreed to change the law to allow police officers to apprehend vessels in shallow waters and restore the offence of an 'illegal stay' in France, which would allow the police to arrest migrants and smugglers before they attempted a crossing. There was also a commitment by France to speed up the construction of a detention centre in Dunkirk — paid for by the British — which had become bogged down in planning rows.
But, so far, these commitments have yet to materialise. The plan to enable police to intervene within 300m of the shore is yet to be implemented amid opposition from the officers themselves. There is also still slow progress on Dunkirk.
Verdict: Ministers believe improved co-operation with France is as close as it comes to a silver bullet to stem the flow of boats. But while Starmer has won important commitments from Paris, which were never given to the last government, these commitments have yet to materialise into action on the ground.
New legal powers to tackle smuggling gangs
In January ministers published a bill that they claimed would give police anti-terrorism-style powers to 'identify, disrupt and prevent' organised immigration crime.
The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, which is going through the House of Lords, will make it illegal to handle items suspected of being used for organised immigration crime, such as boat parts and engines, with a maximum punishment of 14 years in prison.
Those found collecting information that could be used by people smugglers will face up to five years in jail. This would include researching routes or vessels online, or arranging departure points, dates and times.
The new offences will be accompanied by additional powers for Border Force officers, police and the National Crime Agency. They will be allowed to seize and search the mobile phones of anyone arriving in the UK illegally if they believe it will help an investigation into who organised the journey. The information gathered will also be available to be used in cases brought overseas.
Verdict: Senior policing figures believe the legislation will make a difference in their ability to dismantle the smuggling gangs — pointing out that the numbers involved are in the hundreds — and are vulnerable to a concerted attempt to dismantle their activities. However, as the bill is not yet law, at the moment it remains an aspiration.
Return hubs
In one of his first acts as prime minister Starmer scrapped the Conservative Party's plans to send migrants to Rwanda, branding it a waste of money and a 'gimmick'. However, he is now drawing up a policy that sounds remarkably similar — sending failed asylum seekers to 'return hubs' in the west Balkans.
There is one significant difference: the Tories planned to send all those who came to the UK on small boats abroad, while Labour's plan is limited to those who have exhausted all avenues of appeal. But the intent is similar: to deter people from making the crossings in the first place.
Verdict: The plans are at a very early stage, and it is not a given that countries will agree to host the return hubs. Albania has already ruled out doing so. There remain significant legal and political challenges to getting the scheme off the ground. There is broader support for the idea among some EU states and also in the UN. But even if the plans get off the ground, there is no guarantee it will work as a deterrent.
Deal with other countries
In December Starmer negotiated a deal with Germany, which agreed to tighten its laws to make it easier to prosecute those helping to smuggle migrants to the UK.
Ministers said this was important because facilitating people-smuggling to a third country was not technically illegal in Germany. However, the law has not yet been enacted, and ministers need to win approval from the new German government for it to be put into place.
Starmer has also recently announced a partnership with Albania, Kosovo and North Macedonia to detect and deter illegal migration operations.
Verdict: The prime minister has made improving international co-operation to tackle smuggling gangs a big diplomatic priority for the government. But while the issue is a huge priority for the UK it is less important for other countries, and it remains to be seen how quickly and effectively diplomatic deals are converted into concrete action.
The asylum backlog and hotels
There are 8,000 more asylum seekers living in hotels than when Starmer pledged during the election campaign in June last year to 'end asylum hotels, saving the taxpayer billions of pounds'. The reality of how difficult that is has become clear. This month the National Audit Office said the cost of asylum accommodation would be three times higher than previously estimated and more than 38,000 migrants are being housed in hotels, costing the Home Office an estimated £5.5 million a day — while a further 66,000 migrants are in dispersal accommodation such as large houses, bedsits and flats across different local authorities.
• Migrants will be put up in hotels for years yet, Treasury admits
The vast majority are awaiting asylum decisions, so speeding up that process is seen as key. The Home Office has had some success — it has been increased by 52 per cent and 24,000 people have been removed from the country. Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, is also planning to change the law to introduce a mandatory 24-week legal deadline for all asylum appeals.
Verdict: If decision-making can genuinely be sped up it will help not only to bring down the hotel bill, but could act as a deterrent for those considering making the journey across the Channel.
Human rights laws
Ministers will bring in a new framework for judges to work to when deciding whether to allow migrants to make claims for asylum using the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR).
The most heavily used part of the ECHR, Article 8 — the right to family life — has been leveraged by murderers and paedophiles to stay in the country. Cooper revealed this week about 30 per cent of cases had been considered 'exceptional' by judges, and she wants to restrict that to a more narrow set of circumstances.
• Kemi Badenoch would override ECHR on asylum for illegal migrants
Verdict: Restricting the scope of Article 8 will save ministers from some embarrassing headlines but is unlikely to be enough on its own to fulfil the government's immigration pledges. An appetite to direct judges — and suggestions that the government could be open to reforming the ECHR — shows a willingness from Starmer and Cooper to step into an arena previously inhabited by the Tories and Reform UK. But as those on the right ramp up pressure for Britain to pull out of the convention altogether, the efforts may fall short.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Reform and indy will be at the heart of our debate for years
Reform and indy will be at the heart of our debate for years

The Herald Scotland

time10 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Reform and indy will be at the heart of our debate for years

Of course, by now you already know the result, so you'll know which of the following scenarios and their consequences are the most accurate. But let me start with what the national polls tell us ought to have happened, by-election peculiarities – which I'll come to – notwithstanding. The SNP should have won with around 33% of the vote, down significantly on the 46.2% it won in 2021, with Labour in a narrow second on around 28% of the vote. Reform should have come third with just under 20% of the vote, while the Conservatives should have collapsed to under 10% of the vote. The rest of the vote, around 10%, will have been split among the Greens, Liberal Democrats, and myriad minor parties and independents. But by-elections rarely work out this way, even when the national polls are accurate. Firstly, voters are more likely to have voted in protest than they are at national elections, which may well help Reform in this case. As Jamie, a service engineer from Hamilton, told a focus group run by More in Common, it's 'time to give someone else a chance,' even if he thinks Nigel Farage is an 'a***hole'. Read more by Mark McGeoghegan Secondly, turnout will likely have collapsed. In the Hamilton and Rutherglen West by-election in October 2023, turnout fell by 43% compared to the 2019 General Election. A similar decline here would see around 15,600 voters who would otherwise turn out in a national election stay at home instead. Given that voters turning out to vote Reform as a protest against both the SNP and Labour governments are likely to be more motivated than SNP and Labour voters, this may also advantage Reform. In fact, assuming predictions based on national polling would otherwise have been accurate, Reform's vote will only have to have been marginally more resilient for it to finish ahead of Labour and narrowly behind the SNP. Factor in that first peculiarity of by-election campaigns, and such a scenario is hardly far-fetched. On the eve of the by-election, Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar accused the First Minister, John Swinney, and journalists of manufacturing Reform's competitiveness in the seat. Nothing could be further from the truth, and a Reform underperformance yesterday will have been more surprising than it coming second. It has demonstrated its strength in a succession of local by-elections, the latest of which saw it beat Labour to come second behind the SNP. Whether or not Reform came second yesterday, its performance will shape the narrative in Scottish politics going into next year's elections in conjunction with its UK-wide polling lead (it has led in 25 consecutive polls going back to the beginning of May) and strong results in recent local elections and Parliamentary by-elections in England. Ultimately, regardless of yesterday's result, the spectre of Nigel Farage looms over Scottish politics. There are three broad scenarios. Firstly, that Reform performed to its Scotland-wide polling, confirming that it is on course to win between 15 and 20 seats in next year's Scottish Parliament election. Secondly, that it did overperform, perhaps coming second, leading to the next 11 months to being dominated by the SNP seeking to present next year's elections as a choice between the SNP and Nigel Farage, and a bitter fight between Reform and Labour for status as the main challengers to the SNP. Thirdly, that it underperformed, in which case the SNP will be quick to emphasise divergence between Scottish and English politics. In any case, the SNP will use the prospect of a Reform government at Westminster to try to increase the salience of the constitutional question, attempting to return independence to the heart of the Scottish political agenda ahead of next year's elections and the following UK general election. It knows that that is its best bet for winning back pro-independence voters who have swung to Labour in recent years. Replacing Humza Yousaf with John Swinney may have stabilised the SNP's support, but the party not really recovered in any meaningful way. The longer Reform leads in UK-wide polls, the more likely that narrative will be to gain purchase among the independence-supporting electorate. Strong Reform showings in Scotland will reinforce the sense that they could win power in 2029; weak performances will emphasise the ways in which Scottish and English politics may be diverging. Both provide hooks for the SNP. The spectre of Nigel Farage looms large over Scottish politics (Image: PA) The bigger question is whether this leads to a change in the constitutional deadlock. Some recent polling suggests that support for independence may have edged up. Norstat recently recorded its first Yes leads in three years, finding Yes ahead by seven points in the wake of Reform's strong showing in the English local elections. Survation still has No ahead by two or three points, down from leads of seven or eight points a year ago. The data is not conclusive, and we should be cautious of hypotheticals around whether developments will change voters' minds – we had enough such polls around Brexit and Boris Johnson becoming Prime Minister that never bore out. But the prominence of Reform UK and Nigel Farage in UK politics is a gift to the SNP and the independence movement, regardless of how they performed yesterday or how they perform north of the Border in the coming year. If Anas Sarwar is frustrated with his opponents' and the media's "obsession" with Reform UK, he should get used to that feeling – they'll be at the heart of Scottish political debate for years to come. Mark McGeoghegan is a Glasgow University researcher of nationalism and contentious politics and an Associate Member of the Centre on Constitutional Change. He can be found on BlueSky @

‘We've proven pollsters wrong,' says Scottish Labour leader after surprise win
‘We've proven pollsters wrong,' says Scottish Labour leader after surprise win

The Independent

time40 minutes ago

  • The Independent

‘We've proven pollsters wrong,' says Scottish Labour leader after surprise win

People will need to 'change the script' on Scottish Labour after the party's surprise win in Hamilton, the party's leader has said as he hailed party prowess over proving the pollsters wrong. Davy Russell took the seat vacated by the death of Scottish government minister and SNP MSP Christina McKelvie. The deputy lord lieutenant of Lanarkshire, who has never held elected office, beat out SNP candidate Katy Loudon, who fell to her third defeat since 2023. The win comes against the backdrop of national polls which place Scottish Labour in third place behind the SNP and Reform UK and will undoubtedly give a boost to Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar's bid to become first minister in next year's election. While the party had been believed to be among the frontrunners alongside the SNP, the Nigel Farage-led Reform UK saw a surge which took them into third place, just 800 votes away from the SNP. When the votes were counted, Mr Russell polled 8,559, with Ms Loudon coming second on 7,957, ahead of Reform's Ross Lambie, who secured 7,088 votes. Speaking to the PA news agency after the declaration, Mr Sarwar said: 'I think people need to change the script, because we've proven the pollsters wrong. 'We've proven the commentators wrong, we've proven the bookies wrong. 'We've proven John Swinney wrong and so many others wrong too.' In the final weeks of the campaign, the first minister said it was a 'two-horse race' between the SNP and Reform, but Mr Sarwar asked what it says about a government that has been in power for 18 years and 'all it has to offer in a campaign is vote SNP to stop Farage'. Mr Russell had faced criticism for his perceived lack of media appearances, but Mr Sarwar said such arguments were borne of 'an element of classism and elitism'. Speaking from the stage after his win, Mr Russell said: 'Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse has voted tonight to take a new direction with Scottish Labour. 'Like the people here in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, and right across Scotland, we all feel we have been let down by the SNP.' The newly-minted MSP also hit out at Reform, saying the win 'sent a message to Farage and his mob tonight – the poison of Reform isn't us, it isn't Scotland and we don't want your division here'. While Mr Tice told PA he was 'thrilled to bits' with the result. 'It's a fantastic result, just a few hundred votes away from the SNP, nobody predicted that that,' he said. 'I think that sets us up with excitement and momentum for the next 11 months into the Holyrood elections.' Asked what his party needs to do to carry forward that momentum, Mr Tice said Reform UK will spend time 'working that out'. While first minister John Swinney said Ms Loudon had 'fought a superb SNP campaign' and that he was 'clearly disappointed' they were unable to win. 'Labour won by an absolute landslide in this area less than a year ago – we came much closer tonight, but the people of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse have made clear that we still have work to do,' he added. 'Over the next few days, we will take time to consider the result fully.'

Cambridge University colleges seek injunctions over protests
Cambridge University colleges seek injunctions over protests

BBC News

time44 minutes ago

  • BBC News

Cambridge University colleges seek injunctions over protests

Two university colleges are seeking High Court injunctions against pro-Palestine demonstrations after an encampment on their land over the Friday, activists camped on Newton Lawn outside Trinity College and then moved to a lawn outside St John's College, a lawyer for the University of Cambridge protesters left after temporary injunctions were granted on Sunday and Monday, meaning further protests could result in activists being found to be in contempt of Thursday, Kester Lees KC, for the colleges, asked for the injunctions to be made final and to last 12 months, as protests were disruptive to students taking exams. In written submissions, he said the university was "concerned about the environment of fear and intimidation created by masked protesters". He said the university did not wish to stop all protests but added that "some chanting was directly aimed at disrupting the examination season".Instead he suggested other options, such as a march or online and writing Kynaston, for the European Legal Support Centre, which supports the legal rights of pro-Palestine activists, said the court action had been rushed and that more time should be given, during which further evidence could be Kynaston asked the court to discontinue the said if it were to be granted, it would be an "exceptionally wide-ranging and uncalibrated interference" with the protesters' human also said there was a trend of higher education institutions relying on court injunctions as a first rather than a last resort for enforcement against Andrew Twigger KC is expected to give his judgement in two to three weeks, during which time the temporary injunctions will remain in place. Follow Cambridgeshire news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store