Home Office to share data on asylum hotel locations with food delivery firms
Currently delivery riders discovered to be sharing their accounts with asylum seekers have their profiles suspended.
The latest measures hope to crack down further on the practice.
The gig economy firms have also been increasing real-time identity and right to work checks which has led to thousands of workers being taken off the platforms, the Home Office said.
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp claimed last month to have found evidence of people working illegally for the food delivery firms during a visit to a hotel used to house asylum seekers.
Asylum seekers in the UK are normally barred from work while their claim is being processed, though permission can be applied for after a year of waiting.
Delivery firms met Home Office bosses earlier this month to discuss the concerns of abuse in the sector.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: 'Illegal working undermines honest business, exploits vulnerable individuals and fuels organised immigration crime.
'By enhancing our data sharing with delivery companies, we are taking decisive action to close loopholes and increase enforcement.
'The changes come alongside a 50% increase in raids and arrests for illegal working under the Plan for Change, greater security measures and tough new legislation.'
The three delivery companies said they were fully committed to working with the Home Office and combatting illegal working.
Ministers promised a 'nationwide blitz' to target migrants working illegally as part of efforts to deter people from coming to the UK from France.
Officials hope to tackle the 'pull factors' attracting migrants to the UK alongside the deal struck by Sir Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron earlier this month to send some people who reach England in small boats back to France.
More than 23,500 migrants have arrived in the UK after crossing the English Channel so far in 2025, a record for this point in the year.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
37 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Mario Lapointe reveals investment in Dumbarton goes beyond cash as owner bares his soul to management and punters
The new Dumbarton owner is bullish over the events which have transpired since he took the reins at The Rock in Jun Right now Mario Lapointe is a happy chappy. The new Dumbarton owner is bullish over the events which have transpired since he took the reins at The Rock in June after the Good Ship Sons ran aground in the form of liquidation and the subsequent forming as a newco after a 15-point penalty put paid to their League One status. Scottish football is no stranger to unexpected saviours but a French-Canadian musician who has made his money in the world of electronics is the unlikeliest spark for a club in need. But Lapointe is bullish over the Sons' future with ticket sales on the up, added investment in the club's youth set-up and pioneering pay it forward schemes directly engaging youths in the Dumbarton area. They will start the League Two season with a five-point penalty but the mood music around Lapointe's most ambitious project yet is rising after a Premier Sports Cup campaign which started with a win over Stirling Albion and ended with a victory over crisis-hit Hamilton. Montreal native Lapointe is a big personality but his role as custodian of Dumbarton doesn't come with a laissez-faire attitude – just ask the management team who hear from him after every game. Football advisor Neil Watt, appointed by Lapointe himself, and manager Stevie Farrell receive an instant debrief from the boss who is back in Scotland for their League Two opener against Clyde as they aim to quickly wipe out the deduction they were slapped with. Speaking exclusively to Record Sport, Lapointe said: "I'll be watching our games and I take notes and I take notes and after the game I'll write to our adviser Neil Watt and Stevie, our coach, and I'll share my notes. "I coached hockey 19 years and there's things in hockey that we cannot take a low effort or something like that or we're attached to details because it's a very fast game, ice hockey is very fast compared to football "I write what I see, just like I'm talking to you now, I'm a guy that's very direct. I don't beat around the bush too much. and so, I write exactly what I see. "And then to push my efforts, I'll make sure that if I have a solution for it, the solution will be there too, and I send it to them and they (management team) probably go, "Oh my god.", "And this is why I went to get Neil Watt at the same time. I had set five different aspects for me to evaluate our coaching staff and those five aspects. "So for me to be able to evaluate, let's say, the coaching staff, the confidence level, it's like statistics, you have a certain way of saying things, but what's your confidence level? for the coaching staff to receive it, it could not just be from this French Canadian guy that knows about hockey and coaching. It had to be also from a guy that agrees with it, or doesn't agree with it in Neil Watt, right now in our perspective, he's that guy. He's taking care of it. "He's the mentor of the coaching staff, but also he's a guy that's taking his notes as well, and he receives mine. And maybe our notes match sometimes, and perhaps they don't. I cannot be everything, which I am not the best at everything, but I'm pretty good at everything. But I surround myself with some of the best. I'll try to anyway. and that's what I tried to do in this case." The new man in town is an open book and appears willing to self-evaluate after admitting the emotions of his first voyage to the Shire resulted in emotions running high and a club legend offering a quiet gesture to avoid the owner boiling over in front of his public. Lapointe admits his primal reactions in the stands came as a surprise to himself. He added: "During the game, I'll say nothing. I'll watch. If I'm at the stadium, it's a different thing though because at the stadium, I did find myself getting mad a couple of times last time and that's not usually me. "But when you coach for so many years behind a bench, you're not a guy that lets yourself go so much because everything's planned and you're going at it, But when you're in the stands, it has been a while that I haven't been in the stands for a long time. It was good because I was sitting next to Murdo MacLeod and he put his hand on my shoulder a couple of times "So, I don't know if he noticed that, but he was really trying to calm me down, I think. And that's fine because I am a competitive guy. I like to obviously win and I don't mind losing. I've never been a bad loser, but every loss is an opportunity to find out why you lost and how you can do something different and right now I'm happy." Lapointe comes with no airs and graces despite his success in life and his modesty in the abode he rests his eyes on when he makes the trip from Canada to his new home. And his open doors policy has stretched to his social media presence, with Dumbarton fans invited directly to his personal Facebook page as he toyed with letting those beyond the stadium hear about the success of a team under new ownership. He said: "They say that change is hard to happen, and for me I don't have that problem of being uncomfortable. You know what I mean? if I send you where I live when I go to Scotland right now it was a mattress in an empty apartment and that was it, and I got it late and stuff and I couldn't care less. "I had a picture on my Facebook with a huge church bell that comes in the rack and a lot of people, 'my god, what does he want to do with that and stuff?' And I didn't buy it, of course. but in Montreal, one of the biggest things is that people have a losing team,..but when they score, the whole town knows because you can hear that bell ringing, and it puts a smile on your face every time."
New Statesman
38 minutes ago
- New Statesman
How Britain lost the status game
Photo by Stefan Rousseau/AFP I've always been a bit puzzled by the 1956 Suez Crisis. The idea of Britain, France and Israel plotting together but being defeated by the honest, righteous Americans does feel, nearly a lifetime later, a little strange. But the most baffling thing about the Suez Crisis is the idea that it was a crisis. It's always described as this a great national humiliation which ruined a prime minister, the sort of watershed to inspire national soul-searching, state-of-the-nation plays and a whole library of books. And yet, compared to the sort of thing which literally every other European country had to deal with at some point in the 20th century, it's nothing. Britain was not invaded or occupied; Britain did not see its population starve. Britain simply learned that it was no longer top dog. That's all. The event and the reaction don't seem to go together. But this, of course, is to see the world from the perspective of today. Now, we all know that Britain cannot just do what it wants – that the US is the far more powerful player. At the start of 1956, though, large chunks of the map were still coloured British pink (or, come to that, French bleu), and the median opinion at home was that this was broadly a good thing. Suez was the moment when the loss of status we now date to 1945 came home. I wonder, in my darker moments, if we're going through something similar now – a less dramatic decline, perhaps, but a potentially more ruinous one. The loss of empire, after all, was mainly an issue for the pride of the political classes. Today's decline in status affects everyone. Consider the number of areas in which the current British government seems utterly helpless before the might of much bigger forces. It's not quite true to say that Rachel Reeves has no room for manoeuvre – breaking a manifesto pledge and raising one of the core taxes remains an option, albeit one that would be painful for government and taxpayer alike. But her borrowing and spending options are constrained by the sense of a bond market both far flightier than it once was, thanks to an increase in short term investors, and less willing, post-Truss, to give Britain the benefit of the doubt. The thing that much of the public would like Reeves to do – spend more, without raising taxes – is a thing it is by no means clear she has the power to do. Over in foreign policy, Keir Starmer has offended sensibilities by making nice with someone entirely unfit to be president of the United States, and whose actions place him a lot closer to the dictators of the 20th century than to Eisenhower or JFK. The problem for Starmer is that saying this out loud would likely result in ruinous tariffs, or the collapse of NATO before an alternative system for the defence of Europe can be prepared, or both. Again, he has no space to do what his voters want him to do. In the same vein, consider the anger about Britain's failure to act to prevent the horrors still unfolding in Gaza. It is not to imply the government has handled things well to suggest that at least part of the problem is that – 69 years on from Suez – the government of Israel doesn't give a fig about what the government of Britain thinks. The things the public wants may be outside the realm of things the government can actually deliver. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Even in less overtly political realms, the British state feels helplessly at the mercy of global forces beyond its control. The domestic TV industry, a huge British export, is in crisis thanks to the streamers. AI will change the world, we're told, and it's very possible that isn't a good thing: and what is Westminster supposed to do about that? And with which faculties? In all these areas and a thousand more, people want their government to do something to change the direction of events, and it is not at all obvious it can. Ever since 2016, British politics has been plagued by a faintly Australian assumption that, if a prime minister is not delivering, you should kick them out and bring in the next one. That is not the worst impulse in a democracy. But what if Britain is so changed that delivery is not possible? Researchers have found that social status affects the immune system of certain types of monkey – that the stress of lower status can, quite literally, kill. It already looks plausible the electorate might roll the dice on Nigel Farage. This is terrifying enough. But when it turns out he can't take back control either, but only trash what's there – what then? [See more: Trump in the wilderness] Related
New Statesman
38 minutes ago
- New Statesman
The cost of apathy in England's mining towns
Riot police hold back protesters near a burning police vehicle after disorder broke out on 30 July 2024 in Southport. Photo byOne year ago, as the riots that started in Southport spread across the country, people in the old coalfields started to join in the action. In Wath upon Dearne, a former pit area in the metropolitan borough of Rotherham, rioters clashed with police outside a Holiday Inn Express, leading to some of the most appalling violence of that summer. The hotel's residents, housed there by the Home Office while it processed their asylum claims, said they felt a deep terror when they saw the mob set bins alight and storm the building. It was the event that produced some of the most memorable images of the riots. For all the distinct 2020s character of the livestreamed disturbances, the clashes invoked the past too. Not only was the hotel built on former colliery land, but to some former miners, the violence was reminiscent of the battle between police and picketers at nearby Orgreave 40 years earlier. Back then, protesters also claimed to be defending their way of life, though from deindustrialisation rather than immigration. Britain's former coalfields have become deeply disenchanted with politics. When I conducted ethnographic research in mining areas in Nottinghamshire back in 2021 and 2022, long before the events at Southport and beyond, people predicted social unrest. Millie, a care worker and mother of four, told me then that she was done with mainstream politics. 'Don't like Labour much, don't like the Tories at all. They come in, 'You will do as we say.' Don't have much of a chance of standing up to them.' In her view, the media was complicit and ordinary people were kept in the dark. She told me: 'I've been predicting there will be riots soon.' On recent returns to Mansfield and its surrounding villages, the prospect of further rioting has become more urgent. Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner have also spoken of the risk of renewed unrest. Only last month protesters from north Nottinghamshire mining communities marched against asylum hotels, spurred on by the comments of local Reform MP Lee Anderson about an ongoing rape trial. Some locals are animated principally by anger at immigration. In their apocalyptic visions, they are defending not just women and girls but their whiteness, too. For others, however, these concerns are secondary to a wider sense of political voicelessness and apathy in national decline. Millie was among this latter group, which feels that politicians had done nothing and that all they did was tell lies. I asked her why that was. 'Money,' Millie said. 'It's always money. Money and greed. You're not telling me they're not having their pockets lined.' Millie's anger was driven by the loss of sports facilities, the disappearance of the Sure Start centres, and the loss of the shared spaces she held dear. Everything had been 'taken away'. Even simple activities such as a family cinema trip or roller-skating at one of the few remaining leisure centres set her back more than she could afford. She would love to be able to drop her kids off to play with the pit band, as her father, a miner, had done with her. But the facilities had shut. 'When the pits started closing, they lost funding and stuff. I mean, it's still about, don't get me wrong. But it's not as rife as it used to be… My kids don't understand it because they never had it. But it hurts me, because what am I to do?' [See also: One year on, tensions still circle Britain's asylum-seeker hotels] To understand the anger of the mining towns, we need to understand the history of miners' welfare. This takes us back to Southport, long before Southport became a shorthand in the national press for the disaffected working class. The Victorian seaside resort was the preferred location for conferences of the northern working class. Its train station was easily reached from Liverpool and Manchester and grand hotels sprang up to host them. (One of these was the ornate red-brick structure of the Scarisbrick Hotel, which would much later be used as an asylum hotel for several months.) Late-19th-century accounts in regional newspapers describe a remarkable sight at one of the conferences: in the early hours of the morning, the sky above the town came alive as the miners – many of whom flew pigeons for a hobby – released their birds to fly back home, while the miners themselves remained in Southport to vote on proposals for the eight-hour working day. After the First World War, the miners met at Southport again to discuss their demands, having paused strike activity for the duration of the fighting. They wanted to be put in charge of the industry – nationalisation under worker control, as well as wage increases and a reduction in the working day. They threatened to go on strike. The government baulked at their demands, but the ensuing Sankey commission did recommend that colliery owners be charged one penny per tonne of coal, to be put towards social, cultural and medical amenities. This was promptly made law in the Welfare Fund clause of the 1920 Mining Industry Act – the clause from which welfares derive their name. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Sports pitches, pithead baths and social clubs sprang up around Britain's collieries, all funded by the levy, and, after nationalisation, by the state. The welfares and other amenities were not just useful for community well-being, but also helped to forge a social tie between representatives and the represented. Bolstered by social investment, MPs could prove they cared about the communities that had elected them. In reality, the Welfare Fund investment reflected the structural power of miners over the energy source upon which industry and households depended. Nonetheless, people use the provision as an example of care and recognition. When these were lost in the ravages of deindustrialisation and austerity, it was felt like a moral injury. Politicians still claim to care, but what have their constituents got to show for it? Quantitative research by the economic geography professors Maria Abreu and Calvin Jones has shown that former coal-mining areas have lower levels of political participation, a lack of political trust and a low sense of political efficacy even compared with economically and demographically similar places. Other recent research tells us that closures of GP practices, pubs and shops are all associated with elevated support for the far right. These losses of social infrastructure are all the more impactful in former mining areas because there was more to lose. The decay of amenities won by the labour movement have become a potent symbol of decline. Today, ex-miners who were once connected to hundreds of others through a dense web of social provision tell me they live increasingly private lives in their private homes. Some end up on dubious Facebook pages and YouTube channels. They come to imagine their homes as embattled fortresses, under siege from disorder and diversity outside. The Wath Main Colliery memorial in South Yorkshire is a ten-minute walk from the Holiday Inn where everything kicked off in August 2024. Fifteen minutes' walk the other way there's a large distribution centre, which regeneration officials had hoped would provide an employment alternative. It is often said that places like Mansfield or Wath were forgotten or left behind, and many of us are guilty of talking about ex-industrial areas as though time stopped shortly after the miners' strike. Nothing could be further from the truth. In Wath, like in Mansfield, there have been frantic policy interventions to lure footloose businesses and make the land productive again. As a result, many former pit areas have similar landscapes: a big Tesco, expensive newbuild housing and a waste incineration plant – if planners can get it past the local residents. Like Nottinghamshire, Wath ended up with distribution centres. Here, it is the clothing retailer Next; in Nottinghamshire it's Amazon and Sports Direct. In Wath, as in the South Wales valleys, they received call centres too. And of course, where land, rent and rates are cheap, the government will soon see an opportunity to make savings. There is never any money to keep Sure Start going or to keep the welfare alive, but people who depend on the state can be dealt with on the cheap. It is, perhaps, easier for Serco and other government contractors to house asylums seekers in one place, rather than disperse smaller groups more widely. To the surprise of no one, this is not a recipe for social cohesion. Racism and xenophobia exist everywhere, but combined with structural decline they make for a particularly toxic politics, and it is not hard to see how far-right visions of civil disorder and societal breakdown could meld with more mundane concerns and a widely shared anti-politics. In a new report for IPPR, I make the case for the return of a miners' welfare fund to combat declinism and alienation. Where it was once levied on colliery owners, it should now raise its budget from the large online businesses, such as Amazon, that have filled post-industrial Britain with gargantuan distribution centres. Private-sector-led approaches to regeneration have left mining communities with exploitative jobs and crumbling social infrastructures. Things seem only ever to get worse. Instead, the state could use a 21st-century welfare fund to revive community centres, facilitate affordable family activities and help community groups take neglected spaces into common ownership, reclaiming the mundane utopia of the sports pitch and the pit band. Memories of the affordances of the previous generation of welfare facilities speak to its understated pleasures. 'Pit bands – you really got a feel for the pit community,' Millie told me. 'Stuck together, had a laugh.' [See more: British decline is as much intellectual as it is political] Related
