Migrants attempting to enter UK in refrigerated trailers are ‘constant threat'
The study, published by logistics company Oakland International, stated that 4,415 instances of a truck or van being found with stowaways seeking to reach the UK were recorded between 2016 and 2023.
An average of nearly 100 people per month were detected infiltrating trucks entering the UK between January and September last year.
People hiding in trailers cause delays, increased costs, potential damage to goods and disposal of produce, researchers found.
Companies transporting food, household goods and healthcare items dispose of an average of 56% of stock on an infiltrated lorry.
The value of lost stock can be up to tens of thousands of pounds, research found.
This can result in revenue loss several times higher.
The report, produced with research company Analytiqa, stated: 'The use of refrigerated trailers to gain illegal access for stowaways remains a constant threat to food safety and contributes to considerable unnecessary waste and risk within the food supply chain.'
Oakland International co-founder Dean Attwell said: 'The rise in clandestine infiltration is not just a statistic, it's a ticking time bomb for food safety, driver security and public health.
'Every compromised load puts the public at risk and costs the industry millions per year.
'We need urgent, co-ordinated action across the supply chain to implement robust security protocols, improve traceability and ensure accountability at every stage.'
In cases where a vehicle is found carrying a hidden entrant, the Government can issue the transport company with fines of up to £10,000 per stowaway.
Road Haulage Association senior public affairs lead Ashton Cull said failings within Border Force and the Clandestine Entrant Civil Penalty Scheme mean 'all the responsibility and liability is being unfairly shifted onto drivers and businesses who have taken all possible steps to secure their vehicles'.
He added: 'We repeat our call for further and urgent investment in training and technology at our borders to help keep loads secure.
'We want to see a fair system in place that protects drivers, goods and businesses as well as our borders.
'We look forward to seeing greater urgency on this issue.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
6 minutes ago
- The Independent
The UK tech sector is booming – but the government must do more to support it
With each passing day, UK tech grows in importance. What was once viewed by traditionalists as marginal and voguish is now the dominant force in British business. This is why the E2Exchange, or E2E, Tech Track 100 for 2025 is so vital, showcasing the domestic firms that have forged ahead and are succeeding. In association with The Independent, E2E, the leading business networking and mentoring organisation, has published the definitive index of the 100 fastest-growing tech-focused private businesses in the UK. The list is based on their profits over the past three years and is the latest Track 100 to be produced this year. Others in the 2025 series will cover different categories, including job creation, dynamic and profits. To accompany the unveiling, Shalini Khemka, founder of E2E, assembled an online panel of UK tech stars: Jared Owen of digital shopping partner Redbrain; Mike Walters from payment platform Form3; Peter King, director of business banking for fintech bank OakNorth; data-driven and intelligence supplier Quantexa's Imam Hoque; and Dhaval Patel, CEO of Universal Partners, the foreign currency payments provider that is also sponsoring the Track 100s. We kicked off with the key question: is Britain doing enough to support tech? Hoque said he felt the government was on the right lines with R&D credits, creating a 'Silicon Valley' between Oxford and Cambridge, 'but what we and they really need to fix is the investment model for scaling-up start-ups,' he said. 'There are plenty of initiatives for start-ups but as companies grow it starts to get trickier.' Hoque believes more could be done as well, since we're longer in the EU, to buy British. He cited structural models in Canada and Australia where public pension funds are encouraged to invest in tech. 'More pressure could be applied in the UK,' he said. Walters said Britain could 'never move fast enough', since tech is constantly accelerating. Where we can score, he said, is by achieving 'greater clarity and alignment with tech in purpose and regulation and being consistent in their delivery.' There isn't one solution but a host that can combine to create a healthy outlook, he added. 'Buy it if it's British and a British spend, invest so it's funded from UK pension activities, enable regulators to understand and support tech in the UK – all those things have to happen at the same time and consistently to make a real difference.' King addressed the challenge of beginning and entering a globally crowded space. He said that his area, fintech, was one where Britain had been, and is, a world leader. That was down to government and regulators being keen to encourage and lend their backing. He agreed with Hoque that the problems arise higher up, when companies increase in size. Then traditional conservatism and aversion to risk kick in, which is when firms are forced to look outside the UK for their funding. From Redbrain, Owen was asked if the company is getting the talent it needs? 'Honest answer, probably not,' he said. 'Really exceptional people are often drawn to the global tech giants and it can be hard to compete with that.' They choose to go to them because they are playing safe and that is down to a lack of optimism. They have to be invested in and encouraged, and likewise they have to believe in what they're joining and in the longevity of remaining. Recruiting from abroad is becoming more difficult, not helped by leaving the EU, but there is a talent pool in the UK – it just needs to be made bigger and its members need to be less easily swayed by inducements from elsewhere, especially from those big global players. On one issue they and the audience were as one: that we rely on the government too much and that the best assistance tech businesses can receive is from the businesses themselves. At the end, there was some advice for would-be tech entrepreneurs: 'Dig in. Learn it and dig in,' Walters said. Owen said it was about 'creating positive tech experiences for young people, to attract them to the sector, make them grasp its potential and opportunities.' King said while the education system catches up it was up to tech businesses to foster demand, to become as attractive as possible. Patel echoed that with the final say: 'Be the role model you've always wanted to be to others.'
The Independent
6 minutes ago
- The Independent
Is Britain's sluggish economy the fault of the Labour government?
The latest economic growth numbers may have been fairly unimpressive by most historical standards, but they were rather better than recent readings and surpassed market expectations. The first estimate of the size of the UK economy showed it had expanded by 0.3 per cent in the second quarter of this year, against a rise of 0.7 per cent in the first three months. Investors had 'priced in' a minimal 0.1 per cent rise. The annual increase, ie on the same period last year, is 1.2 per cent. Is this good news or bad news? What's happening? The pattern of sluggish economic growth that has prevailed in Britain, and most of the West, since the global financial crisis of 2008, is proving to be the new normal. It's not what we had come to expect. For most of the postwar period, punctuated by stop-go cycles, average economic growth was running at 2 to 2.5 per cent a year, with some endemic inflation and structural unemployment. By the 1990s this had accelerated to something like 2.7 per cent, combined with lower inflation and unemployment. In recent years, excepting the pandemic, growth has been more like 1 to 2 per cent. This is driven by low investment and a poor productivity record, exacerbated by market loss post-Brexit. Is this what Labour promised? No. It gave the impression that the very act of electing a Labour government to replace the incompetent Conservatives would lift confidence and 'kickstart' the economy, but no firm evidence of that has emerged. Expectations have not been fulfilled. For example, the Labour manifesto stated: 'Sustained economic growth is the only route to improving the prosperity of our country and the living standards of working people. That is why it is Labour's first mission for government. It means being pro-business and pro-worker. We are the party of wealth creation.' Rachel Reeves, when she was shadow chancellor, promised 'securonomics', but little has since been heard about that either; tax rises and welfare cuts have been the main talking points. Will Labour's policies work? They may well do, but not necessarily fast enough to produce tangible results by the time of the next general election, and to rescue Labour's second term. There are many measures that should edge up growth, even if each is comparatively modest: the Brexit reset; trade deals with the US and India; making the public finances stable; reforming planning rules; expanding airports; building 1.5 million homes; green energy including nuclear power; loosening financial regulation; making room for cuts in interest rates; and some strategic investments in new sectors. Headwinds for the UK include the continuing world trade war, cuts in migration, a trend to higher debt-financing costs globally, and the prospect of more wars. The problem is that any major investment drive takes years, which means that much of the benefit in lifting the trend rate of economic growth won't be felt until the early to mid-2030s – by which time some other political party may be in power and claiming the credit. What can Labour do? Up its presentation. As with the NHS, voters need hard evidence that things are indeed improving, even if slowly, and that they are on the path to better times. That means explaining why present sacrifices have to be made, but also some vision of the rewards that will follow as a result. The party needs to boast and showcase its successes. Does it matter? The economy will always be central, which in a way is a strength for Labour given that it can't win on the 'culture war' issues. A display of determination and competence in running the public finances and the wider economy can win the confidence of the voters. Unfortunately, Reeves has made too many errors of political judgement to be confident that the public will be receptive to anything she says. But give it time, and some evidence of higher living standards and improved public services, and that can be turned around. Is the opposition capitalising on Labour's misfortunes? Not that much. The words 'Liz Truss' and 'mini-Budget' still make people – including the current shadow chancellor – wince. The memories of the Tory years in power aren't that rosy: a long spell of austerity, followed by Brexit, Partygate, splits, crises, and general 'chaos and confusion'. Labour can still rightly pin some of the blame for 'broken Britain' on 14 years of Tory rule. The electorate simply isn't yet ready to give the Tories a hearing; they've apologised for Truss, but it's not enough. Meanwhile, perhaps from frustration with the two main parties, voters are curiously susceptible to the lavish and unrealistic promises made by Nigel Farage and Reform UK. Again, this could actually turn to Labour's advantage if it concentrates on the not-too-difficult task of proving that Farage's fantastical figures don't add up. Not much sign of that yet, though. Labour's biggest problem isn't so much the economy as complacency.
Times
7 minutes ago
- Times
Welcome to the age of ‘geoeconomics'
A s Europe prepares to watch from the sidelines while the United States and Russia negotiate the future of Ukraine in Alaska, references to geopolitics are, once again, everywhere. The 'geo' buzz has been upon us for a while. According to almost every commentator, we live in the age of 'geoeconomics'. And yet, when real-world great power competition comes knocking, analysts struggle to make sense of it. Nowhere has this been more apparent than in reactions to the recent EU-US trade deal. Commentators have labelled it a humiliating and economically unnecessary climbdown, while berating European negotiators for their lack of strategy. The UK, which struck a deal limiting most tariffs to 10 per cent rather than the EU's 15 per cent, is seen as having achieved a better result.
