Germany sees number of asylum seeker arrivals HALVE in six months following tough new migration policies
According to figures, the number of people applying for asylum in Germany for the first time fell by more than half in the first six months of the year.
There were just over 70,000 applications between January and July, compared to nearly 141,000 during the same period last year.
Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt said: 'We have massively reduced the number of initial asylum applications compared to last year.'
The drop has been seen as a big success for Chancellor Friedrich Merz's conservative government, which promised to crack down on illegal immigration and speed up deportations.
The coalition is putting pressure on the EU to bring in stricter rules, including fewer appeal options for failed asylum seekers and faster returns to their home countries.
Dobrindt told the Bild am Sonntag newspaper: 'We want procedures at the EU's external borders, faster decisions and consistent returns.'
'We are declaring an even tougher fight against the smugglers, because the state must regulate who comes into our country, not the criminal smuggling gangs.'
But the government's policies have come under scrutiny, with some critics saying it breaks European Union rules and puts pressure on the bloc's visa-free travel zone.
EU data shows Spain has now overtaken Germany as the most popular destination for asylum seekers.
That change is partly due to fewer Syrians applying for refuge, following the collapse of the Assad regime.
In Germany alone, overall asylum claims dropped to 9,900 in May, compared to 18,700 during the same month last year.
A major reason for the decline has been the introduction of tough new border controls. Asylum seekers without valid entry papers can now be turned away at the German border.
The policy was one of Merz's key election promises and was introduced as one of the first changes under his new government earlier this year.
But the new checks have sparked controversy across Europe, as they go against the rules of the Schengen area, which makes way for passport-free travel across much of the EU.
Germany is now carrying out border checks with Poland, Switzerland, Austria, France, the Czech Republic, Denmark, and the Netherlands.
On Sunday, Poland said it would extend its own border checks until October. The measures were first brought in this July, following pressure from far-right vigilante groups that began stopping migrants at illegal checkpoints.
Across the EU, illegal migration has become one of the most divisive conversations. In Germany, the hard-right party Alternative for Germany (AfD) continues to enjoy a rise in polling.
The party is known for its hardline stance on migration and has promised mass deportations if it comes to power.
A new poll published showed it's now at 25 percent, just behind Merz's Christian Democratic Union on 27 percent. Support for the chancellor's coalition has dropped to 42 percent.
Germany, Italy and Denmark are all pushing the EU to make it easier to deport people whose asylum claims are rejected.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
We're prepared if protests turn violent, police say ahead of string of anti-migrant demonstrations
Police chiefs have warned they are ready to 'mobilise significant and specialist resources' if unrest breaks out at a string of anti-migrant protests planned at hotels housing asylum seekers. The National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) is working with forces across the country and monitoring intelligence in preparation for a fresh wave of protests on Friday, with demonstrations planned at up to 14 hotels across the country. It comes as the Metropolitan Police is also expected to come under pressure on Saturday when a National March for Palestine is planned in the capital. A separate pro-Palestine Action rally could result in mass arrests with 500 people expected to hold signs saying 'I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action' in defiance of anti-terror laws. Anti-migrant protesters are expected to return to The Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, on Friday, where violence erupted last month after an Ethiopian refugee was charged with sexual assault for allegedly attempting to kiss a 14-year-old girl. Demonstrators are also set to return to the Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf, where a group wearing face masks and carrying smoke bombs made a 'concerted effort' to break in last weekend. Other anti-migrant demonstrations are planned at hotels in Birmingham, Wolverhampton, Leeds and Norwich, among others, in what is being billed as UK-wide protests to 'abolish the asylum system'. Organisers have said the events will be 'locally led peaceful protests ' with no masks and no alcohol in posters shared widely on social media. Ahead of the widespread action, Chief Constable BJ Harrington, chair of the NPCC Operations Coordination Committee, said: 'We have robust and well-tested proactive plans in place, with the ability to mobilise significant and specialist resources, if necessary. "Public order response officers will be supported by investigation teams who will gather evidence and ensure those responsible for any acts of criminality, should they occur, are identified and held to account. 'Policing is not anti-protest, we are anti-crime and we will continue to work with local communities to ensure that they are safe and serious disruption is prevented.' The Police Federation, which represents rank and file officers, has warned that another summer of unrest places forces and officers under strain. 'Public order duties often mean long shifts, cancelled leave, missed family time and real risk,' a spokesman added. 'That takes its toll. This isn't just about numbers; it's about resilience, wellbeing, and a system under strain.' It comes ahead of the possibility of yet more mass arrests in London on Saturday, after the Met vowed to continue its crackdown on those showing support for Palestine Action. Campaign group Defend Our Juries has said more than 500 people are ready to be arrested by holding placards supporting the banned direct-action group in Parliament Square. They have warned their demonstrations will continue until a legal challenge over its proscription as a terror group is heard at the High Court in November. At least 221 people have been arrested across the country under terror laws for supporting Palestine Action since it was banned in July, with ten people charged so far. Despite plans for a large-scale demonstration with the 'intention of placing a strain on the police and the wider criminal justice system', a spokesperson for the Met said they are prepared for 'any eventuality' and anyone showing support for the group should expect to be arrested. Vicki Evans, senior national coordinator for Prevent and Pursue at Counter Terrorism Policing, said that they have 'robust plans' in place to respond to activity in support of Palestine Action. 'At this time, it remains illegal to be a member of or encourage support for the group Palestine Action,' she added. 'This legislation is specific to that group and does not interfere with the right to protest in support of the Palestinian cause. 'Operational plans are in place to ensure this right can be preserved over the coming days with protests expected in several major cities, including London.' Despite pressures on prison capacity, a Ministry of Justice spokesman insisted the system is prepared to 'act quickly' if more cells are needed. Officials will not hesitate to use contingency measures if they are faced with a sudden influx to the prison estate, The Independent understands. This could include activating Operation Early Dawn, which allows defendants to be held in police cells until prison beds become available. 'The swift and coordinated response to last year's unrest shows the criminal justice system is prepared to act quickly if needed to maintain stability and keep the public safe,' the spokesperson added.
Telegraph
22 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Reeves could unlock £30bn with defence loophole in fiscal rules
Rachel Reeves could give herself an extra £30bn headroom next year if she follows Gordon Brown's advice to take increased defence spending outside the fiscal rules. The former prime minister said the Chancellor should follow Germany and declare that 'exceptional' increases in defence spending can be paid for by borrowing more. This is currently banned under Ms Reeves's fiscal rules, which say borrowing should never pay for day-to-day spending, and that debt should fall as a share of the economy by 2030. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) says the defence spending change could give the Government another £30bn next year. However, the economic think tank warned it would increase borrowing costs for households with mortgages. It comes as Ms Reeves comes under huge pressure to figure out how to fill a £50bn hole in the public finances, with tax rises seemingly increasingly likely. Mr Brown told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme that he would like the Chancellor to scrap the two-child benefit cap, raising the money to do so by increasing taxes on the gambling industry. He said another option was to treat a commitment to ramping up defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP by the 2030s as 'exceptional' and as 'outside the fiscal rules'. 'When you come to the fiscal position, there is one thing that has happened over the last few months which has been quite unprecedented: to spend 5 per cent on defence expenditure as we want to spend by 2030,' said the former prime minister. 'But this is a Nato initiative, this is a European initiative, we should be doing this jointly, we should have either jointly issued bonds or a Nato defence fund and we should be sharing the cost across the Continent. 'That should be regarded as something extraordinary and exceptional, outside the fiscal rules and that would create the kind of headroom that Rachel Reeves needs.' Ben Zaranko, associate director of the IFS, said that if defence spending increased from 2.5 per cent of GDP to 3.5 per cent, this would be equivalent to around £30bn. He said: 'If the UK needs to spend a lot more on defence, and it needs to do so quickly, there could be a case for borrowing more in the short term to make that happen, and to smooth the path towards the new higher spending equilibrium. 'Some sort of one-off joint bond issuance with Europe or Nato could be part of that. 'But that extra borrowing wouldn't be free: we would expect it to push up borrowing costs for the Government and households with mortgages. 'And, importantly, more borrowing cannot be a permanent solution. Ultimately, if we need to spend more on defence on a recurring, permanent basis, we will need to either raise more in tax or spend less on something else.'
The Guardian
22 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The unintended consequences of the Online Safety Act
George Billinge says that many age assurance technologies delete their personal data after age has been confirmed, while some providers of virtual private networks (VPNs) sell their data to brokers (Everything the right – and the left – are getting wrong about the Online Safety Act, 1 August). But there is a key difference: we can choose which VPN to use, but the choice of which age assurance technology to use is with the platform. When a platform I use to talk to my friends insisted I verify my age, I wasn't given a choice about which age verification service would get my driving licence. I was expected to trust that the platform had made a good decision with my best interests at heart. That's a pretty big ask. Instead, I elected to sign up for a VPN. I then paid for it with a payment processor of my choice, one with a proven security record. I spent several days considering and comparing the numerous options before selecting one that doesn't keep any data – with audits and court successes to prove it. At every step of the process, I was able to choose who I was trusting with my personal data. I might consider going through the age verification process later – when I get the choice about which service to show my driving licence to. Assuming, of course, that requiring age verification for a group of adults in their 40s to share pet photos and complain about work is ultimately deemed to be within the scope of the legislation. Age verification on porn sites sounds reasonable, but it seems that many platforms are using the Online Safety Act as an excuse to conduct a data grab on a massive scale. We should be wary about who is asking for our ID when the spirit of the law is being so blatantly TrerythSt Austell, Cornwall George Billinge's focus on tech companies such as Facebook unfortunately echoes the flawed thinking behind the Online Safety Act itself. While the act tries to distinguish between large tech companies and smaller independent sites, most of the legislation was only written with Meta and their like in mind. In practice, this means that any site that contains user-submitted content, be that a volunteer-run hobbyist forum or a recipe blog with a comment section, is subject to the same rules (and same fines) as Facebook or X. However, unlike these companies, these smaller sites do not have the teams of lawyers to pore over Ofcom's 1,700-plus pages of guidance, and instead are choosing to either block UK visitors or shut down entirely. Rather than curtailing the power of big tech, as Billinge suggests, the Online Safety Act only entrenches their power further, by making it impossible for anyone else to CoatesBristol
