Woke charities undermine Britain's borders
Eight hundred million. That's the number of people worldwide with a potential claim to asylum in Western countries, once you include the 120 million who have been forcibly displaced, existing refugees, those in modern slavery and the millions who, as per the Refugee Convention, have a 'well founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion'.
Our system is struggling to cope with an annual inflow of 100,000. The Institute for Public Policy Research think tank believes the cost of housing and supporting the average asylum-seeker has reached £41,000 per person per year. The majority of these would-be refugees now cross the Channel in flimsy, crammed dinghies. On the night of November 23 2021, one of these vessels capsized. Tragically, 27 drowned.
As this was the deadliest day on record, and because our gutless politicians love to kick a can down the road, an inquiry into the circumstances surrounding these fatalities was announced in 2023. This followed the publication of a report by the Marine Accident Investigation Branch, which itself recognised that the 'operational picture' in the Channel had changed significantly since the tragedy. So why was the Cranston Inquiry, which launched this week, ever signed off?
Already, the British taxpayer has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on this exercise. In 2023-24 alone, it cost us £500,000. Yet it's almost guaranteed to tell us nothing we don't already know, while adding to the pressure for liberalisation of our asylum arrangements, and quite likely for compensation to survivors and relatives.
The calls for more money to patrol our waters will grow shriller – even though by mid-2022 the Ministry of Defence was putting the cost at £34,000 a day (which sounds like an underestimate). That's nearly £12.5 million a year before inflation, on top of the £470 million we are paying the French over three years to supposedly try to control migration.
If we must have an inquiry, let it add the role played by taxpayer-funded refugee organisations to its terms of reference. Let it scrutinise the charities which oppose government efforts to clamp down on illegal migration and lobby for measures which are tantamount to open borders, and do so on the public purse.
Responding to deaths in the Channel, the Refugee Council published a briefing paper recommending we open up more safe and legal routes. The charity received more than £10 million from the government in 2023-24, has over 300 staff, lists among its achievements 'successfully challenging' the state's efforts to identify the age of young people seeking asylum, and boasts of its role as 'a leading voice' opposed to the Rwanda scheme.
Then there's Refugee Action, which receives more thasn £5 million in government contracts. It 'helps overturn asylum rulings by providing expert legal advice' while campaigning for 'policy changes to improve the asylum system overall'. This indirectly encourages migrants to risk their lives and those of their children – something which is rarely acknowledged.
Opening up legal routes, as these organisations endlessly demand, only eliminates the boats if everyone who applies is admitted. Otherwise, there's still an incentive to make the crossing. It's a view people are free to argue, but not one the taxpayer should be funding these pressure groups to advance, given the obvious risks associated with allowing migrants into the country at levels we cannot conceivably integrate.
Issa Mohamed Omar was one of the survivors on November 24 2021. His testimony to the Cranston Inquiry this week was harrowing. But one line stood out. 'The smugglers told us that we would be accepted as asylum seekers once we entered British waters,' he said. 'This was always my understanding and intention'. So long as this is the understanding and the intention, people will choose to journey from the safety of Northern France.
Indeed, over 600 people crossed the Channel on Monday, the highest number so far this year. For all Keir's tough talk of smashing gangs, there are only two ways to 'stop the boats': make clear that people who gamble with their lives won't gain from it, or else let everyone in. When the EU came to an agreement with Turkey in 2016 that irregular migrants travelling to Greece would be immediately returned, Aegean crossings fell from over 800,000 in 2015 to less than 50,000 in 2017. Deterrence works. There's no need for an open borders experiment.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
NATO Ally 'Can't Rely' Solely on US for Protection, Ex-Trump Adviser Warns
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The U.S. can no longer be considered a reliable ally for Britain and the other NATO members, former Russia adviser to President Donald Trump Fiona Hill said in a recent interview with British newspaper The Guardian. "We're in pretty big trouble," the American-British national said during her interview about the U.K.'s vulnerable geopolitical situation. "We can't rely exclusively on anyone anymore," she said, casting doubt on Trump's determination to tackle Vladimir Putin's aggressive expansion ambitions in Europe. Why It Matters Hill's comments reflect widespread concerns in Europe that the U.S. is no longer the reliable ally it used to be for the continent, and European nations need to quickly get ready to fend for themselves, boosting military spending, forging new alliances or strengthening existing ones. Earlier this week, most NATO members voted to endorse Trump's demand for them to increase their defense spending to 5 percent of their GDP. But this goal might be hard to reach: already in 2023, NATO leaders agreed to spend at least 2 percent of their GDP on national defense budgets, but 22 of the 32 member states are still falling short. During #DefMin, NATO Defence Ministers agreed an ambitious new set of capability targets to build a stronger, fairer, more lethal Alliance, and ensure warfighting readiness for years to come Tap to learn more ↓ — NATO (@NATO) June 5, 2025 What To Know While Hill was born in England, she lived and worked in the U.S. for 30 years, ascending to the role of the White House's chief adviser on Russia during Trump's first administration. Her role was cut short in the summer of 2019, when she was fired by the president, who later accused her of being "terrible at her job." The dismissal followed Hill's testimony at Trump's impeachment trial, where she spoke of Russian meddling at the heart of the White House. Since then, Hill has spoken repeatedly of Trump's admitted admiration for Putin, criticizing his soft approach to the Russian strongman. Fiona Hill, former senior director for Europe and Russia at the National Security Council, on February 2, 2022, on Capitol Hill in Washington D.C. Fiona Hill, former senior director for Europe and Russia at the National Security Council, on February 2, 2022, on Capitol Hill in Washington said that Putin had "declared war on the West" through his invasion of Ukraine, which the Kremlin leader presented to his counterparts in China, North Korea and Iran as "part of a proxy war with the United States." But Trump, who has long admired the Russian president, appears unwilling to take a strong stance against him and instead "wants to have a separate relationship with Putin to do arms-control agreements and also business that will probably enrich their entourage further," Hill told The Guardian. While Trump has recently shown frustration with Putin, who has largely ignored or stalled on the U.S. president's calls for an end to the invasion of Ukraine, he has remained reluctant to impose further sanctions on Moscow—a type of punishment that European leaders have instead embraced. In a recent interview with The Telegraph, Hill said: "If you offer the Russians a carrot, they just eat it, or they take it and hit you over the head with it." What People Are Saying European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in March: "If Europe wants to avoid war, Europe must get ready for war. By 2030, Europe must have a strong European defense posture." Though she recently insisted that the U.S. was still "an ally," in April she said: "The West as we knew it no longer exists." France's President Emmanuel Macron, who has long advocated for the creation of an EU army and boosting military spending, said in January: "What will we do in Europe tomorrow if our American ally withdraws its warships from the Mediterranean? If they send their fighter jets from the Atlantic to the Pacific?" Earlier this week, President Donald Trump described a phone call with Putin as a "good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate peace." During the phone call, he said, Putin said "he will have to respond to the recent [Ukrainian] attack on the airfields," Trump wrote on social media, without adding whether he tried to sway the Russian leader from doing so. On June 1, Kyiv launched coordinated, long-range strikes on multiple Russian airbases thousands of miles from Ukraine which took out more than a third of Moscow's strategic cruise missile carriers. What Happens Next According to Hill, Putin sees the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a way toward establishing the country's dominance as a "military power in all of Europe." And the U.S., she warned, cannot be relied on at the moment to help Europe fight off this growing threat. When it comes to defense, she said, the U.K.—and the other NATO members—should not rely on the military umbrella of Washington as they did during the Cold War, "not in the way we did before." A recent survey by the European Council on Foreign Relations found that Europeans are increasingly losing confidence in the U.S. from a geopolitical perspective. A majority, according to the study released in February, considered the U.S. a "necessary partner" rather than "an ally."

an hour ago
Iranian rapper Tataloo once supported a hard-line presidential candidate. Now he faces execution
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates -- The tattoos covering Iranian rapper Tataloo's face stand out against the gray prison uniform the 37-year-old now wears as he awaits execution, his own rise and fall tracing the chaos of the last decade of Iranian politics. Tataloo, whose full name is Amir Hossein Maghsoudloo, faces a death sentence after being convicted on charges of 'insulting Islamic sanctities.' It's a far cry from when he once supported a hard-line Iranian presidential candidate. Tataloo's music became popular among the Islamic Republic's youth, as it challenged Iran's theocracy at a time when opposition to the country's government was splintered and largely leaderless. The rapper's lyrics became increasingly political after the 2022 death of Mahsa Amini and the subsequent wave of nationwide protests. He also appeared in music videos which criticized the authorities. 'When you show your face in a music video, you are saying, 'Hey, I'm here, and I don't care about your restrictions,'' said Ali Hamedani, a former BBC journalist who interviewed the rapper in 2005. 'That was brave.' The Iranian Supreme Court last month upheld his death sentence. 'This ruling has now been confirmed and is ready for execution,' judiciary spokesman Asghar Jahangir told reporters at a press conference last month. Activists have decried his looming execution and expressed concern for his safety after he reportedly tried to kill himself in prison. Tataloo began his music career in 2003 as part of an underground genre of Iranian music that combines Western styles of rap, rhythm-and-blues and rock with Farsi lyrics. His first album, released in 2011, polarized audiences, though he never played publicly in Iran, where its Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance controls all concerts. Tataloo appeared in a 2015 music video backing Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard and Tehran's nuclear program, which long has been targeted by the West over fears it could allow the Islamic Republic to develop an atomic bomb. While he never discussed the motivation behind this, it appeared that the rapper had hoped to win favor with the theocracy or perhaps have a travel ban against him lifted. In the video for 'Energy Hasteei," or 'Nuclear Energy,' Tataloo sings a power ballad in front of rifle-wielding guardsmen and later aboard the Iranian frigate Damavand in the Caspian Sea. The ship later sank during a storm in 2018. 'This is our absolute right: To have an armed Persian Gulf,' Tataloo sang. Tataloo even issued an endorsement for hard-liner Ebrahim Raisi in 2017. That year, the two sat for a televised appearance as part of Raisi's failed presidential campaign against the relative moderate Hassan Rouhani. Raisi later won the presidency in 2021, but was killed in a helicopter crash in 2024. In 2018, Tataloo — who faced legal problems in Iran — was allowed to leave the country for Turkey, where many Persian singers and performers stage lucrative concerts. Tataloo hosted live video sessions as he rose to fame on social media, where he became well-known for his tattoos covering his face and body. Among them are an Iranian flag and an image of his mother next to a key and heart. Instagram deactivated his account in 2020 after he called for underage girls to join his 'team' for sex. He also acknowledged taking drugs. 'Despite being a controversial rapper, Tataloo has quite the fanbase in Iran, known as 'Tatalities,'' said Holly Dagres, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near-East Policy. 'Over the years, they've flooded social media with messages of solidarity for him and even campaigned for the rapper's release in the past when he was detained on separate charges.' Tataloo's rebellious music struck a chord with disenfranchised young people in Iran as they struggled to find work, get married and start their adult lives. He also increasingly challenged Iran's theocracy in his lyrics, particularly after the death of Amini following her arrest over allegedly not wearing the hijab to the liking of authorities. His collaboration 'Enghelab Solh" — 'Peace Revolution' in Farsi — called out Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei by name. 'We don't want tear gas, because there are tears in everyone's eyes,' he rapped. But the music stopped for Tataloo in late 2023. He was deported from Turkey after his passport had expired, and was immediately taken into custody upon arrival to Iran. Tehran's Criminal Court initially handed Tataloo a five-year sentence for blasphemy. Iran's Supreme Court threw out the decision and sent his case to another court, which sentenced him to death in January. The rapper already faced ten years in prison for a string of separate convictions, including promoting prostitution and moral corruption. 'Tataloo is at serious risk of execution,' Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, the director of advocacy group Iran Human Rights, said in a statement. 'The international community, artists and the public must act to stop his execution.' Tataloo earlier expressed remorse at a trial. 'I have certainly made mistakes, and many of my actions were wrong,' he said, according to the state-owned Jam-e Jam daily newspaper. 'I apologize for the mistakes I made.' Tataloo married while on death row, his uncle said. Last month, Tataloo reportedly attempted to kill himself, but survived. His death sentence comes at a politically fraught moment for Iran as the country is at it's 'most isolated,' said Abbas Milani, an Iran expert at Stanford University. The Islamic Republic is 'desperately trying to see whether it can arrive at a deal with the U.S. on its nuclear program and have the sanctions lifted,' he said. Drawing the ire of Tataloo's fans is 'one headache they don't need,' he added. ___ EDITOR'S NOTE — This story includes discussion of suicide. If you or someone you know needs help, the national suicide and crisis lifeline in the U.S. is available by calling or texting 988. There is also an online chat at ___


Indianapolis Star
3 hours ago
- Indianapolis Star
GOP's health care plan: We're all going to die, so whatever
If death and taxes are the only certainties, Joni Ernst is here to cut one and fast-track the other. 'We all are going to die," she said. You might think that's a line from a nihilistic French play. Or something a teenage goth said in Hot Topic. Or an epiphany from your stoner college roommate after he watched Interstellar at 3 a.m. But that was actually the Iowa Senator's God-honest response to concerns that slashing Medicaid to achieve President Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' would lead to more preventable deaths. The full exchange at a May 30 town hall included one audience member shouting at the stage, 'People will die!' And Ernst responding, 'People are not — well, we all are going to die, so for heaven's sake.' That's not a health care policy — that's a horoscope for the terminally screwed. As you can imagine, the internet didn't love it, because losing your health should not trigger the equivalent of a shrug emoji from someone elected to serve the public good. But rather than walking it back, Ernst leaned in, filming a mock apology in a graveyard because nothing says, 'I care about your future,' like filming next to people who don't have one. Ernst's comments aren't just philosophical musings. She's justifying policy choices that cause real harm. If passed, this bill would, according to the Congressional Budget Office, remove health coverage for up to 7.6 million Americans. That's not just 'we all die someday' territory. That's 'some people will die soon and needlessly.' What makes this even more galling is that the people pushing these cuts have access to high-quality, taxpayer-subsidized healthcare. Congress gets the AAA, platinum, concierge-level government plan. Meanwhile, millions of Americans are told to try their luck with essential oils or YouTube acupuncture tutorials. Honestly, it felt more like performance art than policy: 'Sorry about your grandma getting kicked out of her assisted living facility. Please enjoy this scenic view of her future! LOL!' We're not asking you to defeat death, senator. Death is both inevitable and bipartisan. But there is a broad chasm between dying peacefully at 85 and dying in your 40's because your Medicaid plan disappeared and your GoFundMe didn't meet its goal. Fundamentally, governing is about priorities. A budget is a moral document. When a lawmaker tells you 'we're all going to die' in response to a policy choice, they're telling you 'I've made peace with your suffering as collateral damage.' And if a U.S. Senator can stand in a cemetery and joke about it, you have to wonder — who do our federal legislators think those graves are for? This isn't just about one comment or one bill. It's about a mindset that treats healthcare as a luxury rather than a right. If death is inevitable, then access to healthcare you can afford is what helps determine how long you have, how comfortably you live, and whether you get to watch your kids grow up. Healthcare isn't about escaping death. It's about dignity and quality of life while we are here. Ernst got one thing right: death will come for us all. But leadership, real leadership, is about helping people live as long and as well as they can before that day comes. You want to make jokes, Senator? Fine. But if your punchline is 'You're all going to die anyway,' don't be surprised when your constituents realize the joke's on them.