Asylum seekers who work illegally should be on ‘next plane home'
Migrants whose asylum claims are yet to be processed are not generally allowed to work but they can apply for permission to work if they have been waiting a year or longer for a decision.
The Home Office last month struck an agreement with Deliveroo, Just Eat and Uber Eats to equip these companies with tools to identify patterns of misuse and riders who are not allowed to work in the UK.
The Government will share the locations of asylum hotels as part of the deal.
But the Conservatives have called for illegal working to become a disqualifier in the asylum process, so that anyone caught is barred from becoming a refugee.
'If you come here illegally, take advantage of our asylum system, and then break our laws by illegally working, your asylum claim must be rejected and you should be on the next plane home,' Mrs Badenoch said.
'Under my leadership, the Conservatives will never allow Britain to become a soft touch for those who think they can break the rules and profit from it.'
She also said that illegal working 'rewards illegality, protects perpetrators and mocks hard-working taxpayers.'
Mr Philp said he had seen riders gathering at a hotel housing asylum seekers, which he described as 'an underground courier cartel operating right under this Government's nose'.
He continued: 'Illegal working is a pull factor sold by smugglers as a reward to break in to our country and cross the Channel.
'That is why we are calling for new action: anyone who plays the system should have their status stripped, wages confiscated, and be deported.'
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has previously said that 'illegal working undermines honest business, exploits vulnerable individuals and fuels organised immigration crime'.
She described the Home Office's data-sharing deal as 'decisive action to close loopholes and increase enforcement', and added it sat alongside 'a 50% increase in raids and arrests for illegal working'.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
41 minutes ago
- Spectator
Josef Fritzl caused Badenoch to lose faith
'The testing of your faith produces perseverance' – James 1:2-3. That may be the case, but too much testing can also result in secularism apparently. In an interview with the Beeb, Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch has said that while she was 'never that religious' growing up though would have 'defined myself as a Christian apologist'. She revealed, however, that all this changed in 2008 – due to Josef Fritzl. The Tory leader said that when she discovered what Fritzl had done to his daughter Elizabeth – imprisoning and repeatedly raping her in his basement over 24 years – it changed her attitude to religion forever. Badenoch – whose maternal grandfather was a Methodist minister – stopped believing in God as a result, confiding to the Beeb that: 'I couldn't stop reading this story.' It's not the first time this claim has been made. Last year, Lord Ashcroft published Blue Ambition, in which he documents Badenoch's rise through the ranks of the Conservative party. The Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Badenoch-backer Alex Burghart remarked: That foundation was that God does not test you beyond your endurance. She read about the poor woman who'd been locked in a cellar by her father and how she prayed every day that she'd be rescued. Kemi thought about all the prayers she herself had said, often for trivial and silly things. She told me how she'd have given up every single one of those for the victim not to have experienced the horror that she did. She told me that at that moment, she thought to herself, 'There is no God. If there was, he would have answered her prayers before answering mine.' It's certainly quite the revelation…
New Statesman
42 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Labour's path out of its immigration nightmare
Photo by Justin Tallis/Politics is raging this August. I cannot recall a political battle being played out with such intensity in a summer recess as the one being fought now. The cause of the noisy conflict is connected in a thousand highly charged ways to asylum and migration. Nigel Farage launches various grenades at his weekly press conferences. He knows how to stop the boats. He wants the police to tell us more about the ethnic origins of those they arrest. Robert Jenrick is on the airwaves and complaining about a lack of reliable, transparent data on sex crimes committed by migrants, all while appearing to know the precise degree to which asylum seekers are causing mayhem. Keir Starmer wants the police to be more open. The agreement with France to return some of those on boats is being implemented this week, accompanied by a media blitz. The Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, leaps from the Today programme to Tik Tok to put her case. On one level this amount of political engagement is extraordinary when many politicos are on holiday and a general election is years away. Yet the stakes could not be higher. Reform leads in the polls, an unpopular government desperately needs to be seen as effective, and Jenrick wants to lead a Conservative Party that is currently nowhere to be seen. But urgency goes well beyond politics and polling. The sense of crisis in relation to boats, asylum seekers, crime, the use of asylum hotels and all the rest of the explosive mix has been in place for years. Without resolution the divisions deepen. There have been two crises of globalisation, the financial crash of 2008 and the ongoing movement of people. The first was an abrupt crisis, the latter a continuous and accelerating trend of our age. But in a way that is overlooked – and its lessons overlooked too – the international response to the economic emergency was entirely different to what is happening in relation to the monumental challenge of migration. The crash was met with formidable collective hyperactivity from governments across the globe. There was a co-ordinated fiscal stimulus on an epic scale. Interest rates were cut by various countries at the same time. Even fiscal conservatives such as President Bush in Washington and Germany's Angela Merkel joined in. The coming together was marked by the G20 in London in 2009 when Gordon Brown hosted countries from around the world to focus on the consequences of the crash. By then President Obama had replaced Bush and was a key participant. This week in an interview the former Conservative Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, acknowledged that he had formed a much more positive view on Brown as he reflected on how the then prime minister responded to the events of 2008. That crisis had a long tail, and many of its consequences are still being played out. But the immediate emergency was addressed. There was no global depression as seemed possible at the height of the drama. International co-operation, the recognition that unilateral actions by individual governments would not be enough, had guided the global economy away from the cliff's edge. What Brown described as the first crisis of the global economy was relatively short. This is not the case with the global movement of people. On it goes with every government and populist politician hailing their own meretricious semi-solutions. Send them to Rwanda! But that breaks the law! We'll send them anyway! Send in the navy! They're all criminals and mad people – so we won't take them! Where will they go? That's not our problem! This is a form of international anarchy compared with what followed the crash. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe The course was set ten years ago when the then German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, assumed that EU countries would agree to take in Syrian refugees escaping the hell of the Assad regime. Her thoughts echoed the leaders at the time of the financial crash. If countries co-operated there would be a manageable way of dealing with a humanitarian crisis. Fearing electoral slaughter other governments refused to do so. Ironically most of those governments were defeated anyway partly over the issue of border control. But Merkel's failed attempt at co-ordination triggered the era of largely ineffective unilateral posturing. The crisis has endured much longer than the one sparked by the financial crash. Merkel's instincts were the right ones. Even more than the crash, the movement of people demands co-operation. The crisis is literally around borders between countries. Unilateral action is close to meaningless without involving those that share borders. More fundamentally asylum seekers are not going to disappear however tough one country might be. If they have the means to escape from tyrants, war, famine, climate change they will take them. They may include Trump's criminals and 'mad people', but there will be plenty of others too. If Trump kicks them out of the US they will try to go somewhere else. The reasons for the contrasting response to the two global crises are depressing. With the economic emergency the politics and policy requirements were neatly aligned. Governments could not allow more banks to collapse or to ignore the fragilities of the global economy if they wished to survive. They had to act together. The movement of people is even more challenging as a policy dilemma, but there is much to be gained politically by pretending the solutions are simple and can be applied by mighty individual leaders alone. For Farage or Jenrick to acknowledge complexity would be to deprive them of their appeal, men of action who could deal with a global crisis with a click of their mighty fingers. Trump has openly acknowledged that he won the election last year on his plans for border control. He has never admitted that his ideas were sweeping and simplistic in the global context in which people will keep moving. Such a challenge needs the equivalent of Brown's G20 gathering on a regular basis. There may well be a case for the equivalent of the Rwanda scheme but one that is run on behalf of several countries with international supervision. The arguments for revising the European Convention on Human Rights are strong, but only with all signatories agreeing to amendments out of mutual self-interest. The post-crash assumptions that triggered co-operation between countries are needed urgently now. This is why the agreement between the British administration and French governments this week is more significant than it might seem. The numbers are small but the deal at least represents a recognition that the issue is so demanding countries must work together. It is closer to the mindset that addressed the immediate crisis after the crash. There are bound to be fragilities. Political agreements are dependent on the strength of elected leaders. Few are robust in the current climate of angry disillusionment. But the French deal is not dependent on the authority of President Macron alone. The key figure in the lengthy negotiations with Yvette Cooper was the interior minister, Bruno Retailleau, on the centre-right and from a different political background to Macron. Retailleau is not 'soft' on asylum but sees the difference between macho posturing and working as effectively as possible with other governments to address the problems. As far as the British government sees it, Macron's significant influence was more to secure the backing of the EU, support that was by no means guaranteed. The deal might not last long but also has the potential to be built on rather than collapsing pathetically. The political battle of this August will continue up to the next election. Some of the language and claims will fuel the anger in what Jenrick calls 'the tinderbox', a situation that he threatens to spark every time he mentions it. Beyond the electoral clash the Labour government has a much deeper motive for addressing the challenge of the borders. One of the ideas theoretically propelling the government forward is a belief in an active state. The voters will not share this faith if the state cannot control the borders. The effectiveness of that control depends on states working together. Look at what happened in 2008. Steve Richards presents Rock N Roll Politics at the Edinburgh Festival from Sunday 10 August. [Further reading: The problem with Robert Jenrick's migrant sex crime claims] Related
Telegraph
42 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Revealed: 200 asylum hotel residents charged with crimes this year
At least 200 people living in asylum seeker hotels have been charged with criminal offences this year, without police revealing their immigration status, The Telegraph can disclose. Court records show that 211 people living in the hotels, which are used by the Home Office to house asylum seekers, have been charged with a combined 425 offences. Of these, 109 were violent offences and 44 were sexual offences, including four counts of alleged rape. There were also 63 theft-related offences. The Telegraph analysed court records linked to 50 known asylum hotels. There are more than 200 such sites across the UK used to house those seeking asylum, with still more asylum seekers housed in private rentals. Not every defendant who lists one of these hotels as their place of residence is necessarily an asylum seeker. It has not been possible to establish how many of the alleged offenders identified by The Telegraph are currently applying for asylum in the UK. Nevertheless, The Telegraph's findings offer a sense of the numbers of asylum seekers who may be involved in crime. It came as migrants continued to arrive in the UK after crossing the English Channel on the day a ' one in, one out ' deal with France came into force. Under a pilot scheme that took effect on Wednesday, adults arriving on a small boat can be detained and returned to France for the first time in an effort to limit arrivals. This is in exchange for an approved asylum seeker in France to be brought to the UK under a safe route. On Wednesday, the Conservative Party also set out proposals under which asylum seekers who had been caught working illegally would have their claim automatically rejected and face immediate deportation, either to their country of origin or to a safe third country. All wages gained from the individual working illegally would be seized and used to cover the cost of any asylum support they received. Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, said this week that police should reveal more information about suspects, and that guidance to police was already being looked at. But she added it was an 'operational decision' for forces and the Crown Prosecution Service over what information to release. Police are under pressure to routinely disclose the nationality and migration status of suspects to protect community cohesion and to address a perception among some groups that asylum seekers are carrying out a disproportionate number of offences. On Tuesday, Ms Cooper told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that ministers wanted the public to have more detail about those charged, adding: 'We do think the guidance needs to change.' The Law Commission is expected to issue new guidance in the coming months that would allow nationality and asylum status to be disclosed if it is in the public interest to do so. While the majority of hotels had one or two residents charged with criminal offences, there were some with significantly more. Residents at the Holiday Inn, Empire Way, in Wembley were charged with 28 offences in the time period, while those at the Holiday Inn Express in Oxford and the Derby Midland Hotel had been charged with a combined 24 offences. In Epping, protests broke out last month after reports that an Ethiopian asylum seeker, Hadush Kebatu, had been charged with sexually assaulting a schoolgirl eight days after arriving in the UK. He has denied wrongdoing. Mr Kebatu is not the only Bell Hotel resident to face serious criminal charges. In April, another man appeared before Chelmsford magistrates' court charged with two counts of arson with intent to endanger life. The case was sent to Chelmsford Crown Court for a plea hearing on 5 May. In addition to Mr Kebatu, the review of court reports linked to 50 migrant hotels identified seven other individuals charged with a combined further 11 sex offences against children. These included the alleged rape of a girl aged 13 to 15; six counts of making child abuse material; two counts of attempting sexual communication with a child; an attempt to meet a girl under 16 after grooming; and one count of possessing child abuse material. In another case, a warrant was issued in June for a 24-year-old resident of a Liverpool migrant hotel accused of attempting to engage in sexual communication with a child. The man, who had failed to appear at Sefton magistrates' court on June 20 for his trial, allegedly sent numerous WhatsApp messages to a child under 16. According to court records, he arranged to meet the child, told her he loved her, and expressed desires to 'lay down with her and kiss and cuddle her'. He had previously pleaded not guilty to the charge. Sexual crimes against adults made up 32 of the offences reviewed by The Telegraph. The court records suggest that a significant proportion of these offences are alleged to have been perpetrated against other apparent asylum seekers. In some cases, bail conditions stipulate that the defendant cannot enter into another hotel used by the Home Office as this is where the alleged victim lives. In others, there is a marital relationship between the alleged perpetrator and victim. In one case, before a court in the north of England last month, a resident of a hotel housing asylum seekers was accused of strangling and suffocating his wife. A further 49 hotel residents were charged with 109 violent offences, including 40 counts of assault by beating, 19 of assaulting emergency workers, five of actual bodily harm, 10 of common assault and five of intentional strangulation. In one case, a 24-year-old man living in a Bournemouth hotel allegedly threatened another person with a snooker cue. He was granted unconditional bail and is due to appear at Poole magistrates' court on Aug 6 for a plea hearing. A Kurdish interpreter will attend. In another, heard on May 19, a 24-year-old asylum seeker was handed a suspended sentence at Chelmsford magistrates' court after admitting affray. Magistrates cited Sohaib Atem's 'strong personal mitigation' and 'realistic prospect of rehabilitation' in suspending an eight-month prison term for 12 months. A frequent complaint from residents living near asylum hotels is a rise in theft. Of the 63 theft offences residents in the 50 hotels were alleged to have committed, 14 were burglary offences and 37 were thefts from shops. Among them was Mamukr Kvaratskhelia, 39, who also appeared at Chelmsford magistrates' court in March charged with five counts of theft over a three-month period. He is accused of stealing designer sunglasses and fragrance worth more than £2,000, including £299 Ray-Bans from John Lewis and four pairs of glasses worth £1,165 from a local optician. Twelve hotel residents were charged with criminal damage. In one case, Akhmed Mohammad, formerly housed at Wethersfield asylum centre in Essex, was ordered to pay £380 for damaging a lavatory window in a car park. Mohammed was given until Sept 5 to pay the total amount, with magistrates citing his 'good previous character, low means and circumstances' in their decision. 'Police are in invidious position' Philip Seccombe, the Warwickshire police and crime commissioner, has pressed Ms Cooper for an urgent update on what information forces should give to the public after allegations that authorities tried to cover up alleged offences by asylum seekers. Mr Seccombe called for fresh national guidance to be issued after the charging of two men – reported to be Afghan asylum seekers – prompted accusations that the force withheld information about their immigration status. The pair are accused of raping of a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton. Mr Seccombe said: 'Currently, police forces are in an invidious position when deciding what can and should be disclosed in sensitive cases, given that the national guidance is silent on both the ethnicity and immigration status of suspects. 'It is very easy to criticise and suggest that the balance of disclosure hasn't been correct, but it is much harder to take these decisions on the ground.'
