Number of small-boat migrants to reach Britain under Labour government is set to hit 50,000 - as 435 arrive on Saturday alone
The Home Office confirmed 435 arrived on Saturday – bringing the total since the General Election to 49,516.
Hundreds more arrived at Dover on Sunday, with official figures due to be released on Monday.
It means more than 1,000 migrants have come to the UK since the Government's 'one in, one out' deal with France became operational last Wednesday.
The 50,000 milestone is likely to be hit in the coming days amid ideal weather conditions for crossing the Channel.
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'Labour cancelled the Rwanda deterrent plan before it started with no replacement and numbers have surged.
'This year so far has been the worst in history for illegal immigrants crossing the Channel. Labour has lost of control of our borders. Every illegal immigrant needs to be removed immediately upon arrival. But this government is too weak to do that.'
On Sunday, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage posted a video which showed migrants chanting 'Allahu Akbar' as they apparently crossed the English Channel.
He said: 'This is a national security emergency. Allowing these men to invade our country will not end well.' Last week, Mr Philp accused Sir Keir Starmer of 'gaslighting the British public' and making 'grossly exaggerated' claims over the new migrant deal.
He said the returns agreement would see only 6 per cent of migrants sent back. The deal is also due to last just ten months.
Speaking about the first detentions under the deal, the Prime Minister warned migrants: 'If you break the law to enter this country, you will face being sent back.'
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said 'every migrant' will be 'throwing away their money if they get into a small boat'.
Since the start of this year, a record 26,274 migrants have arrived – up 49 per cent on the same period last year.
Protests against illegal migrants continued across the country at the weekend. Demonstrators gathered outside hotels in Bristol and near Gatwick, West Sussex, which are being used to house asylum seekers.
There was also a rally near two migrant hotels in Bournemouth.
In a separate development, 13 migrants were rescued in northern France after locking themselves inside a refrigerated lorry heading for the UK on Saturday.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
Starmer and Zelensky say Alaska talks present a ‘viable chance' for Ukraine
UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met in Downing Street on Thursday, affirming their 'strong resolve' to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine. It comes ahead of a scheduled meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday to discuss a potential ceasefire in Ukraine. Downing Street said both Sir Keir and Mr Zelensky agreed that the Alaska talks 'present a viable chance to make progress as long as [Mr] Putin takes action to prove he is serious about peace'. However, there are concerns that the US and Russia might attempt to decide the war's conclusion without Ukraine's direct participation. Mr Trump has warned of "severe consequences" if the Russian leader does not agree to peace, while Mr Putin has hinted at discussions on nuclear arms control.
The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
What a cheek! The US is in no position to lecture us about free speech
In the spirit of free speech, I suppose we have to allow other countries to express their concerns about life in Britain, even though it's none of their business and is diplomatic bad manners. However, it is impudent of the Trump administration, currently engaged in dismantling the constitution of the United States, to issue a patronising school report on the state of human rights in the United Kingdom. Every so often, the Americans, whose system of laws owes much to the British, like to tell us we're no longer a free people. 'Sod off' is the instinctive and succinct British reaction to such treatment, but I shall endeavour to elaborate. In the document, produced by the US State Department, Britain is chastised for a human rights scene that has apparently 'worsened' over the past year. From the lofty moral heights occupied by Donald Trump, 'specific areas of concern" are raised, including restrictions on political speech deemed "hateful" or "offensive". The Americans are especially censorious about the way the government responded to the horrendous murder of three children in Southport last year, and the subsequent violence. This constituted, or so we are lectured, an "especially grievous example of government censorship". The UK is thus ticked off: 'Censorship of ordinary Britons was increasingly routine, often targeted at political speech". Bloomin' cheek! What the Americans don't like is that we have laws against inciting racial, religious and certain other types of hatred. Well, first, tough. That's how we prefer to run things to promote a civilised multicultural society. Second, they might do well to consider our way, which is not to pretend that there is ever any such thing as 'absolute' free speech. Encouraging people to burn down a hotel of refugees is not, in Britain, a price worth paying for 'liberty'. Although never stated explicitly, it seems that the State Department is upset about the now totemic case of Lucy Connolly, colloquially regarded in both the UK and the US as 'locking someone up for a tweet'. Connolly was sentenced to 31 months' incarceration under laws consistent with international human rights obligations, which obviously include the protection of free speech. It was more than one message on social media that landed Connolly in the dock, the most famous of which went as follows: 'Mass deportation now. Set fire to all the f***ing hotels full of the bastards for all I care. While you're at it, take the treacherous government and politicians with them. I feel physically sick knowing what these families will now have to endure. If that makes me racist, so be it.' It was up for three hours and read 310,000 times so not trivial. But there's more. According to the recent court of appeal review of her case, and before the Southport attacks, Connolly posted a response to a video which had been shared online by the far-right activist Tommy Robinson, real name Stephen Laxley-Lennon, showing a black male being tackled to the ground for allegedly masturbating in public. She wrote: 'Somalian, I guess. Loads of them', with a vomiting emoji. On 3 August 2024, five days after the attacks, Connolly posted a further message in response to an anti-racism protest in Manchester: 'Oh good. I take it they will all be in line to sign up to house an illegal boat invader then. Oh sorry, refugee. Maybe sign a waiver to say they don't mind if it's one of their family that gets attacked, butchered, raped etc, by unvetted criminals. Not all heroes wear capes.' Two days later, Connolly sent a WhatsApp message to a friend saying: 'The raging tweet about burning down hotels has bit me on the arse lol.' She went on to say later that, if she got arrested, she would 'play the mental health card'. So that is some extra background on the case of Lucy Connolly, and nor should we forget that she was sending inflammatory messages during the worst civil disorder in years. Of course, the great irony about the 2024 riots is that they were caused by what you might call 'too much free speech'. The entirely false rumour promoted on social media was that the killer, Axel Rudakubana, was a Muslim asylum seeker who had virtually just got off a boat before setting off to commit a terrorist offence. None of that was true, but it was stated near enough as fact by people 'just asking questions' with no official interference or 'censorship' whatsoever in free speech Britain. There was no 'cover-up' of the perpetrator's status because Rudakubana was born in Britain. At his trial, it was established that his massacre was not motivated by any political, religious or racial motive but by an obsession with sadistic violence. Had this propaganda about Rudakubana been banned, a great deal of needless anger, distress, and damage would have been avoided. And what of America? Where you can be refused entry or deported for your political views, and without due process, violations of the ancient rule of habeas corpus. Where the president rules by decree and can attempt to strike out the birthright clause in the Constitution by executive order? Where the Supreme Court is packed with sympathetic judges who give him immunity from prosecution, and the president ignores court orders in any case. A land where there is no human rights legislation, no international commitments to the rights of man, where the media is cowed and the universities intimidated? Where the president dictates what is shown in museums, how history is taught and where the historic struggles of people of colour are disparaged as woke nonsense. A country where gerrymandering is a national sport. Where science is being abolished and statisticians sacked for reporting bad news. America is in a state of incipient authoritarian rule and is in no position to criticise anyone about freedom and liberty. The British should tell them all that, but we're too polite.
Glasgow Times
5 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Council's bid to block hotel housing asylum seekers to be heard on Friday
Epping Forest District Council said on Tuesday that it had filed documents at the High Court requesting an interim injunction stopping migrants from being housed at the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex. It follows a series of protests in recent weeks outside the hotel, after an asylum seeker was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl. PA news agency understands the injunction bid is due to be heard on Friday by Mr Justice Eyre at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, with the case involving the council and Somani Hotels Ltd. The council said in a statement on Tuesday that it had seen 'unprecedented levels of protest and disruption' in connection with asylum seeker accommodation. It continued that it had issued the injunction bid because of the 'clear risk of further escalating community tensions and urgency of the need for the present situation to be brought under control'. Councillors had voted unanimously last month to call on the Home Office to close the hotel, the council added. Chris Whitbread, leader of the council, said the situation 'cannot go on' but the Government 'is not listening'. He said: 'The use by the Home Office of the premises for asylum seekers poses a clear risk of further escalating community tensions already at a high, and the risk of irreparable harm to the local community. 'This will only increase with the start of the new school year. 'In our view, placing asylum seekers in the Bell Hotel is a clear breach of planning permission. It is not in use as a hotel, and it doesn't function as a hotel. Protesters outside the Bell Hotel in Epping (Yui Mok/PA) 'The establishment of a centre to accommodate asylum seekers in this particular location, in close proximity to five schools, a residential care home, and the shops and amenities of the market town of Epping, is not appropriate in planning terms.' The protests outside the hotel came after a man who was staying at the hotel, Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, 38, was charged with sexual assault. Kebatu, who is accused of attempting to kiss a 14-year-old girl, denies the charges and will stand trial this month. A second man who resides at the hotel, Syrian national Mohammed Sharwarq, 32, has separately been charged with seven offences. At a hearing at Chelmsford Magistrates' Court on Wednesday, he denied a count of sexual assault after being alleged to have kissed a man on the neck. He indicated guilty pleas to a further two counts of common assault and four of assault by beating, with all of the offences said to have taken place at the hotel between July 25 and August 12. He was remanded in custody until a trial at the same court next month. Six men charged in relation to disorder outside the hotel will also appear in court next week.
