Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
On a Farage note he is sulking again during PMQs and sitting in the gallery vs the chamber for some reason or other.
Apparently its some form of protest because he doesn't get to ask Starmer any questions at PMQ's. The arrogant, self-important twonk objects to the same rules applying to him as all the other MPs. He thinks it should be him and not Kemi Badanoch at the despatch box. So, yeah... he's sulking like the oversized toddler he is
Interesting spat with my wife last night (we don't often discuss these things...) but her and her family are still in a thrall to GB News which they treat as gospel and us showing footage of apparently 'thousands' of fit young illegal immigrants coming across in boats every day.
I don't really know how to counter this, are there any trustworthy, non-partisan facts out there?
Tell her if we refuse access to fit young immigrants who can work in this country then in 10 years time we will not have a sufficient working population (due to low birth rates) paying taxes and working to keep her parents alive
1) That's great in theory - but the work, education and linguistic profile of asylum seekers and refugees is much lower from those of immigrants selected on the basis that they're needed in the economy (and that includesthe Boriswave of low skill immigrants, so it's not a high bar to begin with). There are obvious and legitimate reasons for that - but the point is that it's not as neat as saying "brilliant, asylum seekers are going to solve the UK's skills and labour gaps".
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migration-to-the-uk-asylum/
2) it's not a conspiracy theory that thousands of asylum seekers are arriving by small boats - although it's not anywhere close to thousands every day, even if some days might see big spikes.
since 2021 there have been between 29,000 and 46,000 small boat arrivals each year, with the highest number of arrivals in 2022 (45,774). Whilst small boat arrivals decreased in 2023, small boat arrivals in the year ending September 2025 (45,659) were 53% more than in the year ending September 2024 and were close to the peak number in 2022.
Small boat arrivers are 40% of all asylum seekers.
71% of irregular arrivers (which includes a few thousand air and ferry arrivers in additional to small boat passengers) are adult males. There are some fairly obviously and legitimate reasons why asylum seekers are going to be predominantly male.
3) Yogurt knitters (including me) have to shake off the collective dismissal of small boat arrivals as being insignificant numerically or financially, or just a distraction exaggerated by racists, or simply a conspiracy theory. It's real, it's a ****load of people every year, and it's 40% of £5.5 billion annually the government pays to (mis-)manage it.
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migration-to-the-uk-asylum/
The numbers arriving on small boats is very small and the vast majority are allowed to stay. The problem is the length of time it takes to process them. No doubt the government is also paying way over the odds for sub standard hotel accomodation that otherwise would probably be shut down.
The numbers arriving on small boats is very small
45,000 people (y/e Sep 2025) is a small amount of people to be arriving in the country on unsafe rubber dinghies crossing one of the world's busiest shipping lanes?
What would you consider a big number?
The problem is the length of time it takes to process them.
Have you ever been involved in submitting or review a claim for asylum?
How do you think the government could speed up processing?
45,000 people (y/e Sep 2025) is a small amount of people to be arriving in the country on unsafe rubber dinghies crossing one of the world's busiest shipping lanes?
What would you consider a big number?
So about 10% of net migration then (2024 figure from the Migration Observatory). The other 90% is a big number.
Yes - when you compare it to a very big number, 45,000 people seems small. The same logic also applies to the £5.5 billion spent per annum - it's much less than is spent on pensions, so what's the problem? The amount of money Michelle Mone stole was very little compared to total COVID costs...the number of people at Johnson's No 10 parties was nothing compared to what was happening in pubs everywhere...a few exec tickets for rhe football given to Starmer is nothing compared to political donations to Reform...
This is exactly the hand-wavey, margin of error, deny-and-dismiss attitude I was speaking about. It's a logical fallacy.
Maybe we could employ more people to do the processing? The quicker you allow asylum seekers to get jobs the sooner they can start paying taxes and get out of the hotels, saving more money. Let's not pretend Reform are concerned for the safety of the people in the boats and they're not bothered about the 4.3 million children in poverty either.
The numbers arriving on boats are what they are because we don’t have a land border to the East/South and we’ve put so much in place to effectively close all other routes in for asylum seekers. Stop people arriving by air, tunnel or ferry… what does that leave?
That and we cancelled lots of arrangements with European countries, that asylums seekers have to pass through, when we left the EU.
How many asylum seekers arrived by small boat 10 years ago?
”We” created this small boat situation, with our increased “controls”, and our decision not to cooperate fully with other countries.
And look who’s ready to make then most political capital out of it…
Maybe we could employ more people to do the processing? The quicker you allow asylum seekers to get jobs the sooner they can start paying taxes and get out of the hotels, saving more money. Let's not pretend Reform are concerned for the safety of the people in the boats and they're not bothered about the 4.3 million children in poverty either.
That's always been my position, broadly speaking. Keeping people in limbo just costs the public purse and annoys people, granted for different reasons, but get them bloody processed quickly, and they either get booted out or they can start working and paying tax.
I know thats kind of a simplistic way of loking at it, but fundamentally keeping them housed in crappy accomodation and in limbo helps no one.. they get depressed and/or start working in the black market, the gammons rage, and the public as a whole pays for the whole fiasco.
Governments don't want/need to solve the small boat problem because it distracts from all their other policy failures.
They'd sooner join Farage with the fake outrage than remove the one thing that sustains him and the far right.
How do you think the government could speed up processing?
Quite easily I would imagine. Give me a week to review it in person and I will speed it up.
The process is here --> https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum and the first thing to do is make quicker decisions on eligibility and have no comeback from it, what is decided is decided.
However, the problem is clearly getting the person back to the country they have fled. That is a much harder thing to fix and takes a lot of work and deals with the countries involved which would need to start with the top ten.
make quicker decisions on eligibility and have no comeback from it,
Not a believer in due process and the right to impartial decison-making then?
Not a believer in due process and the right to impartial decison-making then?
Nope. They are not being tried in court, they have just come half way across the world to somewhere they fancy living. If incorrect decisions are made it is not a big deal. Just get on with making them so people are not in hotels for 18 months.
How do you think the government could speed up processing?
Quite easily I would imagine. Give me a week to review it in person and I will speed it up.
This is the Dunning-Kruger phenomenon in full effect. "I would imagine" doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Applicant is a 33 year old Afghan Hazara man. He is applying for asylum based on well-founded fear of persecution based on political views (formerly worked as a drver for US corporation contracted by US military, allowed daughters to be educated) and religious views (Hazara Shia). Says he and his family have already been robbed and assaulted by Taliban groups in his town. Says he was unable to claim asylum in ****stan or the Netherlands, through which he transited en route to the UK.
Please verify all information and give me a written, reasoned decision by next Thursday 9am. Should be quite easy, I imagine. "Just get on with it".
If incorrect decisions are made it is not a big deal.
No big deal to give an ineligible person a lifetime of residence and social security in the UK? No big deal to deport an eligible person back to the government that is putting them in reasonable fear of their life?
They are not being tried in court, they have just come half way across the world to somewhere they fancy living.
> I don't have the words <
Just get on with making them so people are not in hotels for 18 months.
Absolutely. Which needs resources and people, not snap decisions and the removal of appeal processes.
Please verify all information and give me a written, reasoned decision by next Thursday 9am. Should be quite easy, I imagine. "Just get on with it".
Where did I say I will reduce it from 18 months to 1 week? I have spent 30 years simplifying processes, most people tend to overthink and overcomplicate things in all aspects of their lives.
Says he was unable to claim asylum in ****stan or the Netherlands, through which he transited en route to the UK.
Why not?
Says he was unable to claim asylum in ****stan or the Netherlands, through which he transited en route to the UK.
Why not?
That's for you to determine the facts about, then apply the law and HMG policy in a written, lawful decision that can survive administrative and judicial review. Hurry up!
Not when I change the process it won't be. They need to prove why they were unable to claim and if they can't then I don't believe they tried to claim and off they go. Remember, they were safely out of the country they are fleeing from at this point so could have taken the time in ****stan or the Netherlands to get their claim submitted.
See how easy it is.
See how easy it is.
You have to get here to claim asylum, you can't do so from countries on your route here. That's not down to the asylum seeker, it's how the system has been made to "work" by the UK government.
Quick question:
What would make you leave your home, culture, family, friends, property and use a small boat to cross the channel? A free iPad? Doubt it.
Not when I change the process it won't be. They need to prove why they were unable to claim and if they can't then I don't believe they tried to claim and off they go...
You've, err, changed the process to match what the rules already are.
In broad terms, asylum claims may be declared inadmissible and not substantively considered in the UK, if the claimant was previously present in or had another connection to a safe third country, where they claimed asylum, or could reasonably be expected to have done so (or, for claims made before 28 June 2022, where exceptional circumstances didn’t prevent such a claim), provided there is a reasonable prospect of removing them in a reasonable time to a safe third country.
See what happens when you come in with big opinions on a topic you know nothing about (and aren't interested to learn about)?
...I don't believe...
That doesn't sound open to abuse, at all, does it.
See how easy it is.
Have you thought that possibly it might be too easy?
Could you clarify what you mean by "so could have taken the time in ****stan or the Netherlands to get their claim submitted. "? is that a claim to the UK or???
Why would you want to claim in the UK over the Netherlands? There must be a reason 45k people make the crossing.
Why would you want to claim in the Netherlands over the UK? There must be a reason 30k people apply for asylum there.
People have reasons innit?
30k people apply for asylum there.
Less than a third of those applying to the UK and only 2/3 of the number crossing in small boats. Why is the UK so appealing? It can't be the language as the majority of Dutch speak English.
It is easier to make a living in the uk undetected.
In most european countries, there are more paper work needed. We have id cards etc...
Less than a third of those applying to the UK
We are a much, much bigger country.
Hell, if I thought it would work I'd apply for asylum there...
For what purpose? You know it wouldn’t work, because you’re not fleeing a country like Syria, are you.
NL population: 18,044,027
NL asylum applications received pa: 32,000 (2024)
NL asylum applications per million pop: 563
UK population: 69,281,437
UK asylum applications received pa: 108,138
UK asylum applications per million pop: 640
Interestingly, asylum applications in the NL have fallen by about half in the last couple of years. I have no idea why: https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2025/45/fewer-asylum-requests-in-first-three-quarters-of-2025
Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom
https://ecre.org/aida-country-report-on-the-netherlands-update-on-2024/
So pretty much the same, scaled by population.
Now do it per a square mile.
Asylum seekers per square mile is self-evidently meaningless metric. If asylum seekers were looking for territory, they'd have Russia, Algeria, Libya, Ukraine, Saudi Arabia as their end destinations. UK-based asylum seekers make their way to Rannoch Moor and would never go to London. The exact opposite is happening.
But you're free to work it out yourself if you want.
To Chris2lou's lack of ID and paperwork and thriving black economy I'll add the attraction of English, well established gheto communities of all sorts of origins. And believe it or not a lack of racism in the places they'll settle. Even in fiercely racist areas Brits are rarely overtly racist (though sadly this is changing) even if they feel and are prepared to vote that way, so the daily experience isn't oppressive. Farage was the exception in his school. When the Ugandan Asians arrived in my midlands secondary mod in the 70s they had plenty of pupils looking out for them and just a couple prepared to get racist.
Britain benefits from more pull factors than any other place I can think of. The local refugees in Pau might have nice weather to hang around the park but no-one will employ them because it's far too risky, they're isolated in their little group, women aren't interested in them and despite speaking two or three languages including English they're having to learn another one - a neighbour is one of the volunteers helping them. If I were them I'd take a chance on a boat if I could raise the cash.
See what happens when you come in with big opinions on a topic you know nothing about (and aren't interested to learn about)?
I am just going along with your example. The person went through ****stan and the Netherlands before getting to the UK but you stated they couldn't claim asylum in those countries for some reason. In your follow up you stated it was my job to get any proof/documentation etc,. on that but in my process it is their responsibility to prove that they applied for asylum in those countries and if they didn't then get lost (which as you point out I can already do) so your example is a bit shit isn't it.
And it is hardly a "big opinion" to suggest a process that can take two years at times could not be improved drastically given a remit to change whatever I like.
they're having to learn another one - a neighbour is one of the volunteers helping them
Language is a big issue. But remember, France has twice as many people seeking asylum as the UK (as you’d expect). What we need to counter is the idea that people coming to the UK to seek asylum are doing so because other countries aren’t getting, and accepting, asylum seekers. We just need to do our little (and it is little when you look at how many people are fleeing their countries in total) bit here in the UK. Forcing asylum seekers to use small boats to get here to do so is just the result of our geography and shutting down all other routes.
Yes, we need to do our little bit but we need to do it a lot faster for everyone's benefit. Pretty much everything can be done more quickly if the intent is there.
Even in fiercely racist areas Brits are rarely overtly racist
Really? That ship sailed on June 24th 2016
See what happens when you come in with big opinions on a topic you know nothing about (and aren't interested to learn about)?
I am just going along with your example. The person went through ****stan and the Netherlands before getting to the UK but you stated they couldn't claim asylum in those countries for some reason. In your follow up you stated it was my job to get any proof/documentation etc,. on that but in my process it is their responsibility to prove that they applied for asylum in those countries and if they didn't then get lost (which as you point out I can already do) so your example is a bit shit isn't it.
No, it just proves that you're inattentive. You were informed "Says he was unable to claim asylum in ****stan or the Netherlands, through which he transited en route to the UK", and that it was your job to determine the facts. Those are different things to relying on the Applicant's statement or gathering fresh facts - and these are both distinctions that are important in policy and law, and will get your determination binned if you mess it up.
Face it, you've looked at your experience of 30 years of writing process documents in engineering or whatever, decided everyone else is an idiot and only you can see clearly, waded into an area you know (and evidently care) nothing about with big opinions...and made yourself look like a bit of a numpty. The only saving grace is that is all happened online instead of you being appointed like Dom Cummings, who was similar Billy Big Bollocks energy.
Impolitecameraaction still incapable of dicussing things with people xithout insulting them I see.
Shut it, big ears
Animal farm, Orwell... .
If you want to annoy him, tonight's a good night to make a donation to his least favourite 'water taxi service'
Tonight because it's the anniversary of the Solomon Browne / Penlee lifeboat tragedy. I had chance to visit the memorial garden earlier this year, I was aware of the tragedy but actually learning more about it, and listening to the BBC documentary is just - well, I defy anyone to not have a lump in their throat as the Falmouth coastguard keeps calling into the sudden radio silence (about 28 mins on this Sounds documentary)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0012plp
The Christmas lights will go out in a short while, and then as they did in 1981, will come back on again because those that live and perish on the sea know that life goes.
https://www.aspects-holidays.co.uk/webcams/mousehole