Forum Topic

Home Office Wins Appeal Over Migrant Hotel Closure

Surprise surprise.  Not! 🤬

Sue Hammond ● 5d79 Comments

So you've looked at the Court Reports and ascertained that the majority of 'criminals, rapists and gougers' are immigrants.  I think you're wrong, it is the other way around and they are being used as scapegoats by our restless native wrongdoers.

Philippa Bond ● 2d

Mr Hawkes. As I said to Ed in another response, I  had limited time to reply, but you'll be pleased to know my trains were running and on time today but wifi/4G was a bit flaky. My main point was that the ECHR provides a lot more than just the right to family life, etc, and some of the asylum processes relate to other treaties anyway?The ECHR probably does need upgrading for the current world; that might take some time. It's interesting that all European countries are signatories except Belorus and Russia - I think Russia was but because suspended? Or do you thing the UK should be classed with them? I suppose the UK could always join the other world order that Xi and Putin have in mind along with what looks like the other BRICS members (but I'd doubt you'd like any Gaza solution they come up with)-?Yes, nothing wrong with modifying UK law and its application of the ECHR, or temporary suspending aspects of the ECHR, which is allowable? However, what's that old saying, we don't want to "throw the baby out with the bath water" - at least, not until there's a new baby ...Bye ...

Michael Ixer ● 2d

Mr Boyce'I don't think it is very fair to hound people who arrive here, many with genuine reasons, and then attack them as criminals, rapists and gougers'.They are 'hounded' as you put it as a lot of people don't want them here nor the expense they place on the taxpayer.You hit the nail on the head as to the reason for this when you say 'MANY with genuine reasons'.Not all then !You say that some attack them as criminals, rapists and gougers because they are not allowed to work for years.Yet there are examples where they are 'criminals, rapists and gougers' which is why people are suspicious of so many of them and not being able to work is no excuse for this behaviour is it ?'Anyway, your granny doesn't sound to have been a great judge of character.'Were she to have read how you described me and Mr Rose, she would have been spot on !

John Hawkes ● 2d

Mr Boyce'I don't know what you mean by children being used as moles.'The trick of putting a child unaccompanied by any family member in the rubber dinghy such that the state has to take him/her into care and his/her lawyers then claim under the ECHR 'Rights to family Life' that his/her family should and can join them here.

John Hawkes ● 2d

Not selective, Ed; just brief owing to time available. 

Michael Ixer ● 2d

Mr Ixer'What's a good reason to get rid of to ECHR? One imagines it's primarily for Farage's rich individual and corporate friends to use lawyers to bully tenants, leasholders, consumers, etc to deprive them of any rights. Surely, only the gullible would believe otherwise?'I might not always agree with you but I always recognise you attempt reasoned argument.Above does you no credit.'Farage's rich individual and corporate friends' is a phrase that one would wince over yet excuse were it to be heard in a Sixth Form Debate.But from a grown man ?.....And the all encompassing list of victims they are bullying - 'tenants, leasholders, consumers, etc to deprive them of any rights'.That's everybody is it not ?!Examples ? I can think of some.'Labour's homelessness minister (sic) Rushanara Ali has been found to have ‘evicted tenants' from her east London property - only to re-list the address months later after upping the rent by '£700 a month'.As I am sure you know, the concept of the ECHR was devised during the Second World War in the early 1940s, and was developed to ensure that governments would never again be allowed to dehumanise and abuse people’s rights with impunity, and to help fulfil the promise of ‘never again’.After the ECHR came into force in 1953, the European Court of Human Rights was then set up to safeguard the ECHR. Judgments of the court legally bind countries to stand by its rulings.These were the days of Nazi Germany and Communist Russia and the perils they threatened.But circumstances and aspects of geo-politics change with time.Thus critics of the convention argue that it limits the UK’s ability to control its own laws and policies, primarily regarding immigration and national security.And it is not only Farage that criticises it.Former Labour home secretary Jack Straw has called for Britain to “decouple” British laws from the ECHR.Straw, who helped draft the 1998 Human Rights Act – which incorporates the ECHR into UK law – said the legislation is being misused by UK courts to prevent ministers from deporting illegal migrants.Lord Blunkett, who also served as home secretary in a previous Labour government, urged the prime minister to suspend the convention to deport thousands of rejected asylum seekers who are being housed in hotels.So "calm down dear, calm down" and remember the issue is 'does the UK have the right to determine who can reside here and what should be done about those that arrive illegally and without permission'.You might be in favour of an open border immigration policy.I doubt the majority of the population are and I'm sure Starmer and Cooper are well aware of the fact and the impact it would have on their re-election prospects.

John Hawkes ● 2d

I agree with a number of your points John:The Foreign aid budget should definitely not have been cut to 0.5% GNI, and to further cut it to 0.3% in 2027 is going to have an enormous, negative impact on the most vulnerable. I would support reinstating the 0.7% figure. I also agree that asylum seekers should be allowed to apply from the country of origin, or a neighbouring country if that is not possible; danger to life, natural disaster etc.Obviously, I agree that there could be no absolute number on those granted asylum.I don't know what you mean by children being used as moles.You say most people who arrive by boat are not genuine asylum seekers; the figures don't seem to bear that out. I have no idea.I would think that if legal routes were available and aid was increased to support people in their home countries, then a policy that included deportation of those arriving illegally by boat, may well be more palatable. Exactly where they are returned to will depend, but basically a carrot and stick approach to immigration.I also think proper immigration centres with much faster processing of applications is fundamental.Identification cards for everyone would also be a very useful tool in managing who has a right to be here.I don't think it is very fair to hound people who arrive here, many with genuine reasons, and then attack them as criminals, rapists and gougers because they are not allowed to work for years while their application are being assessed. It is very unBritish!Anyway, your granny doesn't sound to have been a great judge of character....or maybe you were just putting words into her mouth.

Gerry Boyce ● 2d

A very selective response Michael.The exposed super injunctions are not the only ones in operation are they?It also ignores the various relationships the UK has had with the Taliban over time.Freedom fighters under Thatcher although documents still locked about who these freedom fighters were actually.Oddly the flow of opium to the UK seems to coincide with Western occupation. Nothing to do with the two major countries involved using drugs as a means of finance I'm sure, despite the history to the contrary.What is evident is that the SAS refused visas for a number if Afghanistan operatives. So who  do we believe the SAS or the Afghanistans.The war crimes committed in Afghanistan are very well documented including the allies turning a blind eye to young boys being abused by Afghans supporting Western intervention.So should we believe Labour with a history of war crimes but no convictions or whistle blowers imprisoned by those that Labour support?Of course some women were becoming judges and high positions aided by the rulling powers but many more from the the less fortunate classes  were being raped and killed by allies or allies supporting forces. Doesn't sound like equality to me!

Ed Robinson ● 2d

Ed, yes, one wonders what "The main countries of origin of illegal migrants to the UK are Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and Iran." as mentioned previously in this thread all have in common? No problems wit western intervention and bombing? I've met several (legal) immigrants from Iran - all intelligent, well educated and contributing to the UK while here. I suspect that goes for most asylum seeker from Iran; one can't blame them from wanting to escape the revolutionary guards - and western bombs (As a country, it must be well advanced to get close to developing nuclear weapons?) And, until the uncoordinated withdrawal from Afghanistan (a deal originally brokered by POTUS#45?) women were becoming judges, doctors, teachers, etc - now many are now dead, incarcerated at home or fleeing the Taliban? Yes, it's been interesting listening to the recent BBC R4 programme about the McLibel trial and being remined about the undercover police infiltration in the London Greenpeace nothing to do with "the" Greenpeace" and forming a relationship with one of the activists. The undercover police must have participated in the anti McDonald's protests to have any credibility and form a sexual relationship? Still, I suppose some police might be against fast food?A good example of the ECHR coming to the aid of UK citizens and ruling that the libel trial was unfair as Steele and Morris had no financial resources and hence no legal aid, other than pro bono support from a young barrister, Kier Starmer, and others. What's a good reason to get rid of to ECHR? One imagines it's primarily for Farage's rich individual and corporate friends to use lawyers to bully tenants, leasholders, consumers, etc to deprive them of any rights. Surely, only the gullible would believe otherwise?It was good that Labour exposed, and didn't keep perpetuating the super injunction coving up the MoD data breach. I can see an initial need to protect Afghans while the previous government sorted out its mess, but, I agree, maintaining it was just a cover up of incompetence.

Michael Ixer ● 2d

Mr BoyceMr Rose wrote -'‘ This has to involve an element of deterrence, otherwise the boats will keep on coming. And those whose claims are rejected must be deported, which may require a change in the law. At the same time Britain should try to offer asylum to a small number of the most deserving cases.’And I am sure is well able to defend his  arguments.And without the use of personal abuse -'previously labelling you smug and self-satisfied'. But then you are obviously someone who my Grandmother would have called 'a bit common' and has been known to call  those that disagree with you a 'gobshite'.'Wow! Impressive stuff Steven, you’ve cracked it. I must apologise for previously labelling you smug and self-satisfied.Could you put a little flesh on the bones of the above; what number should get asylum? What is a deserving case? Where are those rejected deported to? Lone children get deported too? Where do the asylum seekers apply from? Etc. etc etc'.For what it is worth here are my answers to your queries.There should be no absolute number on those granted asylum but there should be strict guidelines on who might be considered for it such as country of origin; the accusation made against the seeker by the authorities of that country; agreed legitimate means of arriving in the UK.Where should those not granted asylum be deported to ?Back to their country of origin.How can a child travelling alone be deemed to be a genuine asylum seeker ?They are just being used as moles by adults.Where should asylum seekers apply from ?The UK embassy in their country of origin.Let's be honest.Most of these boat people do not fit the description of 'asylum seeker'.They are looking for a better standard of living as many if not most are fleeing as the Donald says 'sh1thole countries'.Provided the money would not go straight into the Swiss bank account of the despot that rules it, what we spend on supporting migrants in the UK would be better purposed by being added to our Foreign Aid budget which Labour has just reduced. Oh BTW, have you kitted out a spare room in your house to accommodate an immigrant waiting for an asylum claim to be processed ?

John Hawkes ● 2d

Mr Ainsworth'Most DM readers will believe it. They savour outrage.'Just as Guardian readers like yourself I have no doubt, savour a feeling of self-righteous sanctimonious sympathy for the oppressed, provided they are non-white.'White British' who do not want the country turned further into a multi-cultural, multi ethnic mish-mash and already feel that under Labour their needs and concerns come at the bottom of the priority list, are looked down upon as plebs.You demonstrate this admirably.

John Hawkes ● 2d

Mr Carter'Several people, including at least one child, are pepper sprayed as anti-migrant hotel protest descends into chaosWho fired the pepper spray at whom ?

John Hawkes ● 2d

Ms Bond'most refugees from war torn countries want to actually take refuge in adjacent countries and want when they can to return to their countries.'So why do they travel hundreds of miles through these adjacent countries and then pay thousands of pounds to people traffickers to get in a rubber dingy to get to the UK ?

John Hawkes ● 2d

Mr Rose'The main countries of origin of illegal migrants to the UK are Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Are these homelands no longer in existence?'And there seem to be many from Pakistan and Bangladesh which I thought were pretty stable democracies ?

John Hawkes ● 2d

Those gifted with short memories may have forgot that the Undercover Policing Inquiry is still underway.In the US there were so many FBI informants within the so-called Proud Boys one wonders at what point state infiltration becomes state orchestration.Whilst the government uses super injunctions and secrecy laws to suppress the truth it will become increasingly difficult to determine. We live in a strange world where climate change sceptics are mocked but yet educated middle class liberals think whole countries some how destruct as if by magic! Of course as long as their living standards are protected I guess that is all that matters.

Ed Robinson ● 2d

'Guardian' readers also savour outrage, for example outrage at the behaviour of a few xenophobic hooligans, as a way of advertising their own virtue while avoiding having to think about a rational asylum policy.

Steven Rose ● 2d

Poor, poor people! What a country when these big chaps have to wear masks because they are too frightened when they are peacefully demonstrating* in a shopping centre! I do wonder why police bother with pepper spray, when a pick axe handle would work better and surely give a decent stand-off distance? *I wonder why I first typed "demonstarting"I was drawn to an article in the Daily Mail where GBNews' Jacob Rees-Mogg, the original Eton Mess, peeped over the wall of a Somerset hotel, to see whether it was being used to house illegal migrants. He found that it was. It is a surprise that it was a surprise to him, as it has been used this way for 3 years, so it began under the Tory government, when he was a Tory MP. It is so cruel to suggest that this fake scoop is just the usual attempt to hang blame on Labour, just like the riots a month after Labour won power in 2024.To be fair, it does work. Most DM readers will believe it. They savour outrage.

David Ainsworth ● 2d

Canary Wharf carnage: Pepper spray fired inside shopping centre as police clash with masked anti-migrant hotel protesters.Several people, including at least one child, are pepper sprayed as anti-migrant hotel protest descends into chaoshttps://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-asylum-protest-canary-wharf-shopping-centre-migrant-hotel-b1245290.html

Richard Carter ● 2d

Well, you want them you have them Philippa, I'm sure Ealing residents will love you. Hope you have a big house. Get the food ready, I'm sure they will eat you out of house and home. Play with your grandchildren one way or another. Just remember keep them in your own back yard, not everybody has the same opinion as you. I'm sure you will be able to take more bigger pictures, like you do with everything else. Your house must be full of them.

Barbara Stevens ● 2d

People are moving all around the world.  The countries you mention may well be the current main countries of origin of immigrants to the UK and their homelands may not be liveable right now but most refugees from war torn countries want to actually take refuge in adjacent countries and want when they can to return to their countries.  Some won't be able to. It's one world and there's a bigger picture which the tunnel-visioned don't want to see.  We are making the situation worse with our dependence on fossil fuel.

Philippa Bond ● 3d

The main countries of origin of illegal migrants to the UK are Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Are these homelands no longer in existence?

Steven Rose ● 3d

People have always migrated.  What if your homeland is no more?https://theconversation.com/what-will-happen-to-the-legal-status-of-sinking-nations-when-their-land-is-gone-263559?

Philippa Bond ● 3d

Can someone explain why this Hotel mentioned by Lisa Nandy below was unsuitable and why others are not please?Even with well disciplined large groups of young men such as in the armed forces you have obvious risks which are understood and mitigated. Add that there is no such authority providing discipline the normal social structures and in some of these cultures - the victims of rape and sexual assault ends up being punished even if they are children. I guess after revelations of decades of coverups on abuse we would now have to include UK culture in that definition too!None of this will stop Labour and Conservative supporters going on the next band wagon to destroy another country creating millions more refugees and the ones reaching out shores we will not be able to return!"Wigan MP Lisa Nandy said she was appalled that the Britannia Hotel in Standish was being used to accommodate vulnerable asylum-seekers again, several years after both the Home Office and services operator Serco accepted that it was completely unsuitable for the purpose, and had done so with no notice or consultation with the police, council, herself or the local community."Published 22nd Sep 2021, 08:07 BSThttps://www.wigantoday.net/news/mp-calls-for-wigan-hotel-to-stop-housing-asylum-seekers-after-incident-involving-schoolgirl-3391661

Ed Robinson ● 3d

‘ This has to involve an element of deterrence, otherwise the boats will keep on coming. And those whose claims are rejected must be deported, which may require a change in the law. At the same time Britain should try to offer asylum to a small number of the most deserving cases.’ Wow! Impressive stuff Steven, you’ve cracked it. I must apologise for previously labelling you smug and self-satisfied.Could you put a little flesh on the bones of the above; what number should get asylum? What is a deserving case? Where are those rejected deported to? Lone children get deported too? Where do the asylum seekers apply from? Etc. etc etc.

Gerry Boyce ● 3d

Mr Brigo'The UK used to be known for it's tolerance - sometimes now it just looks nasty.'What evidence do you have that the UK is less tolerant than in the past and is now 'looking nasty' ?Few other countries over recent decades, perhaps only the US, has accepted and successfully assimilated so many people of varying ethnicity and religious backgrounds.That is where such people have wanted to be assimilated rather than use their acceptance as an opportunity to change  the culture and civil society of their hosts to that of the countries they have emigrated from.That is where the problem stems from.A fear of unwanted change possibly being brought about by immigrants of differing backgrounds and cultures, especially regarding attitudes to women, uncontrolled in number and unvetted with regard to intention.That does not make them 'nasty' just cautious and suspicious  of 'leftist' attitudes and governments that regard social change something worthy in its own right.

John Hawkes ● 3d

Mr AinsworthNot the poor old oppressed Palestinians again.Stop living in the past and trying to re-write history.Israel legally exists as a sovereign state and only a few countries and individuals with antisemite tendencies deny the fact.According to Wikipedia (yes I can use it too !) "Many countries have expressed their intention to enter into relations with the State of Palestine. The US formally recognized the West Bank and Gaza Strip as "one area for political, economic, legal and other purposes" in 1997 at the request of the Palestinian Authority. At that time, it asked the public to take notice of that fact through announcements it placed in the Federal Register, the official journal of the US government. The USAID West Bank/Gaza, has been tasked with "state-building" projects in the areas of democracy, governance, resources, and infrastructure. Part of the USAID mission is to "provide flexible and discrete support for implementation of the Quartet Road Map",] an internationally backed plan which calls for the progressive development of a viable Palestinian State in the West Bank and Gaza. The European Union (EU) has announced similar external relations programs with the Palestinian Authority".So their seems to be agreement that Palestine is made up of the West Bank and Gaza.The problem really is and its one you refuse to recognise, is that the Palestinians themselves are not united, in fact are deadly enemies on the issue, as to how it should be governed.Hamas of course simply wants to rule Gaza in order to have a base to attack and ultimately annihilate Israel.Luckily of course it is too incompetent to be able to do so.

John Hawkes ● 3d

Mr RoseI always wonder what the true purpose of asylum is.What sort of persecution are asylum seekers suffering from ?Also, what countries are carrying out this persecuion and for what purpose ?A large number of asylum seekers are from Pakistan and Bangladesh which I thought were countries with a reasonable level of civil liberties.Or is it the fact many asylum seekers are in fact simply economic migrants seeking a more prosperous life.A worthy objective but not one that overrides the UK's right to decide if we want, or can afford as you point out below, for them to try to achieve that here.

John Hawkes ● 3d

Mr Brigo'I wonder what happened to the nice English people? Everyone just seems so nasty these days with not a jot of compassion for those less fortunate than us.'Probably 90% of the world's population are less fortunate than us.The issue is what level of responsibility for them should we take upon ourselves through our government's policies ?And what level should their homeland 'governments' take for looking after them.People do not cease to become 'nice' because they want a say  on this matter.Many feel they themselves are under living cost, housing and NHS availability  pressure and as they have paid or pay taxes for the latter services feel they should not be pushed down the queue for them.Is that unreasonable ?Oh, and you are not necessarily 'nice' just because you claim sympathy for the supposed plight of illegal immigrants.As I said yesterday, if you feel they are not getting appropriate accommodation and other support from the UK government, take them into your own home and provide for them personally.

John Hawkes ● 3d

I totally understand your point Barbara and I don't disagree.I'm simply saying I believe it is possible to show compassion for ALL people less off than us - be they UK pensioners or people fleeing war/persecution or indeed just looking for a better life. I'm not suggesting for a minute we take everyone in, i'm just saying it's depressing to read such nasty comments made on this forum and see the actions of some people outside these hotels. There's really no need for screaming and shouting wild accusations like this. The UK used to be known for it's tolerance - sometimes now it just looks nasty.The numbers of people in hotels in the UK has dropped from the high of the last government which implies the current government is getting things under control - it's a shame they can't be left to get on with it.

Michael Brigo ● 3d

Interesting reply, Mr Rose. You have learnt something from the sad fate of the Palestinian majority population.As you wrote on 23/8:-"‘The Palestinians were there and in the majority’. This is obviously true but hardly worth stating. Whenever immigrants first settle in another country, the existing inhabitants are in a majority. The Jews constituted the majority of the population of Jerusalem when the Arabs captured the city in the seventh century. Native Americans  were in a majority when Europeans first settled in North America."How sad for the Palestinian majority that they never had the right to vote 100 years ago to stop what was happening. There only possible action was to fight and Britain repressed that bloodily, until the Zionist incomers felt strong enough to take over.Just what happens? The natural law, is it?

David Ainsworth ● 3d

Steven, glad you explained better than me.

Barbara Stevens ● 3d

The fundamental question is whether Britain can offer asylum to all those who have a justified fear of persecution. The answer is no and the reasons are obvious. In the first place there are literally millions of people round the world living in countries beset by war and discrimination. There is simply not the space, nor the infrastructure in terms of housing, schools and hospitals, nor the possibility of employment to offer them all homes in this country. Secondly the refugees may not have the skills to contribute to the economy, nor share the cultural values that facilitate social cohesion. Britain would be reduced to poverty and chaos by a huge influx of immigrants. An appropriate metaphor for this situation would be that of a lifeboat full to the brim of people saved from shipwreck. Unfortunately there are still other people swimming in the sea who, if they were taken on board as well, would cause the whole  lifeboat to sink.Once this is admitted, many of the posts on this thread are revealed to be at best naive. One example is the suggestion that Britain should offer asylum seekers a safe and legal route to come to this country by constructing application centres abroad where their claims can be considered. Where would these centres be built? In France? That would obviously constitute a huge pull factor. Within a short time thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people from around the world would come to France in the expectation (given that, apparently, 70% of asylum claims are accepted) of gaining admission to Britain at public expense. And at that point why not save the asylum seekers the trouble of making their way to France? Why not set up immigration centres directly in China, Sudan, Myanmar and Gaza? I am sure that millions of people from those countries would jump at the chance of coming to Britain. Let us put virtue signalling and self righteous indignation aside and try to construct a rational asylum policy. This has to involve an element of deterrence, otherwise the boats will keep on coming. And those whose claims are rejected must be deported, which may require a change in the law. At the same time Britain should try to offer asylum to a small number of the most deserving cases.

Steven Rose ● 3d

Michael Brigo, a lot of old people are less fortunate than you, they get a certain age and are unable to walk, or have to continue working because their pensions are not enough. They have to pay extortionate prices for care, all their savings taken from them and their pensions if they have to go into a care home. But hey they just want to come here and get it all for nothing. Then they come here make a mess and are untidy, Perhaps you should have read a report from some of the staff that work in the Hotels. they are filthy throw stuff in the passage, don't know what a toilet is, poo in a corner of the room. I realize your young Mr. Brigo, and doing well for yourself, hope all the babies appreciate you. But there are also old people in England who were brought up here and spent their whole life here and don't like the way it's being changed.

Barbara Stevens ● 3d

Mr Hawkes. You ask, is data protection a fad? Well, the original data protection convention, #108, was added to the ECHR in 1981, predating any EU directive or regulation. That resulted in the UK's first Data Protection Act (DPA) of 1988, before the EU directive of 1995 which was then followed by the UK DPA 1998. Then the well publicised GDPR came into operation in 2018, effected into UK law by the DPA 2018. Subsequently the EU GDPR was copied into the UK GDPR in recently, the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (DUAA) which updates the UK GDPR and DPA 2018 gained Royal Ascent in June.I don't think I'd call something that's been around for over four decades and been enhanced several times a fad? (Aren't most people concerned about how their financial and health information is protected?) In fact, I think with the increase in Cyber attacks it's becoming more important - and look how much the MoD cost the UK tax payer by not following good data protection practices, and I bet M&S are busy reviewing their DP policies and processes. The number of countries with data protection laws was increasing when I retired (often modelled on the GDPR), although the US was a little fragmented as laws were mainly left to individual states.Looking at it from a purely commercial point of view, during the introduction of and debates about the GDPR, my argument was "if you're not managing your data properly you're not running your business correctly".If one looks at data as a valuable asset in a simiway to an organisation's financial resources what sensible organisation would accept a situation where they didn't know what money they had, where it was, how it was being used, who was using it, why they were spending it, etc?Once data is under control and being managed appropriately surely it can then be used more efficiently and effectively to further the aims and to the benefit of the organisation and those it serves? If properly aligned with business aims, security and privacy should be seen as a benefit and enabler to organisations - and many (most?) modern companies are data driven.And this discussion is way off topic!

Michael Ixer ● 3d

Mr Hawkes. Our taxes are currently contributing towards the cost of hotel rooms anyway. However, I would think the reduction in rooms available for travellers means by tge laws of supply and demand voupled with dynamic pricing we're paying over the odds for hotel rooms when travelling. If the asylum cases seekers are moved out of hotels, yes we're still pay for their accommodation, perhaps it will be cheaper, but their should be more rooms available for travellers and hopefully, with increased availability, dynamic prices will reduce. Barbara raised an interesting point about those on coming having sufficient moneyto afford the fare. Given many in the poorer African and Asian countries are poor, many at subsistance level, the prices charged by people traffickers means only those families or those coming from families with sufficient wealth can afford to pay that amount; hence, the numbers will be limited to those few with sufficient wealth?

Michael Ixer ● 4d

Well the ones that are coming over on the dinghy's can't be that short of money, otherwise they wouldn't be able to afford to come on the dinghy. Also as for the sarky comment about where they come from, obviously most come across from France on the Dinghy's that is why the French police are involved. As for compassion, what about our elderly or our homeless. Why did so many people queue at the Werter Road, Church for handouts of food. Why do they have food donations outside Sainsbury's. What about all the years some people here have waited for a home from the Council on their waiting list. Or living in damp squaller which the Council cannot be bothered to rectify. Yet they come here 3 meals a day clothes accommodation. Our own elderly had a rough time during the War, their houses demolished, food rationing, sleeping in underground stations while bombs dropped all around them. Relations killed in the war, sons, husbands not coming home. So as for compassion, some older people had a hard time and just got on with it. But why should they now.

Barbara Stevens ● 4d

Hello Michael B,I agree, where are all the lovely British people! This is a simplistic (or perhaps not so) view, but for the UK, Brexit happened.  It was a milestone of change.From a global point of view, social media arrived, sadly!

Ivonne Holliday ● 4d

I wonder what happened to the nice English people? Everyone just seems so nasty these days with not a jot of compassion for those less fortunate than us.

Michael Brigo ● 4d

And I forgot the famous £350m a week towards the NHS......

Ivonne Holliday ● 4d

Hello Michael,I wholeheartedly agree with you, particularly with regard to Brexit and leaving the ECHR.Robert Wheeler mentioned in a response further down that "Brexit happened move on".  In reality, we cannot move on as the country was regressed since Brexit.Even if people are very against the BBC, I invite them to read the article of 31 January 2025 entitled: "Five key impacts of Brexit five years on"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdrynjz1glpoIn particular, I invite them to look at the graphs and table in the article.  Sources of information, ONS and UK government impact assessments. One of the main issues at the time of the referendum was freedom of movement.  Please look at the graph entitled "Net immigration to the UK" which contains information from June 2012 to June 2024.  It is very clear indeed! As for leaving the ECHR, well, it is totally ridiculous. The vast majority of immigration to the UK is legal immigration.  The UK adopted the Illegal Immigration Act in July 2023. The UK should act on its laws before blaming other parties.Also, please look at the statistics in this article from the Home Office: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-june-2025/summary-of-latest-statistics

Ivonne Holliday ● 4d

"If our Fishermen never had the right to fish in their waters, well they need not come here."In 2024, the largest numbers of small boat migrants to the UK were from Afghanistan, Syria, Eritrea, Sudan, and Iran.I shouldn't think that we have ever fished much off the coasts of Syria, Eritrea, Sudan, and Iran. I expect that a fishing deal could have been made. Afghanistan doesn't have a coast, as you know.

David Ainsworth ● 4d

Enough of their dinghy's have been collected, put them all back on them and tow them back to where they came from. If our Fishermen never had the right to fish in their waters, well they need not come here.

Barbara Stevens ● 4d

Mr Pike'think how you'd feel if you had 138 foreign nationals in a hotel in central Putney.'Many on this Forum would love it.They could pop round and leave all their unwanted clothes and such to show how welcome these people are.Then they could bask in  warm hearted self satisfaction with their like minded friends over supper in that 'nice little Italian in the LRR'.That is of course if the hotel is not TOO close to where they live and the immigrants are not hanging around their doorsteps.

John Hawkes ● 4d

Mr Ixer'Personally, I feel the sooner hotel rooms are freed up the sooner prices will drop - and, yes, that very much a selfish view.'But you will still be paying for the accommodation costs at re-opened airfields and sustenance allowances for the illegal immigrants placed there.We are effectively being invaded.So many countries in the world are, to quote the US President 'sh1tholes', that perhaps the whole concept of asylum should be reconsidered.We can't take every African and Middle Eastern person who feels oppressed.Perhaps they should stay at home and fight for regime change.And isn't data protection just a new legal fad like diversity, equity, and inclusion  ?

John Hawkes ● 4d

Mr Hawkes. Isn't disagreeing with each other how lawyers earn their huge fees? (I've sat in a presentation with three data protection lawyers who couldn't agree with each other ... but at least I wasn'tpayingfor it - and I got a free drink, or two!) I think one thing that weighed against Epping council was they'd sat on a planning application for change of use from the Bell Hotel for at least a year. If I were a judge I'd also take the view that not responding to an application they disagreed with for that length of time I'd be of the view it couldn't be considered urgent so waiting another six weeks for the full hearing wasn't material so not worth unplanned disruption. It's possible the government may still lose the full hearing, but I suspect the lawyers will earn lots from it. Personally, I feel the sooner hotel rooms are freed up the sooner prices will drop - and, yes, that very much a selfish view.

Michael Ixer ● 4d

Ms Allen'I expect opprobrium to rain down on me.'Not necessarily.You could show practically how much you sympathise with these illegal immigrants by offering to them the use of any spare rooms you might have in your house.As could Mr and Ms Carter.Who on this Forum will be the first to make such a gesture ?Let's be honest what commitments were made in Labour's manifesto to accept these people (who have travelled from their homelands through Italy, Spain, Germany and France to get to the UK) ?And how much was put in any spending plan to fund them ?So it has to come down to well meaning no doubt individuals such as you to pay from your own pockets.

John Hawkes ● 4d

Surely the real issue is within which law or legal definition were these judgements made.Was not the original ruling one of mundane planning, namely a hotel could not have a use change to turn it into a holding area for illegal immigrants.Much sighing from the owners of course as not many tourists in that part of Essex, so a bung from the Labour government came well in handy !Now of course our increasingly out of her depth Home Secretary has to have a plan should she lose her final appeal and hotels cannot be used as illegal immigrant dumping grounds.Could she not resign from Government and get a spot on 'Strictly' just as her 'ol man' did ?Or will she open up a few unused air force bases and put the illegals in those.That of course will cause squeals from the dozens of 'refugee charities' (who funds these ?) as being against our commitments to European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the Human Rights Act.The whole issue is a total joke."More than 50,000 people have crossed Channel in small boats since Starmer became PM" - Sky NewsWe are unable to protect our borders from people who have no right to be here and in doing so are spending a fortune on them whilst ethnic Brits get poorer.The only consolation is that people are losing all confidence in the government regarding immigration which will remain a key issue until the next election which Labour (lead by aspiring property developer Ange) will lose.

John Hawkes ● 4d

Robert The reason I mention Brexit is, firstly, that Farage mislead the gullible once (where's our Norwegian style deal?) and he's doing it again with the ECHR. Secondly, many seem the cosy of Brexit the cause of many of our economic woes. PIf people think its such a good idea then let's have another referendum to see everyone still thinks it's a good idea. As it's a free country I'll keep a gung on about it unless Farage wins, leaves he ECHR and bans me. Of course, Rayner hasn't to my knowledge done anything illegal. If she can afford more than one property then good luck to her. Social democracy is about the aspiration to raie everyone's standards, not just the already wealthy. 

Michael Ixer ● 4d

People complain about homeless people on the streets.People also want migrant hotels closed immediately.I wonder where they will end up.

Michael Brigo ● 4d

Justice Bean definitely wins the battle of the wigs! Anyone know where I might pick up one of these?

Gerry Boyce ● 4d

In your melancholic, nostalgia filled misery, Robert, you seem to be confusing illegal immigrants with asylum seekers .Over seventy per cent of asylum seekers are granted asylum on initial application; a significant number who are refused  are subsequently successful on appeal.One obvious solution is to enable applications to be made from outside the UK and not force asylum seekers to come here before making an application.

Gerry Boyce ● 4d

‘I forgot the 5-10 years to renegotiate the Good Friday Agreement as a prerequisite to leaving the ECHR ...’ Don’t forget that the Yanks will never agree to anything that jeopardises the GFA.  Leaving the ECHR is a complete distraction and perfect for Farage to simplify as a cause for freedom.

Gerry Boyce ● 4d

"They need to take tough action on domestic issues rapidly."Yeah sure. Brexit? - just get over it.The Conservative government for 14 years? Just get over it.The Labour government for 14 months? Their time has already run out! Get a move on and take rapid action - or else, the people will do such things!In fact, "the people's patience" had already supposedly run out just 1 month (!) after the 2024 election, when the riots were stoked intentionally by inaccurate claims.

David Ainsworth ● 4d

It is not a Rayner snide remark l am highlighting double standards exactly as many have done with the previous Government.  Just a gentle aside you really need to get over Brexit, very rarely do you fail to mention it.  It happened move on.You only have to go down our own High Street to see the homeless issue that already exists in this country.  Those wonderful “working people” that this Government constantly refer to have, believe me, had enough with this Government’s cockups and double standards.  Whilst we are all paying ever more increasing taxes they get even more freebie’s.The Government’s first duty is to protect its people.  In my view they have failed.They need to take tough action on domestic issues rapidly.

Robert Wheeler ● 4d

Yes, Robert, but then why make the snide comment about Rayner which isn't going to help arrive at a real solution?People have concerns but the legal action isn't going to assist the solution.  If the government had to find a temporary solution a couple of weeks to rehouse hundreds, possibly thousand of asylum seekers, that's going to take resources and probably delay the long term solution. The government has taken some action: to speed up the processing of asylum cases, track down and arrest the criminals profiting from trafficking the migrants, and increasing deportations. Perhaps the claims are inflated and not enough. Maybe destroying the criminals business model would reduce, perhaps stop the trafficking - as the Rwandan scheme was supposed to (although it didn't seem designed to scale?) but then the criminals would be free to go and perpetuate their next scam, which could be more problematic. Best to get them behind bars.Be wary of closing down the ECHR, it might stop the migration, but one of its original aims was to guard against the rise of authoritarian governments after the WWII fight against facism. Do people really want to destroy that safeguard?There's probably no easy solution; if it seems too good to be true, it's probably not going to work! Remember all those promised benefits of Brexit? Leaving the ECHR would probably be a bigger disaster because there are plenty of other reasons some politicians want that ... why is Nottingham's Reform Council so frightened of a free press? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cger45p0lv0o

Michael Ixer ● 4d

I know that you never said how you feel. You said How would you feel if....Apart from my reply displaying my nasty habit, what sort of replies were you expecting? Please forgive me, but I think that your response to Judy Allen (9.25) shows what sort of reply that you really wanted:-"I wasn't sure who Judy was referring to.They are just people like us whose country is no longer safeThe illegals or the people of Epping."

David Ainsworth ● 4d

These comments are the reason both main parties will lose votes in any future elections.  Nobody is against legal migration it is illegal that many have a major issue in this country and across Europe.  We have thousands of undocumented people which if you care about laws in this country need immediate control.Labour are dividing this country by constantly sitting on every fence they can find.  We need an urgent solution to deport not yet more mud slinging and name calling.  This constant belittling of people calling thiis out is ludicrous.Perhaps Rainer could put them up in her new flat.

Robert Wheeler ● 4d

Very happy where I live thank you Mr Ainsworth.Again I never said how I feelI said How would you feel if....You have a nasty habit of mis quoting or simply taking small bits of a comment out of context.

Andy Pike ● 4d

I forgot the 5-10 years to renegotiate the Good Friday Agreement as a prerequisite to leaving the ECHR ...

Michael Ixer ● 4d

"Not worried at all. Read my post again i do not mention any fear on my part."Of what sort of feelings were you thinking, then?How'd you feel if you had 138 foreign nationals in a hotel in central Hove?Anyway, you are a brave man, Mr Pike. You live in a town with a much worse crime rate than Epping or Putney. (According to crimerate.co.uk anyway) (Website started by a chap who was looking to buy a house in Brighton, as it happens).

David Ainsworth ● 4d

Barbara. I'm aware that even Labour want to end the use of hotels, as do the Conservatives who created  the mess. However,  it must be obvious to anyone with any intelligence that because of the scale of the problem it's going to take a while to resolve the it? That's an issue with Reform's solution. Even if they were going to send some back to Afghanistan you're probably looking at 2-3 months negotiations (assuming they don't fall through) then the flight logistics taking 1-2 months. So providing contingency for hiccups in operations, 6-7 months. It's just not that simple.The current court action is just a distraction that will probably delay resolving the issue and cost money. Good business for lawyers, I assume Epping Council Tax payers are funding all this?

Michael Ixer ● 4d

We gotta find the one person at the bottom of all this awful chain of terrible events and, well, just terminate them with extreme prejudice.

David Ainsworth ● 4d

Seems like reform rent a mob. Have you not thought reform are the only ones trying to get rid of them out of the hotels. Perhaps you would be happy to have them on your doorstep. Perhaps another man who couldnt careless about women or their children. It's turning into a very sad world.

Barbara Stevens ● 4d

"Apparently,  some drunken protesters use gardens as toilets. Must be Reform's rent-a-mob?"Be fair, Mr Ixer. They will often be of an age range that has more bladder problems.

David Ainsworth ● 4d

Yes, Andy, listening to the ruling live on BBC News the case for withdrawing the injunction seemed pretty sound.I've heard some people in Epping find the protesters more of a nuisance than the asylum seekers. Apparently,  some drunken protesters use gardens as toilets. Must be Reform's rent-a-mob?

Michael Ixer ● 4d

Not worried at all. Read my post again i do not mention any fear on my part.

Andy Pike ● 4d

"think how you'd feel if you had 138 foreign nationals in a hotel in central Putney."Gosh, then you must be genuinely terrified, Mr Pike."Council won’t seek to end use of asylum seeker hotels in Brighton and Hove"by Jo Wadsworth  Thursday 21 Aug, 2025 at 3:18PMBrighton and Hove News"The most recent government figures show 65 asylum seekers are being housed in Brighton and Hove hotels, down 10 from March this year."https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2025/08/21/council-wont-seek-to-end-use-of-asylum-seeker-hotels-in-brighton-and-hove/AI:- "For the 2021 Census in the Wandsworth Borough, which includes East Putney, West Putney, and Thamesfield, the population was 62% UK-born, with 38% foreign-born, a slight decrease from 2011."So 38% of the 3 Putney wards would mean 19,000 foreign-born people in Putney. This is a rough estimate - a deeper look at the 2021 Census may have proper figures. (And people's definitions of Putney may differ).By the way, the Bell Hotel is not in central Epping at all, according to the map.

David Ainsworth ● 4d

I wasn't sure who Judy was referring to.They are just people like us whose country is no longer safeThe illegals or the people of Epping.

Andy Pike ● 4d

Not at all, Judy, well and eloquently said.

Jane Carter ● 4d

They are just people like us whose country is no longer safe for them.  Can't we turn it round and think how awful it would be if this country was no longer safeand we tried to move somewhere else but then were vilified and threatened with homelessness? I'm now going to put a tin hat on and hide in a bunker because I expect opprobrium to rain down on me.

Judy Allen ● 4d

Watching the judge give the ruling it was pretty obvious that Epping Council had failed to act at numerous times over the 5 years this hotel has been used for this purpose. Also the initial judge had been swayed by erroneous arguments.It's disappointing, yes but for those of us who live by the rule of law it's the  right decision.It is though worrying that the rights of tge asylum seekers outweigh the safety concerns of local families. ( forget the rent a crowd that always attach themselves to these issues) and think how you'd feel if you had 138 foreign nationals in a hotel in central Putney.

Andy Pike ● 4d

“Illegal migrants have more rights than the British people under Starmer.”I think there are two things here: rights and resources.If you are a passenger in a stolen car that crashes and other passengers are killed then you may quite rightly face charges for your participation in the crime and the  consequences of that crime.If you pay smugglers for a place on a boat where even children drown it seems you are exempt from any consequences.It seems that the migrants have the right not to be prosecuted even though they have participated in an illegal act and possibly even murder or manslaughter.Of course you could argue that UK government officials are also exempt even rewarded when conducting illegal wars abroad killing millions in some cases. It is odd that many of those supporting and promoting parties/candidates that support such foreign policies that help create the refugee crisis, certainly destroyed countries so that refugees can not be returned, are oddly in favour of a very soft approach to those arriving on our shores even softer than the EU's current policies.

Ed Robinson ● 4d

They have no respect for women. That's why there are only men seen in the boats mainly because women are nothing to them, apart from having their children.

Barbara Stevens ● 4d

"Sir Stephen Eyre, the High Court judge who ruled in favour of Epping Forest District Council earlier this month, was a Conservative parliamentary candidate four times."

David Ainsworth ● 4d

Noxious Farage, that slippery xenophobe Jenrick and little mini-me Badenoch have all claimed that the Home Office has said that “Illegal migrants have more rights than the British people under Starmer.”Just to be clear, that is a plain lie. What the Home Office actually said was that the “human right of migrants by putting them in hotels outweighs the safety concerns of local families," a very clear difference that creatures like Farage & Co deliberately obfuscate, and that's not only shameful but dangerous.And if they really were so concerned about the safety concerns of local families instead of stoking the flames of bigotry, they would take notice that, for example, nearly half of those arrested in the violent disorder last July and August had been reported for crimes associated with intimate partner violence, and for those arrested by one police force, this figure was as high as 68%. Previous offences include actual bodily harm, grievous bodily harm, stalking, breach of restraint and non-molestation orders, controlling coercive behaviour and criminal damage. Such genuine patriots!

Richard Carter ● 5d

‘Nicola Davies, a Labour-voting feminist.’Peak Daily Mail.

Gerry Boyce ● 5d

It's just a pragmatic holding position to maintain the status quo until the full course hearing in October. It would obviously be crazy to move everyone out of the hotel by 12th September if the full hearing the reversed the decision. 

Michael Ixer ● 5d

What should the judges have done then, Ms Hammond?

David Ainsworth ● 5d

Yep, absolute madness, was watching on Channel 236.

Barbara Stevens ● 5d