Labour to break another promise

[Cherie]

Labour will break its manifesto pledge to end the scandal of asylum seekers living in expensive hotels after the Government admitted the practice will continue for years to come. Taxpayers currently pay £5.5million every day to house asylum seekers in hotels but a Treasury investigation claimed "global instability" will make it impossible to move them out.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/travel/news/keir-starmer-to-break-promise-as-scandal-of-asylum-seekers-in-hotels-to-last-for-years/ar-AA1BwIZy?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=6f4e4e5a546b4db583d3bcc6fca8d11b&ei=14


So let me get this straight, Labour are considering sending failed asylum seekers to the Balkans and will build migrant hubs there, but they cant build any migrant hubs here....anyone smell a massive rat .....

[arista]

[Taxpayers currently pay £5.5million every day]


Yes, Labour has failed.

[Cherie]

Keir Starmer and Yvette Cooper should "hang their heads in shame" over Labour's asylum crisis, critics declared on Monday.

A record number of migrants have crossed the Channel in the first three months of this year, with some 5,847 people detected on 106 small boats.

And a Treasury document has revealed many are likely to be held in taxpayer-funded hotel rooms for years.

But the Home Office faced fresh fury after documents - seen by the Daily Express - detailed how the department has rejected "alternative housing solutions" because of their costs "despite being cheaper than current contingency hotels".

Asylum accommodation provider Serco has put forward plans for a "range of alternative medium-sized accommodation sites", including converting student accommodation, but the Home Office Property Board has rejected the majority of the proposals.

This is likely to undermine Labour's plan to close down migrant hotels.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp told the Daily Express: "At the election, Labour promised to end the use of asylum hotels.

"In fact, there are now 8,500 more illegal immigrants in hotels than when they came into power. Labour has lost control of our borders, with a 28% increase in illegal immigrants crossing the channel since the election.

"So far, 2025 has been the worst year on record. It was a catastrophic mistake to cancel the Rwanda deterrent before it even started. Labour should hang their heads in shame.

"It is a disgrace that taxpayers are shelling out well over £10 million a day to house illegal immigrants in hotels at a time when hard-working Brits are struggling to make ends meet thanks to Starmer's swinging tax rises."


Sigh

[Vanessa]

Surely there must be a cheaper way to house them. They're costing too much

[Cherie]

Surely there must be a cheaper way to house them. They're costing too much

That wont put money in their mates pockets :nono:

[Beso]

Walter Mitty.


That's who starmer is.

[Crimson Dynamo]

They are now out of control and lunging all over the place. They can't last 4 years, it's madness

[Beso]

If only we were in Turkey.

[Beso]

:crazy:

https://youtube.com/shorts/wBLHBIgwqPo?si=9ui63Ertij0qVxeQ

[Quantum Boy]

"This can't last four years" whilst fist-bumping over the POTUS and chums crashing the global economy :joker:. Dear oh dear.

[Crimson Dynamo]

"This can't last four years" whilst fist-bumping over the POTUS and chums crashing the global economy :joker:. Dear oh dear.

This about Labour

Not your TDS

[Quantum Boy]

This about Labour

Not your TDS

The obvious implication in what I said was "it can and will last 4 years" just like every other shite elected govt. I'll not be blamed for thick folk not being able to read subtext sorry.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Migration Watch Chairman Alp Mehmet said:

Official figures from the ONS have revealed projected population growth by
mid-2032 of almost five million people and of almost ten million people by
2047. This astonishing increase will be entirely due to immigration and the
children of migrants. The projections are based on the assumption that net
migration will fall to an annual 340,000, from 2029, which is unlikely without
radical policy change.

Beside the massive, negative, economic impact, such population increase will
lead to a further significant fall in the percentage of the indigenous (white
British) population. This has already fallen from 95% in 1991 to 75% in 2021.
No wonder 71% are now saying immigration has been too high.

[Quantum Boy]

Most white British people are not even close to being "indigenous" lol, especially in England. Anglo-Saxons are barely more indigenous to the UK than white Europeans are indigenous to the Americas.

[Crimson Dynamo]

"Starmer – who supports human rights to the point of committing national suicide – is
simply setting up a useful idiot in an attempt to avoid the electoral catastrophe that is
coming Labour's way in the May elections."

DT reader comment

[bots]

we need immigrants to pay for our aging population. Families arent having more kids, so immigration is the only option. The other thing is that immigrants are unlikely to stay until pension age, they make money and then head back to their country of origin. Sometimes, things are not as they seem

illegal immigration, of course, is not the same

[Crimson Dynamo]

we need immigrants to pay for our aging population. Families arent having more kids, so immigration is the only option. The other thing is that immigrants are unlikely to stay until pension age, they make money and then head back to their country of origin. Sometimes, things are not as they seem

illegal immigration, of course, is not the same

Until fairly recently we successfully managed legal and needed immigration but now...

and the problem is the left just see illegal immigration and immigration exploitation as a culture war issue and as such cannot engage with it for fear of losing face

:skull:

[Livia]

It always makes me smile when I'm told we need immigration to pay for our aging population. Yet, we can afford nearly £10 billion for another bridge across the Thames. We can afford £5.5 million per day - per day - to house and entertain illegal immigrants while our own homeless sleep in doorways. While social housing is handed over to newcomers while people who have been waiting for social housing for years are ignored. This government hasn't got a clue how badly it's alienating the population, giving people no hope that things will improve and they wonder why Brits aren't having so many kids. Who would want to bring up kids in a country where a primary school cancels Easter in favour of Refugee Week. In short, no one in government gives a stuff about the British, and definitely not about the elderly who've been robbed of their winter fuel allowance after only a couple of weeks in power. In twenty years this country will be unrecognisible if things continue the way they are going and the Great Replacement is allowed to continue.

[Quantum Boy]

Until fairly recently we successfully managed legal and needed immigration but now...


Yes because British people (the 1st world in general) aren't having children. We don't have a sustainable population (and thus, we don't have a sustainable economy long term).

This is not complicated it's one of the most talked existential threats to humanity :facepalm:. At the bare minimum if people want immigration down, then the money (and more money on top) instead needs to be funnelled into funding/financing young British people to start having more children, and earlier. There are currently zero reasons to do that and countless reasons not to. The problem is absolutely gargantuan.

We need the immigration but y'all voted for Brexit so now we have less of the "legal and needed" (i.e. desired) European economic migrants, and more of "the sort" that Brexit voters wanted kept out. If it wasn't so tragic it would be fkn hilarious.

[Quantum Boy]

Who would want to bring up kids in a country where a primary school cancels Easter in favour of Refugee Week.

Entirely out of touch and a position of financial privilege; 99% of parents don't give a **** about kids making easter bunnies, they want to know that they'll be able to afford to feed them and keep a roof over their heads. That's why young people aren't having children. Not because they're scared of Ramadan.

[Livia]

People who think they have all the answers about every single topic, who accuse others of being stupid while being unworldly themselves are fkn hilarious.

[Livia]

Entirely out of touch and a position of financial privilege; 99% of parents don't give a **** about kids making easter bunnies, they want to know that they'll be able to afford to feed them and keep a roof over their heads. That's why young people aren't having children. Not because they're scared of Ramadan.

I'd like to see your stats. No one mentioned Ramadan, only you. And Easter bunnies are not a Christian concept but relate to the goddess Oestra, whose feast day was 21 March and whose symbols were eggs and hares.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Yes because British people (the 1st world in general) aren't having children. We don't have a sustainable population (and thus, we don't have a sustainable economy long term).

This is not complicated it's one of the most talked existential threats to humanity :facepalm:. At the bare minimum if people want immigration down, then the money (and more money on top) instead needs to be funnelled into funding/financing young British people to start having more children, and earlier. There are currently zero reasons to do that and countless reasons not to. The problem is absolutely gargantuan.




Elon highlighted this issue ages ago, I am glad you finally caught up and agree with him

[Beso]

Yes because British people (the 1st world in general) aren't having children. We don't have a sustainable population (and thus, we don't have a sustainable economy long term).

This is not complicated it's one of the most talked existential threats to humanity :facepalm:. At the bare minimum if people want immigration down, then the money (and more money on top) instead needs to be funnelled into funding/financing young British people to start having more children, and earlier. There are currently zero reasons to do that and countless reasons not to. The problem is absolutely gargantuan.

We need the immigration but y'all voted for Brexit so now we have less of the "legal and needed" (i.e. desired) European economic migrants, and more of "the sort" that Brexit voters wanted kept out. If it wasn't so tragic it would be fkn hilarious.



Keep the straight ones and send back the gays...problem solved and other problem halved..

Parmy for PM.:dance:

[Quantum Boy]

I'd like to see your stats. No one mentioned Ramadan, only you. And Easter bunnies are not a Christian concept but relate to the goddess Oestra, whose feast day was 21 March and whose symbols were eggs and hares.

You suggested that the reason that young couples aren't having children and more and more people are choosing not to have children at all is because schools are "celebrating Refugee Week instead of Easter", which is so painfully out of touch with the reality of the situation it's barely worth discussing. People are having fewer kids because they have no confidence they'll be able to support them. And are on top of that, actively told that they then "shouldn't", by the same people who want less immigration.

People with an endless list of complaints but no desire to hear that the practicalities of what they're seeking just don't add up - you can't have a society that won't support young families in having children and tells them "don't do it if you can't afford it", then complain when they say "OK we won't do it" resulting in increased immigration needs for sustainable population levels.

I mean I say "you can't" but that's not correct is it. Clearly plenty of people are perfectly happy to completely ignore the Catch-22 and declare that they want the "best of both", no matter how unrealistic (impossible) that is.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Entirely out of touch and a position of financial privilege; 99% of parents don't give a **** about kids making easter bunnies, they want to know that they'll be able to afford to feed them and keep a roof over their heads. That's why young people aren't having children. Not because they're scared of Ramadan.

So now you are talking on behalf of 99% of UK parents

:rolleyes:


got it

[Quantum Boy]

So now you are talking on behalf of 99% of UK parents

:rolleyes:


got it

I'd give you a lesson on illustrative hyperbole LT but I think you'd struggle, despite being a living example of one.

[Crimson Dynamo]

42 minutes for that....

https://media.invisioncic.com/Mrangmedia/emoticons/belm.png

[Cherie]

The government will end a contract with a provider of hotel places for asylum seekers after an audit identified concerns about the firm's performance.

Stay Belvedere Hotels (SBHL) provides around a quarter of Home Office asylum accommodation in 51 hotels in England and Wales. It also operates Napier Barracks in Kent, which houses people awaiting asylum decisions and is due to close in September.

SBHL was sub-contracted under a £2bn-a-year deal agreed between accommodation services provider Clearsprings and the previous government in 2019.

An audit found issues with its behaviour as a supplier although the Home Office did not give specific examples. BBC News has approached SBHL for comment.

SBHL's website says it offers a range of pastoral and welfare services that exceed the requirements of its contracts and ensure those staying in its hotels are treated with dignity.

Border security and asylum minister Angela Eagle said the decision had been taken because of greater oversight of asylum accommodation.

"We have made the decision to remove Stay Belvedere Hotels from the Home Office supply chain and will not hesitate to take further action to ensure Home Office contracts deliver for the UK," she said.

Speaking in the Commons later on Tuesday, Eagle said "significant elements" of the company's behaviour "fell short of what we'd expect from a government supplier".

She added the government would conduct a "full audit" of its supply chains.

Shadow home secretary Chris Philp claimed the number of those using asylum hotels had increased by 8,000 since the general election, despite Labour's pledge to end the use of hotels.

He added: "38,000 mainly illegal immigrants are now in those hotels, costing hardworking taxpayers around £2bn a year.

"It is completely unacceptable that taxpayers are asked to foot a bill this size."

The earliest point which the Home Office can exit the contract with SBHL without a break penalty is in September of next year.

It is unclear where those they are housing will go when it does end.

Labour promised at the general election to "end asylum hotels, saving the taxpayer billions of pounds".

Responding to Philp's urgent question in the Commons, Eagle said the government was still committed to that goal but declined to set a date for achieving it.

The number of hotels being used to accommodate asylum seekers is not publicly available.

However, BBC Verify has obtained the figures via a Freedom of Information (FOI) request.

The FOI shows that there were 213 hotels in use during June's general election campaign. While that number initially fell, it increased to 218 in December.

here were 112,187 asylum seekers being supported in the UK at the end of 2024 was

* 38,079 (34%) were in hotel accommodation. That figure is 32% lower than the peak of 56,042 at the end of September 2023

* 70,986 (63%) were in other accommodation, including initial, contingency and dispersal accommodation

* 3,122 (3%) were in receipt of subsistence support only.

The government is looking at plans for failed asylum seekers whose appeals have been exhausted to possibly be sent to the Balkans.

More than 5,000 migrants have arrived in the UK after crossing the Channel on small boats so far this year, according to latest figures.

In 2024 as a whole, 36,816 were detected making the dangerous crossing in small boats.



These poor guys must be Tory donors, and will be replaced by more Labour friendly owners I am guessing...

[Crimson Dynamo]

The government will end a contract with a provider of hotel places for asylum seekers after an audit identified concerns about the firm's performance.

Stay Belvedere Hotels (SBHL) provides around a quarter of Home Office asylum accommodation in 51 hotels in England and Wales. It also operates Napier Barracks in Kent, which houses people awaiting asylum decisions and is due to close in September.

SBHL was sub-contracted under a £2bn-a-year deal agreed between accommodation services provider Clearsprings and the previous government in 2019.

An audit found issues with its behaviour as a supplier although the Home Office did not give specific examples. BBC News has approached SBHL for comment.

SBHL's website says it offers a range of pastoral and welfare services that exceed the requirements of its contracts and ensure those staying in its hotels are treated with dignity.

Border security and asylum minister Angela Eagle said the decision had been taken because of greater oversight of asylum accommodation.

"We have made the decision to remove Stay Belvedere Hotels from the Home Office supply chain and will not hesitate to take further action to ensure Home Office contracts deliver for the UK," she said.

Speaking in the Commons later on Tuesday, Eagle said "significant elements" of the company's behaviour "fell short of what we'd expect from a government supplier".

She added the government would conduct a "full audit" of its supply chains.

Shadow home secretary Chris Philp claimed the number of those using asylum hotels had increased by 8,000 since the general election, despite Labour's pledge to end the use of hotels.

He added: "38,000 mainly illegal immigrants are now in those hotels, costing hardworking taxpayers around £2bn a year.

"It is completely unacceptable that taxpayers are asked to foot a bill this size."

The earliest point which the Home Office can exit the contract with SBHL without a break penalty is in September of next year.

It is unclear where those they are housing will go when it does end.

Labour promised at the general election to "end asylum hotels, saving the taxpayer billions of pounds".

Responding to Philp's urgent question in the Commons, Eagle said the government was still committed to that goal but declined to set a date for achieving it.

The number of hotels being used to accommodate asylum seekers is not publicly available.

However, BBC Verify has obtained the figures via a Freedom of Information (FOI) request.

The FOI shows that there were 213 hotels in use during June's general election campaign. While that number initially fell, it increased to 218 in December.

here were 112,187 asylum seekers being supported in the UK at the end of 2024 was

* 38,079 (34%) were in hotel accommodation. That figure is 32% lower than the peak of 56,042 at the end of September 2023

* 70,986 (63%) were in other accommodation, including initial, contingency and dispersal accommodation

* 3,122 (3%) were in receipt of subsistence support only.

The government is looking at plans for failed asylum seekers whose appeals have been exhausted to possibly be sent to the Balkans.

More than 5,000 migrants have arrived in the UK after crossing the Channel on small boats so far this year, according to latest figures.

In 2024 as a whole, 36,816 were detected making the dangerous crossing in small boats.



These poor guys must be Tory donors, and will be replaced by more Labour friendly owners I am guessing...


He added: "38,000 mainly illegal immigrants are now in those hotels, costing hardworking taxpayers around £2bn a year.

[Quantum Boy]

42 minutes for that....

https://media.invisioncic.com/Mrangmedia/emoticons/belm.png

Imagine being this open about the fact you sit on here all day refreshing the browser. Ouch.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Imagine being this open about the fact you sit on here all day refreshing the browser. Ouch.

well don't tell people you do that and no one will know (obviously we do now)

:skull:

[Quantum Boy]

well don't tell people you do that and no one will know (obviously we do now)

:skull:

https://media.tenor.com/Psc6i0OlC_YAAAAM/uno.gif

[Crimson Dynamo]

Migrant paedophile who attacked teenage girl allowed to stay in Britain as he would face
'inhuman treatment' in Pakistan because he's an 'alcoholic'

https://www.gbnews.com/news/migrant-paedophile-attacked-teenage-girl-avoids-deportation-britain-pakistan-alcoholic

[Livia]

Migrant paedophile who attacked teenage girl allowed to stay in Britain as he would face
'inhuman treatment' in Pakistan because he's an 'alcoholic'

https://www.gbnews.com/news/migrant-paedophile-attacked-teenage-girl-avoids-deportation-britain-pakistan-alcoholic

I wish this stuff still surprised me.