£15bn on hotels?

It's true that the EU are replacing the DA with a new system in 2026 (which we will also miss out on) due to issues with the system. Pre Brexit, successful transfers out of the UK using the DA stood at between 7 and 16% of the total incoming. Compare that with zero now, because there is no mechanism and therefore very few are being processed.

It's true also to say that the UK was a much less effective user of the Dublin Agreement than some of its co EU member states. That responsibility of course lies with the government of the day. The fact remains that we had more control of our borders (at least when we speak about asylum seeker processing) as an EU member than we have now post-Brexit.

Can you say how many used this and still do for say ROI?

Generally it’s very low numbers which is why Dublin has had similar protests and issues.

Which EU country has used the DA to resolve migration issues?

Indeed, the key difference being for the UK now that since Brexit we can no longer rely on the law that determined which EU member state was responsible for examining an asylum claim, based on where the applicant first entered the EU. Which tends to be a key component of the argument against the boat people ("if they're that desperate to escape, why don't they settle in the first safe country they come to?") Well, before Brexit, we had the means with which to argue this case.

Your ridiculous insinuations are meaningless. They ARE incomers. They are not already resident here therefore they have come in to our country.

Some observations/criticisms in the report going forwards:

The number of asylum seekers in hotels is currently significantly lower than during the peak of hotel use—32,059 people as of June 2025, compared to 56,042 in September 2023, although that still represents an 8% increase on the numbers being accommodated in hotels in June 2024, which casts doubt on the Home Office’s assertion they are continuing to reduce reliance on hotel accommodation.

The Government has committed to reducing the cost of the asylum system and ending the use of hotels by 2029. This is a stated Government priority, but making promises to appeal to popular sentiment without setting out a clear and fully articulated plan for securing alternative accommodation risks under-delivery and consequently undermining public trust still further.

[There is a break clause to the contracts beginning March 2026]

The 2026 break clause and the end of the contracts in 2029 represent an opportunity to draw a line under the current failed, chaotic and expensive system and move to a model that is more effective and offers value for money. While the Home Office is considering options, it has not yet shared a clear strategy for the delivery of a sustainable accommodation system. Moreover, there has been little clarity from ministers even regarding the basis on which they will make a decision on using the break clause. There is a serious risk that if the Home Office does not expedite the development of a long-term strategy for the future delivery of asylum accommodation, when it is time to replace the current contracts the department will find itself in a similar position to that of 2019, with limited choices as to how it secures accommodation.

The Home Office has developed plans for a fairer distribution of asylum accommodation, but made limited progress, and we share the scepticism that their plans will be achieved.

Come again, this time written coherently?

Merely an observation. If you find it's being made about your vocabulary and thought processes enough to be unoriginal, maybe you should stop and consider why.

I think that is what they say. Under the UK government’s Illegal Migration Act 2023, anyone who:

arrives in the UK without permission (for example, by small boat), and

passes through a “safe” third country (like France),

is considered to have entered illegally and is not eligible to claim asylum in the UK.

@WildLimePoet yes ,many many expose programs have covered all this over the years

The fake English language schools telling various educational institutions the level of English is good which is a lie. Fake marriages ,jobs all sorts. Collisions within council ...it's intricate and deep.

only 14 deportations have been prevented by the ECHR

You are thinking of cases we lost at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. We don't know how many deportations have been halted because of appeals made under the ECHR at court hearings or tribunals held in the UK -'Dame Angela Eagle, the border security minister, said it would be a “disproportionate cost” to provide data on the number of deportations of foreign criminals or illegal migrants that had been stopped as a result of ECHR claims'

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/02/20/home-office-refuses-reveal-number-deportations-halted-echr/

Although there are in fact some stats for foreign criminals (but not asylum seekers) here;

Home Office management information shows that, from April 2008 to June 2021, 21,521 appeals against deportation were lodged by FNOs

Of the appeals that have been determined, 6,042 FNOs had their deportation appeal allowed at the First Tier Tribunal, with around 40% (2,392) of them doing so on Human Rights grounds.

A review of a random sample of FNO allowed appeal determinations has also been conducted to understand more specifically the grounds on which appeals allowed on Human Rights grounds were allowed... In the period 1 April 2016 to 8 November 2021, of 1,011 appeals against deportation by FNOs that were allowed on Human Rights grounds at First Tier Tribunal, an estimated 70% were allowed solely on Article 8 grounds [right to respect for private and family life].

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/foreign-national-offenders-appeals-on-human-rights-grounds-2008-to-2021

@Puzzledandpissedoff because we are in a reactive situation with people arriving in boats
If we can get tough and say no if you come here illegally you will not be allowed to stay.

I think there's some truth hidden in your post.

But I'm pretty sure most visas don't allow any other than partners and dependent children to to brought in. (And dependents are allowed to work, each family member has to pay health service surcharge and they aren't entitled to non-contributory benefits).

I've seen interesting and credible info on migrants' income derived from HMRC data. Average income of migrants appears to reach UK average after a few years. In other words, I'm far from convinced that migrants are a drain. Or, put another way, calling them low-skilled doesnt mean they are ALL low skilled/paid.

GDP per head can be lower because, well, there's more heads. But it is plausible that without migration the total GDP would have been proportionately lower.

To have a stable population seems to require increasing productivity to pay for investment in training and higher pay for jobs like care work. Either higher productivity, higher taxes or higher migration perhaps.

To the extent I might be a wokey-lefty I like to blame (or not) migration rather than migrants.

We must stop ploughing money into people who do not need our help ... We should be helping the truly vulnerable and those fleeing their lives

I agreed completely, @StatuteofLiberty, but a difficulty is that vast numbers of would-be asylum seekers produce well rehearsed stories insisting that they are in the second category, knowing that there's little chance of them being properly checked or even if their identity and place of origin is what they say it is

Regardless of claims about what we could do before Brexit - which conveniently overlook numerous amnesties which have been granted to swerve the difficulties - there's really no straightforward way to check someone who's wilfully hidden their history and who's only interest is gaining admittance no matter what barriers we attempt to put in place

A tip, if you lack originality, you can use chat GPT find better insults.

Incomers, a word i have only heard used by the far right and supporters of when trying to justify their racism.

I have not read this thread but as I have just said on another as we stare down another bleak horrendous winter...we must stop ploughing money into people who do not need our help.

The refugee and asylum system must take people of our choosing ,not people like the great hulking men who force themselves upon us without our choosing
We should be helping the truly vulnerable and those fleeing their lives .
We should be able to offer quality sanctuary to them and at no detrimental to ourselves

This is all very very wrong.

Part ideology, part incompetence and part corruption.

Open borders is a kind of mad ‘be kind’ ideology that the political classes subscribe to because it makes them feel and sound worldly and cosmopolitan. makes them look like they are outward looking, when really they are thick as mince who have no ideas on how to do the hard work to make the country better, just focus on optics.

And the incompetence part is that low skilled labour costs less than training up your own population. Notice how the benefits bill started 59 balloon when tax credits were introduced and it was about the time immigration started to get out of control.

Our ruling classes have been of a particularly low calibre since 1997. People who rather than growing the skills and income of the nation, decided to import cheap labour and give a bung in the form of unlimited benefits to the locals to keep them quiet. Ever since that time, GDP per capita has been in decline. We bring in low skilled immigrants with huge families that will never earn enough to contribute enough that they pay for themselves. At the same time we have a ballooning welfare bill for the locals.

We used to build stuff to sell. Not just manufacturing, but intellectual property, finance, high value commodities. Thats how you generate wealth. Now this country is a conveyor of second rate universities and bogus colleges pretending to sell an education and selling visas instead, often to ‘mature’ students who bring wife, kids, parents and other elderly relatives and (understandably) use it as a way to get indefinite leave to remain. And there a racket in every sector engaging in import of low skilled labour. The care sector is literally colluding with fake immigration ‘companies’ that sell visas abroad. Thats not a romantic view of the past, just a factual observation.

All of these ‘businesses’ benefiting from open borders are either donors to these corrupt politicians or the politicians are advisors or employed by these companies after m leaving office. These people are ripping us off and laughing at us.

At the same time the asylum system is broken beyond repair. Why? It’s just too ‘ard, innit?

None of that has made the country richer. The myth that uncontrolled immigration is good for the economy is a total lie.

Massive increase in asylum applications within the EU within the last five years as well:

First-time asylum applications in EU countries:

2020 415,200
2021 536,000
2022 873,700
2023 1,049,500
2024 912,000

I assume that a proportion of the 18.3m have returned.

The OP was about asylum seekers and their hotel cost. But I guess the the majority of (legal) migration could be reduced.

What is your theory for WHY governments want high levels of inward migration? It must be something bad or they wouldn't be so coy about it.

We do.

18.3million incomers and 8 million net migration since 1997 tells you we do.

Just think about that. 8 million net migration since 1997, it is total madness. And 18.3 incomers is just batshit crazy. How on earth can it be good for social cohesion and integration with these kind of crazy levels.

In the mid 90s net migration was around 50k, totally sustainable and makes sense. In the early 90s, net migration was 0.

This country is cooked.

And they say satire is dead!

This joke is quite funny.

Would you rather they slept on the streets?

This is completely inaccurate. If you don’t understand what the Dublin Convention is, or how it worked for the UK, or the conditions that had to be met before we could send anyone anywhere, then please stop citing it.

I would happily blame Farage for pretty much anything from global warming to Oasis reforming, but the small boats are not his fault.

But, we don't have open borders