Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

So what can in practical terms fully halt illegal immigration?

662 replies

Wellwhatnowbellaboo · 09/05/2026 10:06

Reform has won by a landslide .... immigration is probably by the look of it the biggest issue. What can realistically without breaking laws be done to really halt this with a big impact ? What would Farage actually do ? Would and should we as a country break some laws to get this done and speak to what people really feel is an issue ? (Many countries do). This is not in labour's dna so I doubt anything will come if it now ... but if you've thought about it or you have solutions what are they ?
And if you are opposed- why and what's the answer ?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
16
usedtobeaylis · 09/05/2026 12:00

Stop criminalising migration. You're not going to stop it, people will always try to move, they always have and always will. The focus should be in creating a more humane system to process migrants.

AyeDeadOn · 09/05/2026 12:02

CoverLikelyZebra · 09/05/2026 11:59

Should only the countries immediately neighbouring danger zones deal with the full cost and impact of each wave of asylum seeks and the costs of verifying their claims? Thatvwould be ridiculous. The UK has no more than its fair share of the global population of refugees if divided among safe countries in proportion to population. Given that a properly equitable distribution would naturally give a slightly higher proportion to richer nations we are really doing a bit less than our fair share. If international agreements for refugees qere changed to force all asylum seekers to make their claim in the first safe country that would have to come with a distribution system to relocate fair proportions of asylum seekers to other countries that do not border damger zones, which would be at the cost of the states involved instead of the personal costs to the asylum seekers, plus an enormous extra layer of bureaucracy to manage and monitor it, it would be far more expensive and we would have more asylum seekers billetted here officially and legally than we do with the current setup.

The best way to tackle illegal migration is to make legal migration easier, claiming asylum easier, and work harder to enforce employee rights for all so that there's no profit to be made shipping in migrant workers to evade costs. Reform are trying to reduce employee rights to make it easier for exoloitative employers so I expect their policies will actually increase the problems.

But surely countries closest will be much more culturally similar, which makes it much easier for people to assimilate and build a life there. And to support or rescue the women they have left behind in such extremely dangerous environments.

usedtobeaylis · 09/05/2026 12:03

Restlessdreams1994 · 09/05/2026 11:41

Reform did not “win by a landslide”. They got 26% of the vote in England, lost to Plaid in Wales and were thrashed in Scotland. They are dressing this up as a success but in fact their vote share has dropped based on previous by-election performance.

The vast majority of “illegal immigrants” in the UK arrived here through legal means such as student visas but stayed on once their right to reside ended. Small boat arrivals are a fraction of immigration, and asylum seekers are vetted and then deported if their claims fail. Focusing on small boats and asylum seekers as the issue just shows how willing people are to fall for Reform propaganda instead of actually understanding what is really happening.

I used to work with overseas students here on student visas and the number who would abscond was not insignificant. The authorities rarely bothered to try to locate them. Reform don't seem to care too much about that group. Not as glamorous as boats I guess.

HoppityBun · 09/05/2026 12:03

Allseeingallknowing · 09/05/2026 11:51

Completely agree. Nothing will happen otherwise.

People believe what they want to believe about the ECHR and much of it is misreported

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2025-09-04-misrepresentations-around-human-rights-and-immigration-fuelling-calls-quit-echr

usedtobeaylis · 09/05/2026 12:04

AyeDeadOn · 09/05/2026 12:02

But surely countries closest will be much more culturally similar, which makes it much easier for people to assimilate and build a life there. And to support or rescue the women they have left behind in such extremely dangerous environments.

Religious tensions says that's a no. It can be more dangerous.

BeardOToots · 09/05/2026 12:05

By next year, net migration is set to fall below zero.
If Reform gain power they’ll have to beg people to come to prop the economy up.

MagpiePi · 09/05/2026 12:05

sashh · 09/05/2026 11:53

I've thought the same.

It is the small boats that need to be stopped. People pay thousands to get a place on one of those rubber boats. The people we want to stop are economic migrants.

We could issue a visa that costs say, £10000 that allows you entry to the UK and to look for work say for 2 years. Two year visa not looking for work.

BUT you have to provide finger prints and DNA and a valid passport from your home contry.

Restrictions can be added about where you are allowed to live / work.

As well as the DNA / fingerprints you re not allowed to use any public funds.

You will have to have a monthly interview, face to face or via zoom with a case worker. If you do not find work or undertake some voluntry work then your visa can be cancelled.

We already allow a lot of younger people from commonwealth countries to enter the UK.

I've not thought out the details but something could be worked out.

Who is going to pay for all those bureaucrats to do the checking up? And do you think there would be a huge increase in the number of employers taking on volunteers rather than paying a living wage to employees?

People arriving in small boats are a tiny percentage of illegal migrants. The vast majority are those who outstay their visas.

If they cracked down on the people who employed illegal migrants it would massively reduce the pull factor. But obviously in the reform narrative it can’t be the poor downtrodden, hard working British citizens who are causing the problem, can it?

Error404FucksNotFound · 09/05/2026 12:06

Nothing can fully halt illegal immigration and anyone who claims they can do that is a liar or a fool.

The illegal migration act 2023 with some amendments would be a start. Perhaps instead of crossing dangerously on boats, refugees and asylum seekers can present themselves to a British embassy in a safe country and request asylum. There are reasons some people may want to get to the UK specifically. They already know the language, for example.

I am very much against any system that says you can request asylum in theory but if you got here by "irregular routes' then you are not eligible.

There has to be an accessible and publicised way for people to request asylum. Then people who don't follow that can be dealt with according to the act and you know that you haven't turned away desperate people.

And the vast majority of refugees dont come to the UK. People act like everyone is trying to come here but thats simply not true. It's something like 1% of forcibly displaced people globally last i read.

A condition of applying should be taking a course on British culture. The important things, not who was king in 1503 or what's black pudding made of. Actual education on laws and societal expectations with consequences for failing to follow them clearly set out.

Tbh the whole bloody country could probably use that course!

AyeDeadOn · 09/05/2026 12:06

usedtobeaylis · 09/05/2026 12:04

Religious tensions says that's a no. It can be more dangerous.

Sure, sure. So you want to import those "tensions" here in big enough numbers that we have similar problems? Like Jewish primary schools needing security guards, for example?

MagpiePi · 09/05/2026 12:07

Allseeingallknowing · 09/05/2026 11:58

And who pay into the system!

So every single person living here who can’t speak English is unemployed and living off the state?

SmudgeButt · 09/05/2026 12:09

What I find frightening should Reform ever be able to unduly influence parliament is that the immigration processes they are proposing currently will drastically effect many people who have come here legitimately. One thing is changing the wait to apply for UK citizenship from 5 years on a indefinite leave to remain to 10 years or more. All these things come with a high price tag for people who move to the UK for work/family. Make it too expensive and the UK will lose a huge number of skilled workers - teachers, business people, NHS staff.

Catwalking · 09/05/2026 12:10

UK only produces a quarter of the food required for all humans on its islands.
Why does anyone think that allowing more people in, can/will possibly work?
We’re already building ‘homes’ on huge areas of productive farmland, so somehow an infinite source of food is going to magically deliver out of nowhere? We’ve defo “paved over paradise”.

Does anyone in in govt. ever possess even an iota of forethought, over & above the obvious, the sun always rises? 🤨 currently.

millymollymoomoo · 09/05/2026 12:11

Recognise these are not asylum seekers but illegal economic migrants.
stop ALL housing, no hotels, no hmos, no access to nhs or healthcare. Turn boats back into French waters. Remove visa from
countries who refuse to cooperate. Detain any that arrive and do not let them roam free.

absoluty crack down on money laundering barbers and bake shops etc.

Lifeofthepartay · 09/05/2026 12:14

Latenightreader · 09/05/2026 11:39

If that is true it sounds horrendous. "Local communities don't tollerate the building of mosques - if any are attempted they are pulled down in the night"? I am really struggling to articulate quite how sick this makes me feel.

Would Muslim countries allow Christians to build churches? I don't think I you are even safe showing a bit of PDA while on holiday....

GrinchPink · 09/05/2026 12:16

MissAmbrosia · 09/05/2026 10:32

Asylum seekers are not illegal. Illegal immigrants are the ones overstaying visas etc. I would introduce ID, checks on where people live and do spot checks on businesses to ensure they are not employing people with no right to be in the country.

Ok… what about this then? Very much illegal and should no be able to claim asylum on fake claims !! How do we differentiate now between who is genuine and who’s not 🤷🏼‍♀️ most probably not genuine and could stop in first safe country.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c937wldkkw8o

Undercover footage of an Asian woman sitting on a bed. The chimney breast behind her has been turned into a feature wall with bright blue and silver wallpaper, while the bed cover is a large check pattern in yellow, blue and grey.

Legal advisers help migrants pose as gay to get asylum, undercover BBC investigation finds

The BBC exposes a shadow industry charging migrants thousands of pounds to help them cheat the asylum system.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c937wldkkw8o

Cheese55 · 09/05/2026 12:16

MagpiePi · 09/05/2026 11:27

Spend money (shock horror!) on training and employing far more immigration officers so that all migrants and asylum seekers entering the country can be processed quickly and either given legal status to stay and be allowed to work and contribute to the economy, or are deported back to their country of origin.

Employ enough immigration officers to check up and deal with those who overstay visas or otherwise flout their visas.

Prosecute any employers who do not carry out the correct vetting procedure to make sure they only employ people who have a right to work and prosecute employers that pay less than minimum wage and are the ones attracting all the ‘wrong’ types of immigrants.

Not as dramatic and brutal as the US ICE agents who go around rounding up anyone who isn’t white, which is what I’m sure a lot of people would love to see.

It's the legal appeals that take the time not the amount of immigration officers. Also a country has to accept the person back so you are dealing with immigration office of a, sometimes, developing country

Weeellokthen · 09/05/2026 12:16

tulippa · 09/05/2026 11:40

I used to teach English to foreign national prisoners, some of whom were illegal immigrants due to be deported at the end of their sentences. I was told by them more than once that they passed through Germany, The Netherlands, France, Belgium etc as there was no way for them to get work there without having the correct papers. They came to the UK because we don't check/care and they knew they'd get work somewhere in our underground economy.
This may not apply to all illegal immigrants but if we crack down on the barbers, vape shops, car washes and other businesses we get cheap deals from paying cash and turning a blind eye to what goes on behind the scenes with them, we might discourage a proportion risking their lives to arrive here illegally.

I agree, the amount of criminal activity in plain sight of authorities is astonishing in the Uk.Why wouldn't undocumented, potential criminal, economic migrants want to settle here 😂
I have plenty of friends from India and all over the world who have had to jump through hoops to get jobs and settle here.

Bikenutz · 09/05/2026 12:18

There is so much interest in the movement of people across international borders and yet so little attention paid to the movement of goods or money. This imbalance matters, because the latter two do the most damage to the UK economy.

Take the movement of goods. The illegal import of foods, especially meat that does not meet UK standards undercuts British farmers and legitimate suppliers, costing the sector significant lost trade and weakening already fragile supply chains. These products bypass animal welfare rules, environmental protections, and basic food safety checks. The harm is financial but it is also a direct risk to public health when consumers are exposed to food that would never be allowed onto UK shelves through legal channels.

Then look at the movement of money. Consider the international coffee chain on your local high street. You might assume your purchase mainly contributes to UK tax revenues. In reality, only a small fraction of what you pay stays here. Profits are often shifted abroad through complex internal charges such as large fees for using branding, paid to subsidiaries in low‑tax jurisdictions like the Netherlands or Luxembourg. On paper, the UK arm makes little or no profit, and its corporation tax bill all but disappears. Legal, but devastating for the public finances. This pattern is not limited to coffee. Online retailers, energy companies, and digital platforms routinely move profits offshore, while UK consumers, workers, and small businesses carry a growing tax burden.

At the same time, illicit flows—such as VAT fraud, counterfeit goods, and money laundering silently drain billions more from the system, largely out of sight and out of mind.

This helps explain why the UK’s finances are under such strain.

We focus intensely on who crosses our borders, while largely ignoring what crosses them - and how much value leaks out as a result. Value that could be paying for the NHS, etc

Farage is a money man working for his own private gain - of course they want you to be distracted. There’s an objective debate to be had around immigration policy but don’t let them take our eyes off of these other things.

SomedayIllBeSaturdayNight · 09/05/2026 12:21

kinkytoes · 09/05/2026 10:51

Reduce the comfy life and benefits offered here. I honestly think that's the only way.

People aren't coming here for the weather, that's for sure.

Illegal immigrants cannot access benefits of any kind. So already done!

TemperanceWest · 09/05/2026 12:29

Wellwhatnowbellaboo · 09/05/2026 10:06

Reform has won by a landslide .... immigration is probably by the look of it the biggest issue. What can realistically without breaking laws be done to really halt this with a big impact ? What would Farage actually do ? Would and should we as a country break some laws to get this done and speak to what people really feel is an issue ? (Many countries do). This is not in labour's dna so I doubt anything will come if it now ... but if you've thought about it or you have solutions what are they ?
And if you are opposed- why and what's the answer ?

Reform hasn't won by a landslide. It has won the most council seats in England in this election yes (not every council seat was up for election), but it has only won control of 14/136 councils in England. It failed to win power in Wales and Scotland.

Perrygreen · 09/05/2026 12:30

Yes, this "if we crack down on the barbers, vape shops, car washes and other businesses we get cheap deals from paying cash and turning a blind eye to what goes on behind the scenes with them, we might discourage a proportion risking their lives to arrive here illegally."
See also, food delivery drivers, ice-cream bars, mini-marts and nail bars.

There needs to be a collosal (ie; covid emergency) level of investment in trading standards, council teams and police so they can start making it impossible for these dodgy businesses to operate.

And I believe that re-joining the EU is needed too. France no longer have to care who comes over the channel to the UK.

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 09/05/2026 12:31

AyeDeadOn · 09/05/2026 10:36

Why arent they seeking asylum in the first safe country? Once they choose to go through another safe country, or many other safe countries, imo they are no longer asylum seekers. They have other reasons for wanting to come specifically here, not just to a safe place.

No, asylum seekers are not legally required to claim asylum in the first safe country they enter under international law. While Mumsnetters politicians often suggest this, the 1951 Refugee Convention doesn’t contain an obligation to seek asylum in the first safe country reached.

SpottyAlpaca · 09/05/2026 12:32

Internment camps.

Anyone who is currently in the UK illegally or who enters the UK illegally is immediately sent to an internment camp. They are then offered a choice: Immediate deportation at the UK taxpayer’s expense or they remain in the camp indefinitely. They cannot leave other than to be deported. They cannot work or study. They receive only basic subsistence rations, no money, and only emergency medical treatment. There is no entertainment, no recreational facilities & no means of practicing their religion other then private prayer.

This would obviously require fundamental changes to human rights laws, but it would stop illegal immigration in weeks.

AyeDeadOn · 09/05/2026 12:33

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 09/05/2026 12:31

No, asylum seekers are not legally required to claim asylum in the first safe country they enter under international law. While Mumsnetters politicians often suggest this, the 1951 Refugee Convention doesn’t contain an obligation to seek asylum in the first safe country reached.

I didnt say they were legally required to so I have no idea what the point of your post is.

Latenightreader · 09/05/2026 12:33

Lifeofthepartay · 09/05/2026 12:14

Would Muslim countries allow Christians to build churches? I don't think I you are even safe showing a bit of PDA while on holiday....

I've just searched for 'church in' plus the name of a dozen or so majority Muslim country and almost all have churches and cathedrals. Iran was the exception I found - I could well believe there are others and only searched for a few minutes. Many Middle Eastern countries have extremely old Christian minorities.

Are you saying that countries should only allow people to practise their state religion, or is it specifically Islam you object to?