Protests flared across Britain this weekend as anti-migrant demonstrators gathered outside hotels housing asylum seekers. Clashes erupted following the arrest of a migrant charged with sexual assault in Epping, prompting heightened tension around the nation's asylum policies. Keir Starmer's Labour government is facing mounting pressure, with immigration emerging as a prominent public concern.

 

The use of hotels for housing asylum seekers has ignited outrage, costing billions annually. Protesters in cities like Bristol, Birmingham, and Epping took to the streets, waving British flags and holding signs demanding action, including the defiant "Stop the boats." On Saturday, small-scale rallies swept across England, Scotland, and Wales, showcasing public disapproval.

 

A pivotal court ruling ordered the removal of asylum seekers from a hotel in Epping, marking a hotspot for protestors. While the government plans to appeal, the situation remains tense. Meanwhile, Nigel Farage, leader of the Reform UK party, has outlined proposals for mass deportations and withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights if his party gains power, reported CNN.

 

Official figures reveal a concerning peak in asylum claims, with more migrants housed in hotels than in previous years. In response, the government pledged to transform the asylum appeal process to clear a backlog of cases and reduce reliance on hotels. An independent body of adjudicators will be established to tackle the significant backlog of 106,000 cases, including 51,000 appeals with year-long waits.

 

Interior Minister Yvette Cooper labelled the existing system as chaotic and pledged reforms to restore control. "We cannot carry on with these completely unacceptable delays," Cooper declared, underscoring the government's urgency in addressing immigration concerns.

 

The implementation of a streamlined process aims to accelerate decisions and phase out hotels, attempting to appease public discontent during this politically charged period. As the government navigates these reforms, the fate of thousands of asylum seekers hangs in the balance, set against ongoing protest action.

 

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from CNN 2025-08-27

 

UK is the left on steroids. I hope the result there wakes the rest of the world up before its too late

 

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Interior Minister Yvette Cooper labelled the existing system as chaotic and pledged reforms to restore control. "We cannot carry on with these completely unacceptable delays," Cooper declared, underscoring the government's urgency in addressing immigration concerns.

 

Dog and Pony show. Word salad from Cooper. Lip service. 

 

I think I preferred her when she was a smug, self satisfied virtue signaller. At least that was authentic. 

 

2 hours ago, webfact said:

 

Protests flared across Britain this weekend as anti-migrant demonstrators gathered outside hotels housing asylum seekers. Clashes erupted following the arrest of a migrant charged with sexual assault in Epping, prompting heightened tension around the nation's asylum policies. Keir Starmer's Labour government is facing mounting pressure, with immigration emerging as a prominent public concern.

 

The use of hotels for housing asylum seekers has ignited outrage, costing billions annually. Protesters in cities like Bristol, Birmingham, and Epping took to the streets, waving British flags and holding signs demanding action, including the defiant "Stop the boats." On Saturday, small-scale rallies swept across England, Scotland, and Wales, showcasing public disapproval.

 

A pivotal court ruling ordered the removal of asylum seekers from a hotel in Epping, marking a hotspot for protestors. While the government plans to appeal, the situation remains tense. Meanwhile, Nigel Farage, leader of the Reform UK party, has outlined proposals for mass deportations and withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights if his party gains power, reported CNN.

 

Official figures reveal a concerning peak in asylum claims, with more migrants housed in hotels than in previous years. In response, the government pledged to transform the asylum appeal process to clear a backlog of cases and reduce reliance on hotels. An independent body of adjudicators will be established to tackle the significant backlog of 106,000 cases, including 51,000 appeals with year-long waits.

 

Interior Minister Yvette Cooper labelled the existing system as chaotic and pledged reforms to restore control. "We cannot carry on with these completely unacceptable delays," Cooper declared, underscoring the government's urgency in addressing immigration concerns.

 

The implementation of a streamlined process aims to accelerate decisions and phase out hotels, attempting to appease public discontent during this politically charged period. As the government navigates these reforms, the fate of thousands of asylum seekers hangs in the balance, set against ongoing protest action.

 

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from CNN 2025-08-27

 

It's time to deport Farage. A drowning island would be suitable🙏

21 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

It's time to deport Farage. A drowning island would be suitable🙏

At this moment Farage is the only leader in the UK that can do something and is willing to.

Starmer and previous Governments have done little to halt the serious problem.

Labor have plans to close hotels by 2029, fast-track appeals, deploy 3,000 riot police, and crack down on misinformation. But these are woefully inadequate against 111,084 asylum claims, 50,000+ boat arrivals, and protests at 26+ hotels (Epping, Horley, Canary Wharf). The Bell Hotel’s closure and councils eyeing injunctions show a system cracking, with 60% public anger and Reform UK’s 26% poll lead waiting to pounce. The 170,500 police can’t handle nationwide riots.

It look like Starmer may be forced to hold a general election!

 

Just now, mikeymike100 said:

At this moment Farage is the only leader in the UK that can do something and is willing to.

Starmer and previous Governments have done little to halt the serious problem.

Labor have plans to close hotels by 2029, fast-track appeals, deploy 3,000 riot police, and crack down on misinformation. But these are woefully inadequate against 111,084 asylum claims, 50,000+ boat arrivals, and protests at 26+ hotels (Epping, Horley, Canary Wharf). The Bell Hotel’s closure and councils eyeing injunctions show a system cracking, with 60% public anger and Reform UK’s 26% poll lead waiting to pounce. The 170,500 police can’t handle nationwide riots.

It look like Starmer may be forced to hold a general election!

 

No,

he's a demagogue and you are trapped in his bubble.

He has to follow the same laws as Starmer.

As I said yesterday, he is on his ego trip to gain influence and power. But he's a toothless tiger if he would be in a government.

But the bottom of society will love him, those with a hopeless life 

 

4 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

No,

he's a demagogue and you are trapped in his bubble.

He has to follow the same laws as Starmer.

As I said yesterday, he is on his ego trip to gain influence and power. But he's a toothless tiger if he would be in a government.

But the bottom of society will love him, those with a hopeless life 

 

Yes he has to follow the laws as Starmer.

I am not trapped anywhere I am American and can see that unless something happens in the UK soon to stop the illegals invading the UK, or I should say being welcomed by the UK and given accommodation, food, clothes, mobile phones etc, something bad is going to happen. Nobody want that!

Labor’s plans are a Band-Aid on a gunshot wound. They’re moving, but in slow motion. Fast-track appeals and 6,000 hotel removals sound nice, but 32,345 migrants, 51,000 appeals, and protests at 26+ hotels laugh in their face.

There is no question that Farage is taking advantage of the present situation, but who else is there?

The 9,072 deportations against 111,084 claims and 32,345 hotel occupants is a losing ratio. The 2029 hotel phase-out ignores immediate tensions, as Epping’s closure sparked protests elsewhere (e.g., Broxbourne’s Delta Marriott). The £100 million anti-smuggling fund hasn’t dented 50,000+ arrivals.

29 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

It look like Starmer may be forced to hold a general election!

 

How good would that be?  

 

Alas...

 

54 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

and given accommodation, food, clothes, mobile phones

Ah, you follow only stupid propaganda. There are no phones to supply and sure, they will get food and clothes and a roof.

What is your alternative? Kill them all?

12 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Ah, you follow only stupid propaganda. There are no phones to supply and sure, they will get food and clothes and a roof.

What is your alternative? Kill them all?

Why not send ALL the illegals back to France where they came from and is supposedly a safe country. If the bleeding heart liberals and the human rights lawyer scream racism and clutch at their pearls just send 5 ille4gals to move into their place and let them support, accommodate and feed the illegals at their own and NOT the UK governments expense.

 

Spend the you would have spent on the illegals, on the people of the UK.

1 hour ago, newbee2022 said:

Ah, you follow only stupid propaganda. There are no phones to supply and sure, they will get food and clothes and a roof.

What is your alternative? Kill them all?

 This is enough No more pussy footing around  Get Serious.

Send all the Illegals and non registered ones back to where they came from .

Stop the boats from entering the UK  .

If need be sink the boats  before they enter UK waters .

Let the Navy pick up any survivors and take them back to were they came from .

Some Do Gooders  won't like this but hey they can pick them up and look after them if not Shut Up.

16 minutes ago, digger70 said:

 This is enough No more pussy footing around  Get Serious.

Send all the Illegals and non registered ones back to where they came from .

Stop the boats from entering the UK  .

If need be sink the boats  before they enter UK waters .

Let the Navy pick up any survivors and take them back to were they came from .

Some Do Gooders  won't like this but hey they can pick them up and look after them if not Shut Up.

Once again to all of you who believe in Santa, Farage, and fascist propaganda;

You can only sent migrants "back" if the recipient will agree.

All other "options" are fantasy 

59 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Why not send ALL the illegals back to France where they came from and is supposedly a safe country. If the bleeding heart liberals and the human rights lawyer scream racism and clutch at their pearls just send 5 ille4gals to move into their place and let them support, accommodate and feed the illegals at their own and NOT the UK governments expense.

 

Spend the you would have spent on the illegals, on the people of the UK.

You are another one who needs extra lessons:

You can send back if France accept.

I advice you to more correct information 

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

Why not send ALL the illegals back to France where they came from and is supposedly a safe country. If the bleeding heart liberals and the human rights lawyer scream racism and clutch at their pearls just send 5 ille4gals to move into their place and let them support, accommodate and feed the illegals at their own and NOT the UK governments expense.

 

Spend the you would have spent on the illegals, on the people of the UK.

 

You mean like when we had the Dublin Regulation.......now, where did that disappear to I wonder?

1 hour ago, newbee2022 said:

Ah, you follow only stupid propaganda. There are no phones to supply and sure, they will get food and clothes and a roof.

What is your alternative? Kill them all?

Currently they get (current rates are £49.18 or £9.95 weekly), and phones aren’t part of standard support, but charities like Migrant Help, Leeds Refugee Forum, and Heart4Refugees provide second-hand smartphones.

But we are getting away from the problem aren't we.

The alternative is of course not killing them off, but not allowing them in, in the first place.

But that ship sadly has sailed.
Maybe if they stopped giving out benefits it might be a start?

Just now, newbee2022 said:

You are another one who needs extra lessons:

You can send back if France accept.

I advice you to more correct information 

What do you NOT understand about this is MY opinion and NOT yours.

 

If you don't like my opinion, then don't read my post. Put me on your ignore list if you wish. You could always to use a quaint old English expression "teach your grandmother to suck eggs".

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teaching_grandmother_to_suck_eggs

 

Teaching (your) grandmother to suck eggs is a saying that refers to a person giving advice to another person in a subject with which the other person is already familiar (and probably more so than the person giving the advice).

Isn't it just amazing how you can have 2 VERY different interpretations of the same event from different journalists, underming what many of this thread are so eager to paint as some sort of national crisis? Here is exactly the same topic but from Duncan Robinson, political editor at the Economists. 

 

'There were supposed to be riots last weekend. For weeks, a sliver of British society—its politicians and its media—had breathlessly warned that Britain was a “tinderbox”, at “breaking point” and on the brink of “civil war”. A hot Bank Holiday weekend should have been the perfect moment for these violent prophecies to come to pass. Protests were planned outside asylum hotels from Nuneaton to Newcastle. Newspapers fired up live blogs to keep a tally on the trouble; broadcasters turned up to film it all.

Instead, the protests passed largely without incident. There was some pushing and shoving in Liverpool; in Bristol grumpy middle-aged men clashed with students who had come to march against them. Come late afternoon, both sides headed home. In total, the forecast civil unrest amounted to a few dozen arrests. For comparison, there are about 50 arrests each weekend at football matches across England and Wales. 

A hot, calm weekend demonstrates two things. First, Britain is not as angry as people think. Britain has little history of street politics. Flare-ups, such as last summer when riots ripped through parts of the country, are the exception rather than the norm. The draconian response from the state—with hefty sentences handed out even for cheering them on social media—reminded people of the stakes of joining in. 

Second, politicians should ponder whether the people who do turn up to wave flags outside asylum hotels—or who hang flags from lampposts—truly speak for the country at large. Robert Jenrick, the Conservative shadow justice secretary, has been most keen to align himself with the protesters. Earlier this month Mr Jenrick visited Epping, a market town to the east of London and the centre of recent asylum protests, where he posed next to concerned mums from Essex. Unfortunately, he was also pictured near a bald man who—unbeknownst to the wannabe Tory leader—turned out to be Eddy Butler, a former activist for the far-right British National Party.

Britain’s elite is engaged in a bout of self-radicalisation, convincing itself that a niche fringe speaks for a silent majority. In truth, the immigration debate in Britain is marked more by consensus than conflict. Every major party wants lower legal migration; every major party wants small-boat crossings to stop. So do most voters. The only point of debate is how these goals are met. It is a trope for people to claim that Westminster knows nothing of the country it governs. But no one is more disconnected than a politician who thinks Britons yearn for the mob.' 

 

1 minute ago, mikeymike100 said:

but not allowing them in, in the first place.

Question: how you want to do that? How to prevent them entering UK?

You can reduce or eliminate the pull factors. But therefore you need new laws which probably will violate International laws. This is an unsolved dilemma.

2 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Question: how you want to do that? How to prevent them entering UK?

You can reduce or eliminate the pull factors. But therefore you need new laws which probably will violate International laws. This is an unsolved dilemma.

 

 

Odd that the only ones whoever have a "solution" are the ones who are never actually in power........always shouting safely from the sidelines.

12 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Once again to all of you who believe in Santa, Farage, and fascist propaganda;

You can only sent migrants "back" if the recipient will agree.

All other "options" are fantasy 

I guess that you don't like it when people disagree with you.

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

What do you NOT understand about this is MY opinion and NOT yours.

 

If you don't like my opinion, then don't read my post. Put me on your ignore list if you wish. You could always to use a quaint old English expression "teach your grandmother to suck eggs".

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teaching_grandmother_to_suck_eggs

 

Teaching (your) grandmother to suck eggs is a saying that refers to a person giving advice to another person in a subject with which the other person is already familiar (and probably more so than the person giving the advice).

Your opinion? Well, sure you can opt for an opinion the earth being flat.

But the facts are different.

And your opinion about the migration problem is not backed by facts. It's simply RUBBISH.

But we live in a country of free speech. And everybody can spreading nonsense. 

So, actually it doesn't bother me really.

6 hours ago, Gsxrnz said:

 

 

Yeah it's hilarious innit ?

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15027723/Migrant-lived-tourist-THREE-European-countries-illegally-entering-UK-raped-15-year-old-girl.html

3 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

Odd that the only ones whoever have a "solution" are the ones who are never actually in power........always shouting safely from the sidelines.

Yes, that's what Farage can do best 

11 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Question: how you want to do that? How to prevent them entering UK?

You can reduce or eliminate the pull factors. But therefore you need new laws which probably will violate International laws. This is an unsolved dilemma.

 

That's what they said about the US border.  All it took was a change in the White House and now net illegal immigration is less than zero.  There are more leaving than entering.

 

Just now, newbee2022 said:

Your opinion? Well, sure you can opt for an opinion the earth being flat.

But the facts are different.

And your opinion about the migration problem is not backed by facts. It's simply RUBBISH.

But we live in a country of free speech. And everybody can spreading nonsense. 

So, actually it doesn't bother me really.

What a contradictory person you are.

 

Firstly you say that "we" (who is "we" BTW) live in a country of free speech and then you rubbish my post even though I am exercising MY right to free speech.

People are too distracted with illegal immigration. Legal immigration is by far the biggest problem. Legal status is just a government fiction. What's important is holding territory against foreign tribes and preserving the culture and people.

4 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

That's what they said about the US border.  All it took was a change in the White House and now net illegal immigration is less than zero.  There are more leaving than entering.

 

You are correct, but the US has President Trump an actual leader, whilst the UK has well, a limp lettuce called Starmer, huge difference!

Just now, newbee2022 said:

Yes, that's what Farage can do best 

And now you are rubbish somebody else's right to free speech.

 

Can you see the contradiction yet.

 

Nigel Farage lives in the UK, stood for an election and won a seat in Parliament.

 

Do you live in the UK, and did you stand in the last general election and win a seat in Parliament?

7 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

That's what they said about the US border.  All it took was a change in the White House and now net illegal immigration is less than zero.  There are more leaving than entering.

 

Not possible in Europe.