 |
| Sir Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron earlier this year (Image: The Independent) |
Britain this summer was seemingly dominated by a wild debate about 'patriotism' - who is 'truly' patriotic, who is 'more' patriotic, and which patriotism is the 'right' patriotism. These are interesting questions to be had, and a part of me is glad we're having these discussions - it's healthy to understand what the consensus is every now and then. It started so well when England women's national team won the Euros. Even I was pleased for England.
But then it appeared we swiftly moved on from that positive feeling, to something rather uncomfortable. Patriotism was given a completely different meaning, fuelled by digital and traditional media channels and several parts of the country. The situation around asylum seekers and refugees living in hotels has taken centre stage, and the UK government officials feel cornered, torn in the middle, struggling to strike a complex balance between pleasing the disenfranchised protesters (regardless of which 'side' of the argument you're on) and meaningful policies that would bring ease the moral panic.
Now, I am writing this as a proud Brit. I'm a proud Welshman, of course. However, I also love Britain. While I know others who have left the UK and living the dream abroad, for me, there is no place I'd rather live than home. The proudest I've ever felt being British was back in 2012 when London hosted the Olympic and Paralympic Games. It was two months of pure joy - people in their masses came together, putting any difference they may have had to one side, and embraced the amazing sport and general camaraderie. And, may I say, we - as a country - were terrific hosts, and if the Games were to take place tomorrow, we'd be totally ready and offer the same warmth.
Some of you reading this may laugh, convinced that 2012 was nothing compared to 2025. Those who think that have short term memories. 2012, I remember vividly - the austerity that threatened key resources, high unemployment, the global economy still bruised after the crash four years previous, and tensions across the Middle East and North Africa threatened key regimes in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere. 2012 wasn't a fun year, but that summer reminded us that the human race can get along nicely.
Not much has changed in 13 years, sadly. The UK economy continues to threaten to collapse, tensions in the Middle East (and Ukraine) are brewing towards breaking point, and the influence of social media continues to rattle Pandora's box. This has been shaken even more this summer with pockets of protests across the UK, taking place outside of hotels currently housing asylum seekers and refugees. According to latest figures, more than 32,000 are residing in hotels and Bed and Breakfast - and with one case of a sexual assault charge to a resident living in an Epping hotel, it has accelerated for a need of an urgent policy review.
This policy isn't new. It had been brought to mainstream attention during the Covid-19 pandemic, when the number of asylum seekers in hotels started to sharply rise. However, the tail-end of the last government, followed by the current one, have been overwhelmed by the tens of thousands of individuals and families coming through the system annually.
There have been attempts to ease the situation, and signs of things improving - UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer agreed a 'one-in-one-out' scheme with his France's counterpart, Emmanuel Macron, to try and share the burden. Starmer has also pledged to 'smash the gangs', referring to the mafia-type groups who are taking advantage of vulnerable refugees by taking their life savings and using that money to put them on small, frail boats with no guarantee that they'd be alive by the end of their Calais-to-Dover journey, nor a guarantee that they'd be able to stay in the UK for more than ten minutes after arriving.
These attempts have barely taken to effect so it'll be difficult to know whether the plans are working. Those who shout the loudest express impatience and say that actions don't go far enough. Unfortunately, it's those voices who the UK government is focusing too much on, trying to calm tensions at home where they should be turning their attention towards international diplomacy.
It is vital that Britain steps in, with fellow European nations (and not just with France), and collectively reach out to governments in Sudan, Afghanistan, Eritrea, Yemen, and so on, and influence change. They did so going to the United States in solidarity with Ukraine, they can do it again on immigration. Certainly, this will be a significant challenge. The Taliban, for instance, won't suddenly not persecute women for venturing out of the house. And Sudan suddenly won't stop a civil war just because Europe cannot cope with the number of people entering their countries from the African nation. But without consistent and constructive dialogue, we will simply see the situation get worse. And with the UK Home Office pledging to close all the hotels housing asylum seekers by 2029, if improvements aren't made by then, these refugees and asylum seekers would then vacate, be unaccounted for, and possibly living on the streets while waiting even longer to have their right to remain applications processed.
The problem is, those taking issue with the hotels policy don't want to understand the context of why it is in place. By the very definition, refugees and asylum seekers are running away from countries they were once proud to live in - countries in the middle of a bloody civil war or have draconian laws which would result in death at home, but a pat on the back in Europe. They want to move to the continent because they crave safety, opportunity and hope. Who doesn't? Some of them - not all - come to the UK because they see our patriotism, and want to be part of it. They love our football, language, music and landscape. If the situation were to be reversed, we would be doing exactly the same as they are.
I get a strong sense that Starmer is distracted by this noise - noise from people who shout they are patriotic but are anything but. Those in their thousands who intimidate outside hotels up-and-down the country, saying 'Go home' while waving the England or Britain's Union Jack flag. It's laughable, considering St George, England's patron saint who they chant in support of, was born in modern day Turkey, and is more likely to be directly related to one of those asylum seekers they want out than any of them. Their blatant racism is blind, knowing the UK has been a nation of immigrants for centuries and centuries.
I also get a strong sense that Starmer is needlessly panicking about the polls which shows a buoyant Nigel Farage and his Reform UK party top. Farage is rabbiting on about deporting asylum seekers coming in by boat, plane-by-plane. It's a policy suggestion that could cost billions, returning them to their home nation where their lives are at significant risk, and will only create a boomerang effect. Mass deportation will not put people off from trying, and trying again. And with his track record when dealing with Europe, Farage won't be able to form a 'better' deal with France, who won't elect anyone that will want to do business with him in a hurry. Marine Le Pen is his best hope, but she's failed enough election campaigns, and should get the message that no matter how unpopular Macron may be, he's still preferred to her.
It needs to be appreciated that reducing the levels of refugees and asylum seekers requires a global effort, and talking to governments who have completely different belief systems. It's also about speeding the right to remain processes, prioritising those who can provide any vital resource gaps. I'm pretty certain among those thousands waiting for a decision are some excellent nurses, engineers, builders and carpenters which Britain can desperately do with. And I'm sure talking to allies across Asia, South America, Africa, plus Canada, Australia and New Zealand, to discuss their gaps and see if these applicants could vacate to those countries. Let's not follow the Conservative government strategy and agree to do this with one country, Uganda, and expect every refused applicant to be okay with going there.
Patience is needed to solve this crisis, however. A rushed job risks worsening the situation. It will not take a click of a finger for it to be all over. Hotels will remain open to asylum seekers and refugees for years to come, and that is okay. What isn't okay are empty, strong words on social media, GB News or different newspapers to gaslight the situation, over-amplifying anecdotal issues. The UK government is on it, so long as it accelerates the diplomacy I've suggested, and sways away from saying meaningless phrases like 'smash the gangs'.
Ultimately, these asylum seekers want a stable roof over their head, and without fear that one day a bomb will go through it and shatter their lives. They don't come here 'just for the benefits', they want to work, they want meaning in the life, they want to be useful. They matter, and distraction from so-called patriots and influence from the United States, who has its own draconian measures on Mexicans, Cubans and others, are unhelpful. Patriotism is about being devoted to one's country - and in Britain, it means bringing people together without judgement, supporting each other, talking about life over a cup of tea and a digestive (or a pint and crisps, whichever is preferred), a shared love - or angst - of sport, monarchy and film. That's what makes Britain great, and Britain has never stopped being great. Anyone who suggests otherwise - with an overwhelmed immigration system or not - are deeply, deeply mistaken, and should look at themselves before shouting to those who have experienced unimaginably worse.
Comments
Post a Comment