The government’s visible effort — fewer arrivals, a France enforcement deal, more removals and a returns pilot — was read less as proof of purpose than as evidence of theatre. No won by two to one, and the central contradiction is that the winning side largely inferred intent from what ministers refused to do.
The floor’s most-respected No case said ministers “dont like the optics of a blockade”, and would not cut benefits in ways that might reduce the attraction of the journey. Another No voice put the obstacle in legal terms: “international obligations and human rights aspects”, which it said successive governments were unwilling to confront.
Yes voters answered that the machinery exists but the capacity does not. One of the side’s strongest arguments said, “It does intend to, but can't”, while another dismissed “Stop the boats” as “rhetoric” and pointed instead to smuggling gangs, overstaying visas, safe routes and the costly work of processing and returning people.
The two sides were often answering different questions. No treated intention as a willingness to use the bluntest deterrents — including turning boats back — while Yes treated it as a combination of enforcement, humanitarian restraint and imperfect administration; the more extreme No voices cast the whole system as a deliberate scam, while a Yes voter argued that “BREXIT removed a functional mechanism for repatriation”.
The room’s answer was therefore less a verdict on whether ministers are active than on whether activity counts as resolve. On this page, visible measures did not survive the suspicion that the government still wants to manage the boats rather than end them.
14 Opinions
No. Government has no intention of stopping the boats. The 43% dip, £662m France deal and one-in-one-out pilot are theatre. A Fabian strategy is managed decline: never solve, only manage, to justify permanent state expansion and open-borders globalism. Labour wants cheap labour, demographic replacement and EU alignment, not deterrence. No blockade, no real removals, no benefit cut. They need the crisis to erode sovereignty. This is globalist Fabianism by design, not failure!
Of course the government is trying to stop the boats. When Starmer was PM, there were some arrests of those selling the boats used for immigrants. The problem began when the majority of the two thirds of the public, voted us out of the EU, based on lies. A possible way to sort this, is to take them straight back. In all fairness, the immigrants must be desperate to risk their lives and the lives of their children, to get here, I feel we must help.
There was no problem with illegal immigration on boats before Brexit. The easiest way to stop the boats would be to rejoin the EU
All political parties have a migration policy to stop the boats. Not all include extreams of remigration others are setting up return agreements with other countries or setting up safe legal migration routes for those seeking asylum, or using british embassies as a point of contact to place in asylum claims before they even make a crossing. All parties are in agreement that they want to stop the gangs exploiting them and they dont want a loss of life from these crossings.
Non of the main parties are going to stop not just the boats but legal migrants. This is now a massive pyramid scheme and the money involved is enormous. Biggest scam going.
None of the past governments (since 2018) had such intentions. Including current one. It is because these government are acting more like invader force regime than the government working for the people.
No. They dont like the optics of a blockade (tho Australia did it and survived). And they don't like the optics of cutting benefits for illegals, thus reducing the draw factor.
Yes, successive governments have sought stop the boats for humanitarian and PR reasons. BREXIT removed a functional mechanism for repatriation and they have failed to replace it. The bigger problem is overstaying of visas by students or sponsored immigration by bad actors abusing inadequate legislation and the appeals process. The government and courts must ensure that the law dealing with illegal migration is swiftly and firmly applied.
No intention at all, I'm now convinced thru are importing these backward stone age stabby rapey men on purpose ! Send em all back !
We have no idea who they are letting in we were fighting ISIS a few years ago and now we could be letting them in. If they are truly fleeing persecution then they would come with papers/proof and go through the official channels before they come and they would not pay people smugglers to get here! If we returned every single person that arrived on a boat they would think again about getting here.