Net migration to the UK stood at 171,000 in the year ending December 2025, down 48% from 331,000 the prior year and 82% from its 2023 peak of 944,000. This fall stems mainly from sharp drops in non-EU work and study visas following post-2023 policy tightening. Immigration remains a top public concern, with polls showing around 55% of Britons want overall levels reduced.
The voters who carried this question were not, for the most part, arguing for an indiscriminate halt. Yes won by three to one, but the room’s most-respected Yes arguments framed the verdict as a demand for control: lower overall numbers, better enforcement and a system that selects rather than simply admits.
The floor’s strongest Yes cases backed “controlled and limited migration of skilled workers”, while blaming employers who “favour cheap migration of low skilled workers” for underinvestment in domestic staff. That argument sat alongside concerns about housing, wages, public services and capacity, with several voters insisting that immigration should follow training and workforce planning rather than substitute for them.
No’s best-respected case did not defend a free-for-all. It argued for “legal regulated migration for our economy and long-term viability”, while another voice warned that “blanket cuts now just starves the NHS and care sector of vital workers”. The two sides often answered different questions: Yes was demanding a lower end-state, while No stressed the immediate cost of closing routes before nurses, carers, builders and doctors could be trained at home.
The distinction between legal migration and illegal entry became the debate’s clearest dividing line. No voters said “it’s years, not months” to use legal routes and called for faster processing; Yes voters wanted borders enforced, backlogs cleared and unauthorised arrivals removed, while also proposing tighter selection, family-route changes and properly funded immigration control.
The verdict was broad, but not blank-cheque: reduce the level, then make the system quicker, stricter and more selective.
“YES But with a caviat. It should be targeted, we as a country need immigration without it our country would eventually grind to a halt. To do this we have to invest in the government departments that control immigration. Keeping out those who would be a drain on Britain. Whilst at the same time quickly processing & helping those who's skills we need to integrate & become useful members of our com”
YES case · JustFactsNotBeliefs · 6 respects
“We need to buck up our immigration process instead of making people wait for months. We, as a country, rely on immigrants to fill many of our job vacancies, to deny that is burying your head in the sand. Up to December 2025, an estimated 246,000 people emigrated from the UK. That's more than the net immigrants of 171,000 for the same time.”
NO case · HonestCompass65 · 3 respects
% voting yes, by leaning
Should there be a full public inquiry into small boat crossings?
Immigration · 1,565 votes · Yes 51%
Should affluent communities share responsibility for housing asylum seekers?
Immigration · 1,522 votes · Yes 68%
Was the Gosport Section 34 dispersal order during the migrant arrival justified?
Immigration · 1,519 votes · No 51%
Should immigrants be required to adapt to British culture and practices, rather than expect change?
Immigration · 1,396 votes · Yes 72%
Should the United Kingdom provide safe and legal routes for Afghan and Palestinian women and girls to resettle here?
Immigration · 1,364 votes · Yes 53%
Is the definition of ‘British national’ too ambiguous, varying with personal beliefs?
Immigration · 1,276 votes · Yes 55%
Should the UK have tougher immigration laws?
Immigration · 1,281 votes · 78% voted Yes
Should indefinite leave to remain be abolished?
Immigration · 1,212 votes · 61% voted Yes
24 Opinions
Getting rid of 15 million uninvited blood sucking parasites might not fix everything but it’ll fix the housing crisis, crime levels, overstretched state resources and will ensure we’re not demographically replaced in our homeland. Frankly, the uniparty’s actions have been nothing but treasonous for decades! If something isn’t done soon there will be civil war!
Its only because we've become used to such extremely high levels of immigration that this years figures seem low, net migration had never exceeded 100,000 before 1998, in 2010 David Cameron promised the public that he'd bring net migration down to the 10s of 1000s but instead immigration continued increasing. We should aim for net migration in the low tens of thousands and it should be highly selective
The Government needs to examine how the NGOs facilitated the growth of illegal and dangerous routes into the UK. Illegal migrants may vulnerable but also the least likely people to have genuine claims or to build a functional life here. Enforce the borders, and clear the backlog on applications urgently.
Yes, but with certain conditions. Britain should want to attract the best talent to the country for particular roles/industries. It should be easier for those of British descent from countries like Australia, NZ, South Africa, Canada to move & work here without prohibitively expensive visas. Employers also need to invest more in skills and roles for people here. I also think spousal visas need different standards: higher levels of English should be needed to obtain this.
I support controlled and limited migration of skilled workers. I believe too many employers favour cheap migration of low skilled workers rather than invest in British workers, that needs to change and there must be stricter limits on low skilled migration. We should still welcome skilled workers in areas where there are shortages like doctors and engineers.
Any one who arrives by boat not through official ways need to be removed immediately
YES. Our public services and purse is collapsing under the stress of it. If you want to come here from foreign shores you support yourself in every way. NO FREEBIES
We already have many more people looking for work than available jobs. Current levels of Immigration undercuts the working class and has been a contributing factor in the stagnation of wages and living standards for many.
All immigration save families of natives English Scots Welsh & Irish & not any yoke who yesterday was stoning women in Kabul but has suddenly become a ‘Yorkshire’ man. Deport 5-10 Million then we can assess who has the privilege living in UK. Asylum system is not fit for purpose & never intended to deal with non - European migration. We are pawns in a Global Communist plan to dismantle white states wherever they are & however successful. Marxism not Race behind SA & Rhodesia.
We are being demographically replaced in our own homeland, we need drastically less immigration for the foreseeable