The room’s central contradiction was that its strongest arguments were not really for more prison. The decision favoured tougher sentences, even though the debate repeatedly turned on deportation, detention and the shortage of cells.
The winning Yes case asked for punishment as deterrence, but it was not wholly absolutist. One of its stronger voices said, “every case must be treated independently based on individuals circumstances”, while another called to “open up off shore custody centres as a deterrent”. The emphasis was on making entry costly and the response unmistakable, often with deportation added afterwards.
No voters, by contrast, made the more developed case on the page. The floor’s most-respected No argument was blunt: “Illegal migrants should be deported full stop”; another warned, “Our prisons are already overflowing.” Their objection was practical rather than permissive: longer sentences would consume scarce prison space and public money when immediate removal was the stated aim.
The two sides also talked past each other over why illegal entry happens at all. A No voice argued that “Illegal entry is only necessary because we have made it impossible for people to come here to claim asylum in any other way”, while Yes voices treated the route itself as the offence requiring deterrence. This is the live immigration argument in miniature: control and punishment against capacity, enforcement and access.
Its shape is hard to miss: the side that argued most loudly for deportation lost the question about prison.
37 Opinions
Need to open up off shore custody centres as a deterrent
Illegal migrants should be deported full stop. When in prison it is the UK tax payer that foots the bill - again, furthermore the cost of keeping those foreigners in prison should be charged to their country.
This is a biased question. I voted no because they should not be detained in the UK, they should be immediately deported.
Yes the punishment should be increased but every case must be treated independently based on individuals circumstances for doing what they have. If you want to have a deterrent it needs to be a strong one. However if so the criminal courts must enforce it properly. Also the tax payer and our Government must not pay for it, it must be paid for by the person's country of origin.
FAST TRACK JUSTICE AND DEPORT THEM. MOVE THEM ONTO OIL TANKERS UNTIL PROCESSED. STOP FUNDING THE COUNTRIES THEY CAME FROM.
No they need to be deported immediately. Certainly don't need to be spending money housing them in prison.
I thought you wanted them deported?
Illegal entry is only necessary because we have made it impossible for people to come here to claim asylum in any other way.
Yes it should, but more importantly the Govt & courts should be APPLYING the law. These people should be detained and deported without being allowed on our streets. But also with a conviction which bars them from any future entry.
Let’s just use the powers we already have to arrest, imprison and deport any and ALL illegal migrants. No ifs buts or appeals.