Unsurprising that you don't want to respond anymore.
Anyway it appear that in general we have moved on from pages and pages of invective about 'genuine (or not) asylum seekers' to fretting about 'illegal migrants' and from the 'small boats' (the subject of this thread) to other routes into the UK.
Although it's apparently 'not disputed' I'm still not convinced that it's universally accepted that people who claim asylum when arriving in the UK are not illegal or economic migrants. They are asylum seekers whose claims should be considered on their merits.
So leaving asylum seekers aside, what are 'illegal' (or more properly irregular" migrants? There doesn't seem to be a broadly accepted definition that could be used to assess the size of the problem or what can be done about it. Certainly in terms of small boat crossings I understand that 91% of people arriving through that route claim asylum which leaves 9% that don't. On 2022 figures that amounts to 4,118 people. Not hugely significant
A wider definition of illegal (or irregular) migrants could include:
- people entering irregularly by other routes
- people entering irregularly by deception / forged documents
- people entering regularly but then breaching conditions (overstaying visas etc)
- people born in the UK to parents who entered irregularly
Irregular migrants are not permitted to work or to rent property, to access most social security benefits or some public services such as social housing and hospital based healthcare.
It is thought that the most substantial number of irregular migrants are those that enter the country by legitimate means and then breach the conditions of entry (e.g overstay visas etc). We don't seem to hear so much about those compared with the apparently much less significant number that come via small boats. Why is that?
