Brent Liberal Democrat leader, Paul Lorber, has written to Cllr Suresh Kansagra, Conservative Group leader, and his colleagues asking them to withdraw their motion tabled for debate at Full Council on Monday September 15th. The motion is titled 'Deterence, Integration and Accommodation Impacts of Illegal Immigration on Brent'.
Lorber argues for withdrawal because of the motion’s potential to undermine good community relations. He told Wembley Matters, ' The last thing Brent needs is incitement to protest outside any of the local hotels used and make the poor people inside fear for their lives.'
The Conservative motion includes attempts to provide reassurance on ‘deserving genuine refugees’ but then focuses on ‘illegal immigration’, ‘deterrence’and local hotel accommodation for asylum seekers. Such hotels have of course come under right-wing attack in recent weeks.
Deterrence, Integration and Accommodation Impacts of Illegal Immigration on Brent
Background:
Brent has seen growing pressures on its housing stock, primary care and policing, in part due to hotels used for those arriving by irregular channel crossings by boats.
Hotels are used by the Home Office to place asylum seekers and those who arrive through illegal routes. This burdens the wider public purse and taxpayers and may create resentment towards those who follow these illegal routes.
There is currently no clear policy to integrate people arriving illegally, leading to cultural tensions, fears and safety concerns. Although not in Brent, the high-profile case of sexual assault by a recent arrival has amplified public anxiety.
This Council Notes:
· Illegal immigrants increase the demand for emergency hotel accommodation, diverting resources from Brent residents in need.
· Brent households face extended waits for temporary housing while hotels remain filled with asylum claimants which could include those arriving by small boats.
· The answer is deterrence to stop the boats, faster decisions that ensure people are not waiting for clarity on their immigration status for long periods of time and firm humane returns for those with no right to remain.
· Safe and legal routes should exist for the most vulnerable, with clear caps linked to local capacity.
· Other European countries have adopted deterrent and processing measures without veering into extreme policy e.g.
Italy agreed with Albania to process arrivals in centres under Italian jurisdiction, moving decisions away from beach landings.
Denmark legislated for third country processing, explored partnership with Rwanda while seeking a path that fits with European rules.
The European Union has struck migration partnerships with Tunisia and Egypt to curb dangerous journeys upstream.
This Council Believes:
· Genuine refugees fleeing persecution deserve protection and swift humane processing.
· The integrity of our asylum system must be upheld by deterring dangerous journeys and prevent abuse of legal channels.
· Faster decision-making is required to process asylum claims and that people arriving illegally should be deported. Quick humane returns for those with no right to remain will restore public confidence.
· Those in genuine danger should be protected and shown the integrity of the system.
· That residents should not be made to subsidise national policy failures which result in inflated rental costs and overstretched public services.
· The Government has removed the Rwanda option without putting a credible solution to remove illegal immigrants in its place. This does not serve the national interest.
· If a workable model can cut the pull of illegal routes, a serious government should test it and be honest about results.
This Council therefore resolves:
(1) To publish data on the number of hotels used for asylum accommodation in Brent and, once they are granted leave to remain, the impact on the housing waiting list.
(2) To secure monthly data from the Home Office and an exit plan for hotel use in Brent with dates and milestones.
Councillor Suresh Kansagra Kenton Ward
The Liberal Democrats had composed their own motion for the Group Motions section of the Full Council Agenda before they had sight of the Conservative motion. Their motion takes a contrasting approach:
Standing United Against Racism and Xenophobia in Brent
This Council notes:
In recent years, particularly after the Brexit referendum, there has been a disturbing rise in racist and xenophobic rhetoric in public discourse, much of it amplified by political parties and figures on the far right and reactionary elements who seek to divide our communities. These groups have used inflammatory language, scapegoating migrants and minority communities, in a calculated attempt to stoke fear and resentment for political gain.
Brent is one of the most diverse boroughs in the UK. Over many decades, people from across the globe – from South Asia, Africa, the Caribbean, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and beyond – have made their home here, contributing immensely to our local economy, public services, cultural life, and social fabric. Whether as NHS workers, teachers, carers, builders, artists, entrepreneurs, or community leaders, migrants have played a vital role in shaping modern Brent into the vibrant, resilient, and forward-looking borough it is today.
This Council believes:
· Racism, xenophobia, and all forms of bigotry must be challenged wherever and whenever they arise, including when they come from mainstream or elected political figures.
· The demonisation of immigrants and refugees not only undermines social cohesion but also endangers the safety and well-being of residents across Brent.
· Brent’s diversity is not a challenge to be managed, but a strength to be celebrated.
This Council resolves to:
1. Proudly reaffirm Brent's commitment to being an inclusive, anti-racist borough, where all residents – regardless of background, nationality, or immigration status – are welcomed, valued, and protected.
2. Publicly condemn the racist and xenophobic rhetoric being spread by Reform UK and other groups on the far/right, and make clear that such divisive narratives have no place in our borough or our politics.
3. Celebrate the contributions of immigrants to Brent, through public awareness campaigns, community events, and educational initiatives that promote understanding, solidarity, and historical awareness.
4. Encourage all councillors and community leaders to speak out against hate speech and misinformation targeting migrants and to work proactively to build unity across all of Brent’s communities.
5. Continue to support migrant and refugee communities through council services, advocacy, and partnerships with local organisations working on inclusion, integration, and support.
Brent has always been stronger because of its diversity – not in spite of it. At a time when fear and hatred are being weaponised in national discourse, we in Brent choose a different path: one of solidarity, mutual respect, and pride in who we are as a borough. We reject the politics of division and instead embrace the values of justice, dignity, and equality for all.
Cllr Paul Lorber - Leader of the Brent Liberal Democrats
What a contrast - THANK YOU Liberal Democrats for your sensible approach.
ReplyDeleteAgree that diversity should be celebrated, but integration is also important and it would be nice if the Lib Dem’s put some thought to that too. The Cons never said diversity shouldn’t be celebrated, it looks like they just stated what many political parties including Labour have highlighted regarding the use of hotels, it is not a good use of taxpayers money, and certainly not fair. I’m BAME myself, and I don’t like it when the race card is being pulled into all sorts of situations for no reason. Most immigrants in Brent have integrated well and they would want others to do the same. Some of those hotel protests have been violent but some have also been peaceful and the genuine concerns should be recognised. Lib Dem’s have twisted the story.
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly is positive about the Tory Motion? Just look at the point about "This Council therefore Resolves" - what exactly is the point to publish data about the number of Hotels? It is stupid for the Conservatives to be exploiting an issue when everyone knows that they completely mismanaged the immigration system. The Epping Hotel in the news recently was opened as an "Asylum Hotel" by a Conservative Minister when they were in Government.
DeleteWhere is there anything positive in the Conservative Motion which helps anyone to integrate? They even complain if a Council spend money on English classes which of course is the first crucial step to integration.
Agree with this comment
DeleteHi Anonymous @ 12:22, upon reflection I agree with you - I wasn’t trying to support the Con motion, but just wished the Lib Dem’s had a more balanced view which stressed the importance of integration, and reducing hotel use which is costly to the tax payer.
DeleteIt's not about no immigration, it's about illegal immigration. Would be good for the LDs to read properly before completely turning the motion on its head.
ReplyDeleteCan we please not use the word “irregular” & use the correct term “illegal” channel crossings. Will Martin now have the conviction to post this comment I wonder?
ReplyDeleteThere is nothing illegal about seeking Asylum. The UK was one of the first signatories to the Refugee Convention which allows a refugee to seek Asylum in a country of their choice. It is a failure of successive Governments to deal with requests of Asylum properly that is responsible for the channel crossing.
DeleteWhat is "illegal" about the crossings? The Vikings did it and the Anglo Saxons and the Normans. If the Tories had not messed up the processing of Asylum cases and dealt with assessment of Asylum claims properly these poor people would not have to put themselves in danger and not be exploited in the way they are by criminal gangs.
DeleteWhy is it illegal? Answer “what is a passport for”
DeleteTony Blair once said, the British public were fair until issues reach the point of absurdity. We are at the point of absurdity with this hotel migrant crisis and it is damaging to community cohesion. There is already a long waiting list for homes for people with roots in Brent. It is right that the council puts pressure on the governments about this and unless the libdems can come up with a real, practical alternative, sweeping it under the carpet is what will bring reform here.
ReplyDeleteAt one point in the recent past Brent Council owned over 20,000 Council Homes suitable for people in need. As the result of the Thatcher right to buy policy Brent Council now owns around 8,000 - and for decades under the Tories Brent Council was not allowed to build new Council homes - to blame immigrants for "long waiting list for homes for people with roots in Brent" is misguided and simple scapegoating.
DeleteLet's stop blaming Thatcher!!! Why didn't Labour stop the Right to Buy policy when they came to in power in 1997??? And why are they still not stopping it now???
DeleteReform will in by a landslide if we do not sort out asylum and immigration.
ReplyDeleteImmigration and asylum are the most important issues facing the country, cited by a decisive majority (56 per cent) of respondents to YouGov’s latest poll.
It’s not ‘racist’ or ‘xenophobic’ as this concern cuts across all racial backgrounds
https://archive.is/20250906122458/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/09/06/majority-predicted-reform-nigel-farage-election-predictor/
For those asking these are just a few points from the Liberal Democrat Manifesto for the last General Election in 2024:
ReplyDelete* Tackle the asylum backlog by establishing a dedicated unit to improve the speed and quality of asylum decision-making, introducing a service standard of three months for all but the most complex asylum claims to be processed, and speeding up returns of those without a right to stay.
* Lift the ban on asylum seekers working if they have been waiting for a decision for more than three months, enabling them to support themselves, integrate in their communities and contribute to the economy.
* Work closely with Europol and the French authorities to stop the smuggling and trafficking gangs behind dangerous Channel crossings.
The fact that around 48% of asylum claims are approved has already been published and is well known. We also know that claims can take a year or more to be assessed leading to a backlog which means that it takes longer to deal with unsuccessful claims which in turns means that Hotels have to be used to house people for much longer than necessary.
No one is denying that there is an issue the point is that the Conservatives are trying to exploit a problem which they have caused by their Government's incompetence for many years.
Intimidating people staying in the hotels as a result of past incompetence is however not the answer.
The nerve of the Tories to seemingly forget who first used hotels for irregular arrivals, pulled out of the Dublin Convention as part of Brexit making returns harder, who built up the backlog in processing claims, and who wasted millions on a failed Rwanda scheme. Instead of hanging their heads in shame, they seek to use Brent Council to jump on the hateful hotel "protest" (thuggery) bandwagon. Well done, LibDems for calling this out & tabling a more compassionate motion.
ReplyDeleteWhen are all the destitute homeless people on our streets going to be housed?
ReplyDeleteYou need to ask the Labour Mayor of London - he promised to sort this out.
DeleteHe's was too busy wasting £6.5million on the pointless renaming of the London Overground Lines!!!
DeleteThe people in these migrant hotels have exercised their right to claim asylum in this country, and are waiting for their claim to be processed and decided.
ReplyDeleteThe Conservative Group would do well to remember that the person responsible for the backlog of claims being processed, which has led to so many people still having to stay in hotels, was Suella from Kenton, the daughter of a former Brent Conservative councillor.
Have you seen the statistics of where these men come from? Majority stable countries, they are not aslyum seekers and calling them aslyum seekers is damaging the system of asylum. These people throw their phones and passports overboard and in brent, some of which claim to be younger than they are, which poses a safeguarding concern in schools. Economic migtation is okay, nobody can blame them. But come via a sensible route and work. Make it easier to do so. Then Save our aslyum system for emergencies.
ReplyDeleteWhy haven't they claimed asylum in any of the other Europeans countries they have crossed to get to UK???
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 7 September at 10:29 - why don't you read the Refugee Convention that the UK helped to create. Asylum seekers can choose which country to seek Asylum in. If the Conservatives had not messed up the Assessment Process most applications would be dealt with in good time while the individuals were still outside of the UK. Was not their Brexit slogan "Taking Control"? - well the Tories had 5 years or more after Brexit and created Chaos rather than control of UK's borders or anything else.
DeleteThe Tories also failed to deal properly with all the Visa overstayers. Allowing people to come to fictitious Colleges and then losing track of them. There are probably more Visa over-stayers in this country then genuine Asylum seekers left in limbo by Conservative incompetence.
ReplyDeleteWhere does Cllr Paul Lorber, a white man, get off writing a motion claiming that Cllr Suresh Kansagra, an asian, and someone who may have actually experienced racism, is racist and xenophobic in their motion? This verges on the Orwellian
ReplyDeleteIt might help if Anonymous 7 September at 11:40 read Martin's post properly which says:
Delete"The Liberal Democrats had composed their own motion for the Group Motions section of the Full Council Agenda before they had sight of the Conservative motion. Their motion takes a contrasting approach"
The Liberal Motion was written and submitted before the Conservative Motion was published and any one was aware of it.
I may be a "white man" but as someone who never had any grandparents because one was killed in the 1st World War and the other 3 were sent to the Gas Chambers by the Nazis I know only too well the consequences of racism and xenophobia.
And Starmers father was a tool maker and his mother a nurse. That is neither here nor there.
DeleteIf you read the editors post properly it says “Paul Lorber, has written to Cllr Suresh Kansagra, Conservative Group leader, and his colleagues asking them to withdraw their motion”
Why don’t you withdraw your motion as you appear to be sidestepping whether you consider Cllr Suresh Kansagra to be “racist and xenophobic” in their motion?