By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Conservative Party has unveiled a plan to remove 750,000 illegal immigrants from the UK within five years. This initiative involves a “Removals Force” with a doubled budget, aiming to deport at least 150,000 individuals annually. The plan also includes restricting asylum claims, abolishing the Immigration Tribunal, and potentially withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights to expedite the deportation process. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has emphasized that those entering the UK without permission should be returned to their home countries or other safe nations, and the party hopes to implement the plan to counteract a challenge by Reform UK.
Read the original article here
Conservatives pledge to remove 750,000 migrants under borders plan, and immediately, alarm bells start ringing. The sheer scale of the pledge – removing three-quarters of a million people – is immediately eye-catching, but it’s quickly tempered by a healthy dose of skepticism. How can you trust a party that’s overseen a surge in immigration to suddenly fix the very problem they’re now promising to solve? It’s like the fox promising to guard the henhouse.
This promise is set against the backdrop of a government with a track record of, shall we say, less than stellar results on the immigration front. Remember the failed Rwanda plan? A cool £700 million spent, and only a handful of people actually deported. It’s hard to ignore the historical context and the potential for this pledge to be yet another expensive, ineffective, and ultimately symbolic gesture. The fact that this plan seems to be a response to the far-right, rather than a genuine solution, only adds to the concerns.
The practicalities of such a massive deportation operation are daunting. Even if we assume the Conservatives are correct about the number of “illegal” migrants, finding, processing, and deporting that many people is a logistical nightmare. And what happens to the people’s belongings, their businesses, their lives? The details are, conveniently, left unsaid. Instead, the focus is on the soundbite, the promise, the headline-grabbing number.
The timing of this pledge is also interesting. After years in power, why now? Is this a genuine attempt to tackle a complex issue, or a cynical play to win over voters by parroting certain talking points? Given the Conservatives’ history on immigration, one can’t help but suspect the latter. It’s a tactic that seems to be backfiring, potentially driving voters toward the Reform party.
And let’s not forget, a pledge like this is rarely about solving the problem. It’s about maintaining it, using it as a constant source of political capital. The right-wing gains from the perpetual fear and anxiety surrounding the issue. It is a tool to win votes, not to fix immigration problems, which is something that the far-right has already proved.
The lack of concrete details adds to the sense of unreality. What’s the criteria for selecting who goes? How long will this take? What happens when almost 500k migrants (net) keep coming into the country each year? Without answers to these fundamental questions, the pledge feels less like a serious policy proposal and more like a carefully crafted piece of political theater.
The whole exercise feels like a familiar pattern of promises, broken, and under-delivery. This is not to suggest that there are no problems associated with migration. People here illegally are a strain on the country. They should be sent home.
The reaction to the announcement across the political spectrum will not be positive. There’s a sense of fatigue, a weariness with the same old promises and the same old failures. It’s likely that many will dismiss it as a hollow boast, another attempt to distract from other issues or to appease a specific segment of the electorate.
The core issue is complex and needs a lot of work. It’s important to approach immigration with nuance, to acknowledge the concerns of people and to recognize the value that migrants bring to our communities.