Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Channel Crossings

Monday 17 November 2025 · 1 question

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Channel crossings have resulted in a costly asylum system, with the previous government spending more than 9 million per day on over 400 hotels.
  • The current government has reduced hotel usage to fewer than 200 and signed an agreement with France to prevent small boat departures.
  • According to reports, 15.3 billion will be spent on asylum accommodation over the next decade due to illegal channel crossings.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 James McMurdock Ind South Basildon and East Thurrock
Context

The previous government lost control over borders, resulting in high costs for asylum seekers. The National Audit Office reports a projected £15.3 billion will be spent on asylum accommodation over 10 years.

Question

What steps are being taken to reduce the cost to the public purse of migrants who have crossed the channel illegally? According to a recent report, £15.3 billion will be spent on asylum accommodation alone over the next decade, some of whom may commit violent crimes against British people. What do we say to residents, voters and taxpayers?

Answer from The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Shabana Mahmood)

The previous Government lost control of our borders, resulting in a costly asylum system that used more than 400 hotels at nearly £9 million per day. The current government has reduced this to fewer than 200 hotels and signed an agreement with France preventing small boat departures, detaining arrivals, and returning those without the right to be in the UK. A statement will shortly be made outlining further reforms to reduce costs.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The Secretary of State did not address the National Audit Office's projection or directly respond to concerns about public spending on potentially harmful individuals.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email