Их Британийн Ерөнхий сайдын алба 2016 оны Brexit-ийн санал хураалтыг хууль ёсны гэж үзэж байна

Reform UK has published a policy document this morning about its plans to not allow any new asylum claims for five years. (See 9.53am.) Peter Walker says what it is proposing is “a hostile environment on steroids”, adding:

There would be migration checks everywhere. This would, inevitably, be vast numbers of other people caught up in it.

Here is an extract from the document.

A Reform UK government will direct every organ of the British state, both local and national, to make it impossible to live in Britain illegally. This will involve several large policy shifts, and many smaller changes. Overall, we expect it to produce a major increase in voluntary departures.

Currently, immigration enforcement capacity is extremely weak. Just 12,791 illegal-working visits were conducted in 2025. By contrast, there were 350,000 food hygiene visits, 51,020 non-domestic fire safety audits, and 13,200 HSE workplace inspections. There were tens of thousands more across trading standards, environmental health, housing and licensing inspections.

Currently, these visits do not include an immigration check. But this could be easily incorporated. Immigration checks do not require highly technical qualifications, and the officials that conduct these visits should be trained to also conduct a basic migration check. This would increase immigration enforcement capacity by a factor of at least 10, and up to 40.

These checks would feed data back to Deportation Command and the Migrant Identification Centre, increasing their ability to identify illegal migrants, leading to a large increase in voluntary and enforced departures. Revenue shared with local governments generated via fines on those employing illegal workers will encourage local cooperation, which in turn will generate more data for Deportation Command.

Downing Street has said that Andy Burnham does not think Russian interference in the 2016 Brexit campaign affected the result.

Asked if that was the implication of the PM’s comments to the Rest is Politics podcast (see 10.33am), the PM’s spokesperson told journalists at the lobby briefing this morning:

Given everything we know about Russia, it is inconceivable they did not seek to use the referendum to their benefit. But as the minister [Stephen Doughty] said this morning, we do not believe they have succeeded.

The spokesperson said the PM “absolutely accepts the referendum result”.

After repeated questioning the spokesperson added: “Yes, we do believe the referendum result to be legitimate.”

Q: Do you accept that under your plans to deport asylum seekers, some of them could be sent back to countries where they might be tortured or killed?

Zia Yusuf said that would not happen.

We’re not going to be sending people back to be tortured or killed.

There would be third-country options where it was not safe to send an asylum seeker back to their home country, he said. He added:

We’re going to need to [have those options]. We are not idiots.

Q: Do you think there might be a point where Britain should stop supporting Ukraine?

Farage said that no one’s support for Ukraine was limitless. Even Andy Burnham would not suggest that his support for the country was limitless, he said.

Farage suggested he was backing Ukraine now.

But he went on:

This is one of the most corrupt countries on earth, all right? We know that.

I’ve been very, very worried about where some of our money has gone.

And, goodness me, Zelenskyy’s administration has been rocked by corruption claims, which perhaps makes at some point a general election there an important thing to do.

But I am in no doubt at all that [Russian president Vladimir] Putin now poses a greater threat than he’s posed at any point …

I’ve never said we shouldn’t support Ukraine, ever. But I have said I would have a keen look to make sure British taxpayers’ money is not being swallowed up in corruption.

(Farage is exaggerating. While Ukraine does have a corruption problem, in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, it ranks 104 out of 181 countries, implying it is a long way off being among the worst performers.)

Q: Do you back Donald Trump saying it is time for Volodymyr Zelenskyy to be replaced as president of Ukraine?

Farage replied:

Trump and Zelenskyy have a somewhat tempestuous relationship, so [Trump saying Zelenskyy should go] was not any particular surprise.

At some point Ukraine needs an election. Of course that’s true if it’s to be a country that aspires to have Western style values.

As to when that election comes, we’ll have to see.

I mean, we did have an election during world war two, a point that seems to be completely forgotten. But then people’s knowledge of history now appears to be pretty pathetic.

Zelenskyy says Ukraine should not hold a presidential election while the war continues, and that it would not be legal anyway because martial law is in force.

Farage is right to say that Britain held a general election in 1945 while the war was still going on. But it did take place in July 1945, two months after the war in Europe had finished. The war against Japan did not end until August.

Q: [To Zia Yusuf] Why have you not promised to resign if you fail to deliver on your pledges within 100 days when Robert Jenrick and Richard Tice have?

Farage replied:

He doesn’t need to do it … Do you know why? Because I’ll sack him if he doesn’t deliver.

Q: Do you agree with Donald Trump’s plan to buy diesel oil from Russia?

Farage said he didn’t. But he went on to accuse the EU of hypocrisy, saying:

There is a point you ought to write about – that is, who has been buying vast amounts of Russian petrochemicals, who’s been buying huge amounts of Russian gas, who’s been helping fund for the last five months, much of the last five years, the Ukraine war? Germany and the other countries in the European Union. And it’s a point that never, ever, ever, ever, ever gets made.

In response to a question from a Sun reporter, Farage complained about the Sun giving positive coverage to Kemi Badenoch today. He said:

[It’s] almost like a desperate attempt by the establishment ecosystem to keep the two-party system and the appointments to quangos and the OBEs and the knighthoods and the membership of the House of Lords. ‘Let’s not change anything. Let’s leave everything as it is. It doesn’t matter that Britain’s going to hell on a handcart. As long as we’re OK. That’s all that really matters.’

And I think that’s what’s going on.

I’m going to say this: the Conservative party cannot win the next election.

Do you know why? Literally they’ve disappeared in the Midlands, in the north. And I think in counties like Kent and Essex, they even on a good day could not come back with a fraction of the seats they won back in 2019, let alone the last election. So that is the point that I would make to you.

Farage seemed to be referring in particular to this column by Trevor Kavanagh in today’s paper.

Q: Your policy document says that, under your policy, at any point there could be 24,000 illegal migrants detained. Doesn’t that mean local communities will continue to be affected?

Farage replied no, because “none of them will be free to roam the streets, [to] molest people, intimidate people.”

Q: [From the Kent Messenger] What do you say to businesses in Kent who say Brexit has made life harder for them?

Farage replied:

There’s no doubt that for some businesses Brexit makes life marginally harder.

It’s also true that, for some businesses who do their business outside of the European Union, Brexit has made their lives easier.

But let me say this to you – 95% of Kent businesses do no business overseas whatsoever. They do their business in this county or neighbouring counties or somewhere in the United Kingdom. Why should they be subject to rules that are designed for international trade between giant companies of multinationals?

Again, this is one of the points of Brexit, making life easier for men and women running their own companies, acting as sole traders.

And who was it that had the chance, with a stroke of a pen, to get rid of 4,000 of those regulations that had been agreed by everybody, but decided not to? Well, I’ll tell you what her name was. Kemi Badenoch [who was business secretary in the last government].

Q: Where did you get the dinghy behind you (see 11.25am), and how much did it cost?

Farage did not answer these questions, but he joked about how long it took him to blow it up.

Q: Andy Burnham says Russia interfered with the Brexit vote. Does this taint the result? And do you think you gained from Russian interference?

Farage replied:

The prime minister is a liar. Yes, a liar.

Boris Johnson, when he became foreign secretary, one of the first questions he asked was, ‘Was there seen to be Russian interference in the referendum campaign?’ And the answer was no.

But I can give you a stronger answer than that. And that’s Stephen Doughty, the minister, Foreign Office minister, who was on the Today programme this morning, who within 24 hours of Andy Burnham making that outrageous comment, rowed it back and said even if there was some, it made no difference. [See 9.28am.]

There was no Russian interference. And the Russia hoax has run all the way through this.

And I particularly have to mention my friend and supporter Arron Banks, who was severely libelled over this. But in the end, I’m pleased to say, [he] won in the high court.

Farage went on to criticise Burnham’s argument that Brexit has done more harm than good. He said:

And [Burnham] says Brexit has done more harm than good. Well, I don’t think our growth figures are anything to write home about. But I tell you what, they’re a damn sight better than France and Germany and Italy.

Farage admitted that Brexit has caused more “inconvenience” for people trading with the EU. But, when it was necessary to protect borders, there would always be “some level of inconvenience”, he said.

Farage suggests, if a Reform UK government were to fail to deliver on its promises to cut immigration, it would be replaced by an even more extreme goverment.

He says:

I think the single biggest problem in British politics is the increasing feeling that people say things to the electorate that they never actually intend to carry out, and that trust in the whole system is beginning to break down.

If we were to let people down in that way, I shudder to think what would come after us. I genuinely shudder to think.

And maybe we’ve seen one or two potential signs of that in the last few weeks.

Farage seems to be referring to the masked protests. (Earlier he said he did not approve of protesters wearing balaclavas.)

Q: [From GB News] Have you taken advice from Donald Trump on how you will implement these plans?

No, says Farage. He says he is prepared to disagree with “many things” the president has said recently. But he goes on to praise Trump’s record on cutting immigration.

Farage and Yusuf are taking questions now.

Q: Are you going to include children among the asylum seekers you deport or repatriate?

Farage says they would not be exempt. If children were allowed to stay, that would open the door to family reunions, he says.