UK Migrant Crisis: Chris Philp Criticizes Labour’s Return Policy

The migrant crisis in the United Kingdom has escalated dramatically, with record numbers of crossings reported in 2025. By September, over 31,000 individuals had traversed the English Channel, making this year the worst on record. In response, Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp has sharply criticized the Labour government’s return programme, calling it a “complete farce.” His comments come as charities such as Bail for Immigration Detainees (BiD) distribute taxpayer-funded guides aimed at helping migrants evade deportation.

Philp’s allegations raise crucial questions regarding Labour’s immigration policy. He contends that the party’s approach may unintentionally allow illegal migrants to remain in the UK, undermining border security and squandering public funds. The guide, published in August 2025, is a 12-page document that offers legal strategies and template letters for asylum seekers facing removal to France. Philp characterized the situation as “ridiculous,” noting that the Home Office indirectly supports such initiatives through charitable tax relief.

The UK-France return scheme, which aims to return 50 individuals weekly, has been hindered by legal challenges. According to Philp, “What we need to do is make sure that every single person who crosses the English Channel illegally gets removed immediately, without any messing around in the courts.” To date, the programme has only successfully deported one migrant, an Indian national, on September 18, 2025. This followed several failed attempts due to court interventions.

Labour’s Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, defended the scheme, describing it as “an important first step.” Philp dismissed this assessment, labeling the initiative as a “ludicrous gimmick” that has addressed only six percent of the crossings. The situation has prompted protests from charities, which have inundated Air France with complaints, effectively halting further removals and exposing the fragility of the programme.

Official data reveals that since Labour’s election victory in July 2024, there have been 50,000 crossings, a staggering increase of 50 percent compared to the previous year. The financial burden of accommodating asylum seekers has also surged, with hotels costing the government approximately £8 million daily. Critics argue that Labour’s cancellation of the Conservative Rwanda plan—originally set to begin in July 2024—has contributed to this crisis without a viable alternative.

The controversy surrounding the return programme has intensified, with organizations such as Médecins Sans Frontières condemning the deal as “shameful,” citing concerns over potential racial profiling in the selection of migrants for deportation. While BiD continues to receive significant public funding, including over £400,000 from Comic Relief, Philp argues that such resources are being misallocated.

As of mid-September, the total number of returns since July 2024 stands at 16,400, but only five percent of these relate to small boat crossings, raising doubts about the effectiveness of the current strategy. Labour’s recent pledge of £2 billion in aid for return deals echoes proposals from the Reform UK party, yet Philp warns that it rewards non-cooperation and fails to address the root of the problem.

Philp’s criticism resonates strongly amidst economic challenges, particularly in areas like Birmingham, where local councils are subsidizing benefits for migrants despite struggling to maintain essential services like waste collection. He stated, “It is a slap in the face to hard-pressed taxpayers.” With projections indicating that 2025 crossings may exceed 40,000, the urgency of the situation is apparent.

As the political discourse intensifies, the question remains: will the Labour government prioritize effective border enforcement over policies that inadvertently support charity-enabled loopholes? The outcome of this debate could significantly influence the future of the UK’s immigration strategy and the public’s perception of government accountability.