An obvious solution would be to discard the four star hotels and private housing and build massive, and I mean massive, detention centres (heck, we could build Nightingale Hospitals within weeks, so we obviously have the capability to do this). Think of some desolate Scottish islands for example (pay any inhabitants a couple of million to leave - it's worth it) - think Rawanda. Such islands/ places will have no phone and no internet access - any immigrants will be fed basic minimal food and have basic but adequate medical facilities in line with their country of origin. Any people sent there will be forced to stay there until their stay to leave is approved - otherwise they stay there for the rest of their lives. They have committed a crime and therefore are prisoners. If they wish to reject their asylum claim and to be voluntarily chosen to be deported to their home country or any country which would accept them, this would be done immediately at no expense to them - however they would be banned from entering the UK forever. If they choose not to take this option, they will stay there indefinitely.
It's time to stop pussyfooting around and get tough. Trump managed it; 2TK is clearly of a lesser intellect. Otherwise, the UK as we know it won't exist in a few years.
One of Homeland's remigration policies is to deport illegals. Homeland's website puts the number of illegals at around 1.2m and says
"Given the significant numbers of undocumented migrants, a dedicated removals department, separate from the Home Office, should be established to manage DEPORTATIONS efficiently" [1].
If, as you suggest, the number of illegals is 2m or more, then Homeland's policy is presumably one of deporting 2m or more illegals. And that, in anyone's book, surely constitutes mass deportation.
And you've very recently posted (28 Apr) that "Deportation is a means to deal with foreign offenders and illegals" [2]. So does this article signify a change of thinking?
I've discussed Homeland's take on remigration at greater length in a reply to your "What do Nationalists actually want?" substack [3].
The section on the link between forced and voluntary returns is interesting.
"Whereas enforced returns are within the direct control of the UK government, voluntary returns are reliant on the responses of individuals to the “hostile environment” and the personal/familial decision to leave. Between 2010 and 2024, the ratio of enforced returns to voluntary returns was 1:2.2. By 2023 this ratio had grown to 1:3.2. This gives us some idea of the number of voluntary returns which could take place with a huge uptick in enforced deportations. It is plausible, therefore, that a year in which there are 150,000 enforced returns could see a corresponding 300,000 voluntary returns."
Fearing a physical confrontation with activists is no basis for rejecting the demand of the majority of the populace.
Either the government is in control and follows through with the demands of the populace (who put them in power) or it wrings its hands in submission.
If that’s the best the parties can offer, it’s time to give up, the UK is finished as a nation.
The French police have recently taken action to face their mobs using batons.
If the French police can do it, why can’t our police?
If it’s acceptable to arrest and imprison people for memes or for shouting at police - because they’re regarded as right wing - challenging left wing protestors who try to stop the law being carried out is not a problem, surely?
The general publics attitude to stopping left wing agitators, physically, if necessary, will be acceptable provided the mass media are shown up for what they are, criminal facilitators.
I agree to an extent. Once you remove illegals and criminals and the right of the low skilled and indigent to work or claim benefits, many will self deport. However, even these policies will cause minority riots. When has enforcing the law reasonably ever prevented the unjustified indignation of sections of the Islamic population in this country? To take on example. Should deportations ever be directed on the basis of 'cultural alignment', in accordance with Homeland policy, strong opposition from aliens will be a given. By the time we actually get to this, I think most of the public will not be duped by bleeding heart woe is me stories in a treacherous press. This will be a matter of political and cultural will. And what minorities may or may not do should bot factor into policy. If the army has to be brought in then so be it. The resignation policy put forth by Homeland is the most sensible start, but more robust measures should not be discounted. This is our Homeland, and we must save it, even if things get uncomfortable.
Very much disagree. Do it en masse. Deploy riot police and armed forces at any protesters. Journalists who kick up a stink can be branded traitors and "encouraged" to keep their silence. Once the government is willing to take control people will soon fall in line.
I hate to admit it but Farage was fundamentally right when he said recently mass deportations just wasn't on the cards but his big failing was then to not outline all the many measures necessary and possible to gradually reduce the numbers here and stop them coming in the first place as Pete has done so well.
Farage has always been a policy free zone which will be his undoing there is only so much 'cheeky chappy friend of the people' stuff he can play on.
We have to have deportations, all illegals, any immigrant who commits a crime, any visa overstayed. We also need detention centres not hotels, what lunatic chose hotels?
Tell that to Donald Trump. Our politicians are weak, no other country puts illegal immigrants in hotels. We have too many corrupt and spineless politicians. The (un)civil service has been infiltrated by political activists, on the Left. The woman in the Home Office in charge of approving asylum claims told her staff to approve people they knew were lying. She has now gone to the fake charity Care for Calais, good riddance. But there are plenty more like her.
I totally agree our politicians are weak but I'm agreeing with Pete that the way to turn this situation around is through robust policies and not talking tough or using brawn over brains.
There is a also a point - how much of a nazi do you want to be? Mass deportations of people with a current legal right to be here and who are not criminals sounds pretty Nazi to me.
This is exactly the Uniparty stance. No confrontation. “Behind the scenes action” by sneaky little law-making and therefore no accountability and public censure. It is a recipe for defeat.
The civil servants know how to prevent each and every one of your proposals. We need to make a statement by mass deportations. We need to make a statement by channel confrontations. People respect a show of STRENGTH. It will deter the gangs like nothing else. It will show the people that the government means business. The Left-wing MSM is going to scream anyway. Ignore them because they now only speak to a minority.
Yes, we need political reform through legislation too and a massive clear out of the corrupted Home Office, Universities et al but a public show of mass deportations of troublemakers, criminals and illegals will do more good than harm to start with.
The purpose of a system is what it does. The immigration system in the UK actively encourages and facilitates mass legal and illegal immigration. That is its purpose.
All talk of immigration or deportation assumes that those in power (or seeking power) want these things to happen. They (Starmer, Kemi, Nigel et al) do not. If the Tories wanted to stop it they had 14 years to do so, having promised to do so, and yet they did nothing. Starmer does nothing. The next PM will do nothing. This is because flooding the UK with uneducated, primarily muslim foreigners is the desired outcome. The system is doing what it is intended to do.
There will be no mass deportations or remigrations. There will be no holding centres, or tent cities. The largesse will continue to flow to the invaders in order to attract more of them.
At some point something will break, probably when the money runs out, but that's a long way off. Meanwhile expect more of the same.
Things are going to get a lot worse before they get worse.
Completely agree. Forced deportations of people who are neither criminals nor illegally here will not command popular support. And being brutally honest I am quite glad about that.
But as you say there is a lot we can do and should do over immigration.
Respectfully, if you worked in the immigration system or any public sector agency adjacent to it, you would know there was no ‘hostile environment’ other than in a PR sense.
One suggestion I would like to make re detection and raids which I hope will be helpful (and feeds into your exhortations for joined up thinking as there is no silver bullet) is that once again, asylum and the HRA giving direct effect to the ECHR completely undermines enforcement and removals.
I’ve seen so many of the people working in these drugs farms and factories then claiming asylum/to be children then placed in LA care or agencies subsequently referring them down the modern slavery route when caught. (Art 4 place a positive duty on the State so police officers, social workers etc have to refer them to the HO via the NRM or risk lawyers down the line suing their org for HR compensation for breach of Art 4.)
They all know what to do and say when caught so their ‘punishment’ for breaking into the country and committing crimes is to be housed and clothed by the State, given access to state-funded lawyers pending decision, and then usually permission to stay.
And if the application isn’t granted, they disappear underground and it’s back to square one.
Who cares what the media thinks and yes bring in the riot squad if necessary - the silent majority want them gone and the leftists will soon get the message if they are continously stopped every time they try and stop deportations.
An obvious solution would be to discard the four star hotels and private housing and build massive, and I mean massive, detention centres (heck, we could build Nightingale Hospitals within weeks, so we obviously have the capability to do this). Think of some desolate Scottish islands for example (pay any inhabitants a couple of million to leave - it's worth it) - think Rawanda. Such islands/ places will have no phone and no internet access - any immigrants will be fed basic minimal food and have basic but adequate medical facilities in line with their country of origin. Any people sent there will be forced to stay there until their stay to leave is approved - otherwise they stay there for the rest of their lives. They have committed a crime and therefore are prisoners. If they wish to reject their asylum claim and to be voluntarily chosen to be deported to their home country or any country which would accept them, this would be done immediately at no expense to them - however they would be banned from entering the UK forever. If they choose not to take this option, they will stay there indefinitely.
It's time to stop pussyfooting around and get tough. Trump managed it; 2TK is clearly of a lesser intellect. Otherwise, the UK as we know it won't exist in a few years.
I agree, Ascension Island is another possibility but have we got anyone with a backbone who would do it? Apart from you, me and Ben Habib that is.
One of Homeland's remigration policies is to deport illegals. Homeland's website puts the number of illegals at around 1.2m and says
"Given the significant numbers of undocumented migrants, a dedicated removals department, separate from the Home Office, should be established to manage DEPORTATIONS efficiently" [1].
If, as you suggest, the number of illegals is 2m or more, then Homeland's policy is presumably one of deporting 2m or more illegals. And that, in anyone's book, surely constitutes mass deportation.
And you've very recently posted (28 Apr) that "Deportation is a means to deal with foreign offenders and illegals" [2]. So does this article signify a change of thinking?
I've discussed Homeland's take on remigration at greater length in a reply to your "What do Nationalists actually want?" substack [3].
[1] https://homelandparty.org/our-thinking/migration/
[2] https://x.com/FUDdaily/status/1916776579465687168
[3] https://www.northernvariant.co.uk/p/what-do-nationalists-actually-want/comment/114113710
Just stumbled across the recently released "Mass Deportations: A Blueprint" by Rupert Lowe MP and the Centre for Migration Control.
https://www.rupertlowe.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Mass-deportations_-plan_A_Blueprint.pdf
The section on the link between forced and voluntary returns is interesting.
"Whereas enforced returns are within the direct control of the UK government, voluntary returns are reliant on the responses of individuals to the “hostile environment” and the personal/familial decision to leave. Between 2010 and 2024, the ratio of enforced returns to voluntary returns was 1:2.2. By 2023 this ratio had grown to 1:3.2. This gives us some idea of the number of voluntary returns which could take place with a huge uptick in enforced deportations. It is plausible, therefore, that a year in which there are 150,000 enforced returns could see a corresponding 300,000 voluntary returns."
Fearing a physical confrontation with activists is no basis for rejecting the demand of the majority of the populace.
Either the government is in control and follows through with the demands of the populace (who put them in power) or it wrings its hands in submission.
If that’s the best the parties can offer, it’s time to give up, the UK is finished as a nation.
The French police have recently taken action to face their mobs using batons.
If the French police can do it, why can’t our police?
If it’s acceptable to arrest and imprison people for memes or for shouting at police - because they’re regarded as right wing - challenging left wing protestors who try to stop the law being carried out is not a problem, surely?
The general publics attitude to stopping left wing agitators, physically, if necessary, will be acceptable provided the mass media are shown up for what they are, criminal facilitators.
We are not in a position to pussyfoot around.
I agree to an extent. Once you remove illegals and criminals and the right of the low skilled and indigent to work or claim benefits, many will self deport. However, even these policies will cause minority riots. When has enforcing the law reasonably ever prevented the unjustified indignation of sections of the Islamic population in this country? To take on example. Should deportations ever be directed on the basis of 'cultural alignment', in accordance with Homeland policy, strong opposition from aliens will be a given. By the time we actually get to this, I think most of the public will not be duped by bleeding heart woe is me stories in a treacherous press. This will be a matter of political and cultural will. And what minorities may or may not do should bot factor into policy. If the army has to be brought in then so be it. The resignation policy put forth by Homeland is the most sensible start, but more robust measures should not be discounted. This is our Homeland, and we must save it, even if things get uncomfortable.
I agree, we need to get rid of the dishonest press, corrupt spineless politicians and bring in the army if necessary.
Very much disagree. Do it en masse. Deploy riot police and armed forces at any protesters. Journalists who kick up a stink can be branded traitors and "encouraged" to keep their silence. Once the government is willing to take control people will soon fall in line.
I hate to admit it but Farage was fundamentally right when he said recently mass deportations just wasn't on the cards but his big failing was then to not outline all the many measures necessary and possible to gradually reduce the numbers here and stop them coming in the first place as Pete has done so well.
Farage has always been a policy free zone which will be his undoing there is only so much 'cheeky chappy friend of the people' stuff he can play on.
Farage is wrong about deportations.
Farage is wrong about deportations.
We have to have deportations, all illegals, any immigrant who commits a crime, any visa overstayed. We also need detention centres not hotels, what lunatic chose hotels?
This is a point I have tried to emphasise to anyone raising the idea of mass deportations. It's utterly fanciful.
Mass deportations requires political will and a backbone, that is all.
But also realistic policies to tackle the problem starting with reducing all the pull factors.
Pete's main point is right that mass deportation just isn't on the cards but there are as he explains various other ways to skin the cat.
Tell that to Donald Trump. Our politicians are weak, no other country puts illegal immigrants in hotels. We have too many corrupt and spineless politicians. The (un)civil service has been infiltrated by political activists, on the Left. The woman in the Home Office in charge of approving asylum claims told her staff to approve people they knew were lying. She has now gone to the fake charity Care for Calais, good riddance. But there are plenty more like her.
I totally agree our politicians are weak but I'm agreeing with Pete that the way to turn this situation around is through robust policies and not talking tough or using brawn over brains.
We need both.
There is a also a point - how much of a nazi do you want to be? Mass deportations of people with a current legal right to be here and who are not criminals sounds pretty Nazi to me.
It is not your fault you were born without a brain.
This is exactly the Uniparty stance. No confrontation. “Behind the scenes action” by sneaky little law-making and therefore no accountability and public censure. It is a recipe for defeat.
The civil servants know how to prevent each and every one of your proposals. We need to make a statement by mass deportations. We need to make a statement by channel confrontations. People respect a show of STRENGTH. It will deter the gangs like nothing else. It will show the people that the government means business. The Left-wing MSM is going to scream anyway. Ignore them because they now only speak to a minority.
Yes, we need political reform through legislation too and a massive clear out of the corrupted Home Office, Universities et al but a public show of mass deportations of troublemakers, criminals and illegals will do more good than harm to start with.
The purpose of a system is what it does. The immigration system in the UK actively encourages and facilitates mass legal and illegal immigration. That is its purpose.
All talk of immigration or deportation assumes that those in power (or seeking power) want these things to happen. They (Starmer, Kemi, Nigel et al) do not. If the Tories wanted to stop it they had 14 years to do so, having promised to do so, and yet they did nothing. Starmer does nothing. The next PM will do nothing. This is because flooding the UK with uneducated, primarily muslim foreigners is the desired outcome. The system is doing what it is intended to do.
There will be no mass deportations or remigrations. There will be no holding centres, or tent cities. The largesse will continue to flow to the invaders in order to attract more of them.
At some point something will break, probably when the money runs out, but that's a long way off. Meanwhile expect more of the same.
Things are going to get a lot worse before they get worse.
I would suggest completely banning the production and sale of all halal meats. Start with that and see where it goes . . . . .
Completely agree. Forced deportations of people who are neither criminals nor illegally here will not command popular support. And being brutally honest I am quite glad about that.
But as you say there is a lot we can do and should do over immigration.
dawg you’re just doing v2 of the hostile environment costing far more money which no politician of any party wants to spend 😴😴😴
Respectfully, if you worked in the immigration system or any public sector agency adjacent to it, you would know there was no ‘hostile environment’ other than in a PR sense.
where do u worl
One suggestion I would like to make re detection and raids which I hope will be helpful (and feeds into your exhortations for joined up thinking as there is no silver bullet) is that once again, asylum and the HRA giving direct effect to the ECHR completely undermines enforcement and removals.
I’ve seen so many of the people working in these drugs farms and factories then claiming asylum/to be children then placed in LA care or agencies subsequently referring them down the modern slavery route when caught. (Art 4 place a positive duty on the State so police officers, social workers etc have to refer them to the HO via the NRM or risk lawyers down the line suing their org for HR compensation for breach of Art 4.)
They all know what to do and say when caught so their ‘punishment’ for breaking into the country and committing crimes is to be housed and clothed by the State, given access to state-funded lawyers pending decision, and then usually permission to stay.
And if the application isn’t granted, they disappear underground and it’s back to square one.
Remove the right to welfare, housing and free access to the NHS for new arrivals for the first 3 years, and end charitable status for mosques.
The country would be a few million people lighter within months.
Who cares what the media thinks and yes bring in the riot squad if necessary - the silent majority want them gone and the leftists will soon get the message if they are continously stopped every time they try and stop deportations.