Kemi Badenoch has warned that Britain could end up like France (Image: Philip Coburn/Reach plc)

Britain will end up like France – engulfed in civil unrest – if we don’t tighten our borders, Kemi Badenoch has warned. The Conservative leader called on the Government to make it more difficult to gain British citizenship.

It comes as France has been rocked by violent riots after weeks of student protests snowballed into a nationwide revolt. Mrs Badenoch also hit out at Andy Burnham for wanting to drag Britain back into the EU, warning that civil unrest in France and a German chancellor on the brink of being ousted are not a great advertisement for the bloc.

Speaking at a press conference, Mrs Badenoch admitted that too many people came into the UK under the previous Tory government, with those individuals now qualifying for indefinite leave to remain. Mrs Badenoch added that she “knows we made a mistake” and “holds [her] hands up to it”.

She added: “What I am interested in is how we fix this problem. It should not be so easy to get British citizenship, which is what ILR basically fast tracks you to.”

She added: “Being a British citizen is a privilege – it is not something you get like a ‘buy one, get one free’ in a supermarket. We have to do better than that, and Labour need to focus on how to make sure that our immigration system is fit for the world we live in.”

When asked about immigration reform, she added: “We will support Shabana Mahmood if she toughens up the system.” The Tory leader suggested that the Home Secretary is “not going far enough”, but warned Labour ministers not to bow to pressure from their own MPs to water down reforms.

Mrs Badenoch added: “I am afraid we are going to see a lot more problems in the country. I don’t want us to end up with how France is ending up, with so much civil unrest. Politicians need to take responsibility – we will help Shabana if she takes responsibility.”

The Tory leader’s comments come after a Cabinet row over immigration reforms intensified when Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh attacked plans to make foreigners wait longer for permanent residency.

The Home Secretary wants to double the time migrants must live in the UK before being eligible for indefinite leave to remain from five to 10 years and apply it retrospectively to those already here. But Ms Fahnbulleh warned that extending the wait was a threat to “building cohesion” and said Labour must “challenge divisive rhetoric”.

Mrs Badenoch also took aim at Mr Burnham’s desire to drag Britain closer to the EU. She blasted: “This belief that absolutely nothing good can happen to us unless we are in the EU, is for the birds.

“France is in the EU, it is on fire. Germany is in the EU, look what is happening to their economy […] their government is falling apart.

“We need to stop pretending that the EU is the answer to every single problem. Just as we need to stop pretending that all of the problems that we had in the EU would have been solved by leaving.

“Both of these positions are nonsensical – there are many things that we can do out of the EU.”

Meanwhile, in France, cars are being set alight, and shops ransacked as thousands of protesters and rioters take to the streets. French leaders and mayors have imposed curfews across several major cities as they fight mob chaos on the country’s embattled streets.

Britain Will End Up ‘On Fire’ Like France If We Don’t Tighten Our Borders

Britain’s immigration debate has reached another critical moment, as warnings grow that the country could face serious social unrest if border controls are not strengthened. Comparisons with France have fuelled concerns about illegal migration, integration, pressure on public services and the government’s ability to maintain public confidence. For supporters of tougher immigration policies, the message is clear: Britain must take decisive action before existing tensions become more difficult to manage.

However, predicting that Britain will end up “on fire” like France is a dramatic warning rather than an inevitable outcome. The challenges experienced by France have developed over many years and involve a complicated combination of economic inequality, policing, discrimination, social exclusion and political frustration. Immigration forms part of the wider debate, but it cannot explain every episode of unrest. Britain must therefore examine the lessons carefully instead of assuming that the two countries will follow exactly the same path.

The question facing the government is whether it can establish an immigration system that is orderly, effective and fair while addressing the concerns of communities that feel increasingly frustrated by the current situation.

Why France Has Become a Warning for Britain

France has experienced several serious episodes of urban unrest, including the widespread disturbances that followed the fatal police shooting of teenager Nahel Merzouk in June 2023. Riots spread across numerous towns and cities, with buildings damaged, vehicles burned and confrontations between police and groups of protesters.

The unrest exposed longstanding tensions involving policing, economic disadvantage, discrimination and relations between authorities and residents in some deprived neighbourhoods. It also prompted a national debate about integration, public safety and the responsibilities of the state.

For those advocating stricter immigration controls in Britain, these events illustrate the potential consequences of allowing social tensions to deepen without an effective political response. They argue that governments must maintain control over their borders, enforce immigration laws consistently and ensure that local communities have the resources needed to manage population changes.

Nevertheless, France’s experience cannot be reduced to immigration alone. Many of the issues involved are connected to unemployment, housing, relations with the police and a sense of exclusion among some residents. The circumstances vary between communities, and the people involved in episodes of disorder do not necessarily share the same backgrounds or motivations.

Britain can learn from France without assuming that stronger border controls alone would prevent every form of unrest.

The Growing Pressure to Tighten Britain’s Borders

Immigration has become one of the most prominent issues in British politics, particularly because of the continuing debate over small boats crossing the English Channel.

For critics of the current system, the crossings represent a challenge to the government’s ability to enforce its own rules. They argue that people-smuggling networks are exploiting vulnerable individuals and that the authorities must demonstrate that irregular entry will not automatically result in permanent settlement.

The issue also raises questions about the cost of asylum accommodation, the speed of application processing and the resources available to local authorities. When asylum decisions take a long time, uncertainty increases for applicants and pressure on accommodation budgets can continue.

Supporters of stricter border controls believe the government should increase cooperation with other countries, disrupt criminal smuggling networks and improve the enforcement of final immigration decisions. They argue that a credible system requires clear rules and consistent implementation.

Yet effective border management involves more than announcing tougher policies. Authorities must identify people accurately, process applications efficiently and distinguish between those who qualify for international protection and those who do not.

People arriving irregularly may include individuals fleeing persecution or serious danger. Their claims must be assessed according to applicable law. At the same time, decisions that establish a person has no legal right to remain must be handled through effective and lawful procedures.

The challenge is to combine border security with a system that is capable of making timely, reliable decisions.

Could Immigration Lead to Social Unrest?

The relationship between immigration and social stability is complex. Rapid changes in population can create difficulties when housing is scarce, public services are under pressure or local communities feel excluded from decisions affecting their neighbourhoods.

If residents believe that their concerns are being ignored, frustration can grow. Problems involving accommodation, school places, healthcare access and local infrastructure may become more contentious when people feel that limited resources are being distributed unfairly.

However, immigration does not automatically lead to disorder. The outcomes depend on economic conditions, government policies, integration, employment opportunities and the quality of relationships between residents and public institutions.

Migrants are not a single, uniform group. They include workers, students, family members, refugees and people seeking asylum. Their legal circumstances, experiences and contributions differ considerably.

It is therefore important to distinguish between legitimate concerns about how immigration is managed and unsupported claims about entire communities. Individuals should not be blamed collectively for the actions of others who share their nationality, ethnicity or religion.

A government can enforce immigration law while protecting the rights of lawful residents and preventing discrimination. In fact, clear and consistently applied rules can help reduce uncertainty and strengthen confidence in public institutions.

Small Boats and the Crisis of Public Confidence

The Channel crossings have become a powerful symbol of Britain’s wider immigration debate. Images of overcrowded boats arriving on British shores regularly attract public attention and generate demands for more effective action.

The journeys are dangerous, exposing passengers to the risk of drowning, injury and exploitation. Criminal smuggling networks can profit from people who are desperate to reach Britain, often leaving them vulnerable during the journey.

The authorities face a difficult task. They must protect life at sea, gather intelligence about smuggling operations, identify arrivals and determine which legal procedures apply to individual cases.

A sustainable approach would involve closer international cooperation, effective investigations into criminal networks and sufficient resources to process asylum applications without unnecessary delays. It would also require lawful arrangements for people whose claims have been rejected and who have no other basis for remaining in the country.

The success of these measures should be assessed through evidence. Relevant indicators include crossing numbers, the disruption of smuggling operations, processing times and the implementation of final decisions.

Political declarations may communicate determination, but the public ultimately needs to see whether policies produce measurable improvements.

Integration and the Pressure on Local Communities

Border controls are only one part of the wider immigration challenge. Integration and local planning also play important roles in maintaining social cohesion.

When people arrive in a community, access to language education, employment opportunities and clear information about laws and responsibilities can help them participate in society. Schools, employers, councils and community organisations may all contribute to this process.

Housing is particularly important. In areas where rents are rising and affordable accommodation is difficult to find, residents may feel that population changes are adding to existing pressures. If decisions about asylum accommodation are made without sufficient communication or planning, frustration can intensify.

Local authorities need adequate resources and accurate information to plan services effectively. Communities should be able to understand the decisions affecting them and raise concerns through appropriate channels.

At the same time, longstanding residents facing poverty, poor housing or inadequate public services should not have their problems dismissed. Governments must address those difficulties directly rather than treating immigration as the sole explanation for every local problem.

A fair approach recognises that public confidence depends on both effective immigration management and functioning public services.

The Economic Dimension of Immigration

Immigration also has an economic dimension that should not be overlooked. Migrants work in a range of industries, including healthcare, social care, construction, hospitality and other sectors. Their contributions vary according to their circumstances, qualifications and employment.

At the same time, population growth can increase demand for housing, transport, education and healthcare. The effect on a particular community depends on the pace of change, the availability of workers and the capacity of local infrastructure.

A serious policy debate must therefore examine both costs and contributions. Broad claims that immigration is entirely beneficial or entirely harmful do not adequately reflect the complexity of the evidence.

The government must consider which skills the economy needs, how employers can recruit responsibly and whether public services have the capacity to meet demand. It must also ensure that immigration rules are transparent and that workers are protected from exploitation.

These questions are particularly important during periods of economic pressure, when households may feel that wages are not keeping pace with living costs and access to essential services is becoming more difficult.

Clear policies can help distinguish between the different forms of migration and ensure that decisions reflect the country’s economic needs and legal responsibilities.

Political Rhetoric and the Risk of Greater Division

The warning that Britain could end up “on fire” like France is designed to convey urgency. Yet dramatic language can also increase public anxiety if it presents a possible future as though it were inevitable.

Political leaders have a responsibility to explain the risks they identify and provide evidence for their claims. If they believe immigration policy is failing, they should specify which parts of the system are ineffective and explain how their proposed changes would address the problem.

Those who oppose tougher controls also need to explain how they would maintain public confidence, process asylum applications efficiently and enforce lawful decisions.

Debate becomes less productive when every disagreement is reduced to accusations of weakness, prejudice or political dishonesty. Such exchanges may generate attention but do not necessarily help voters understand the practical choices available.

Britain needs an immigration debate that recognises genuine concerns while avoiding language that encourages hostility towards entire communities.

Public safety and social cohesion are too important to be treated simply as instruments in a political contest.

What the Government Must Do Next

The government faces pressure to demonstrate that Britain can manage immigration effectively and maintain confidence in the rule of law. Several priorities are central to that task.

First, asylum applications should be processed as efficiently as possible, with adequate staffing and procedures that allow decisions to be made fairly. Reducing unnecessary delays would provide greater certainty for applicants and help control accommodation costs.

Second, authorities must continue working with international partners to disrupt people-smuggling networks. Criminal organisations operate across borders, making intelligence-sharing and coordinated enforcement important.

Third, the government must explain how final immigration decisions are implemented and ensure that the rules are applied consistently within the law.

Fourth, local communities need appropriate resources to manage housing, education, healthcare and other services. Decisions affecting neighbourhoods should be communicated clearly, with opportunities for residents to raise legitimate concerns.

Finally, integration policies should help people who have a legal right to remain participate in society, learn English where necessary and access employment opportunities.

These measures will not resolve every challenge immediately. They require sustained investment, competent administration and regular assessment of results. However, they offer a more practical foundation than relying solely on dramatic promises.

Britain’s Future Is Not Predetermined

The warning that Britain could end up “on fire” like France captures the intensity of the current immigration debate. It reflects concerns about border security, pressure on services and the possibility that unresolved tensions could weaken social cohesion.

But Britain’s future is not predetermined. France’s experience offers lessons about the importance of public trust, effective institutions, economic opportunity and the consequences of allowing social problems to deepen. It does not establish that Britain will inevitably experience the same unrest.

Stronger border controls may be part of the response sought by many voters, but lasting stability also requires efficient administration, fair enforcement, well-supported communities and responsible political leadership.

The government must show that immigration rules are credible and that decisions are implemented effectively. It must also recognise that people seeking protection have legal rights and that lawful residents should not face collective blame because of their background.

Ultimately, the test of Britain’s immigration policy will be whether it can maintain control, protect public safety and uphold the rule of law while supporting a cohesive society. That requires practical solutions, measurable results and an honest debate about the causes of public frustration.

The comparison with France should serve as a reason to examine the evidence and address problems before they grow—not as proof that a future crisis is inevitable. Britain’s ability to avoid deeper divisions will depend on the decisions made now and on whether its political leaders can turn public concern into effective, fair and sustainable policy.