The asylum system is in crisis (Image: Getty)
Almost 70,000 asylum seekers are now living in communities as Labour continues to spread migrants across the country, bombshell new figures reveal. Some 69,038 are now living in houses, flats and bedsits – including large houses in multiple occupation or HMOs – which is up from 68,719 asylum seekers in May. This includes 4,790 failed asylum seekers. The number of migrants living in hotels has fallen to 16,021.
It comes a week after the Daily Express revealed that the Home Office is telling asylum seekers not to rape or beat women, and to not have sex with children, as concerns over cultural values intensify. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has vowed to close every migrant hotel by the next General Election. But the growing numbers in ‘dispersal accommodation’ will anger the public even more, ministers were told, because communities will be unable to cope.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Reform’s Zia Yusuf said: “Today’s figures show the invasion of Britain continues under Labour.
“More than 205,000 people have crossed the Channel in boats since 2018, yet just 5% have been deported.
“Meanwhile, the number of foreign criminals walking our streets has hit a record 21,294. Labour is allowing dangerous foreign criminals to roam freely, posing a serious threat to the British public, while illegal migrants are being dispersed from hotels into HMOs and properties in British communities, with virtually no background checks.
“And now we are seeing record numbers of foreign nationals being granted Indefinite Leave to Remain, giving people unlimited access to our welfare system, all paid for by British taxpayers.
“Britain is at breaking point. Under Reform, illegal boats in the Channel will be stopped by our Navy, and all those here illegally will be detained and deported.”
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: “Labour are moving illegal immigrants out of hotels and into flats in your building, and now they are telling them to go and disappear without a trace.
“More than 93,000 people are now being housed at the taxpayer’s expense, and the number crammed into dispersal accommodation has climbed by 12 per cent under Labour. Illegal immigrants should be deported in the first place, and we should certainly not be encouraging them to just disappear.
“The next Conservative government would deport every illegal immigrant, leaving the ECHR and any other obligation that stands in the way in order to get it done, because the surest way to empty the accommodation is to make plain that nobody who crosses the Channel gets to stay.”
Britain’s asylum crisis was laid bare as 85,891 sought sanctuary in the UK last year, down from 106,130 in the previous 12 months.
An alarming 33,949 people applied after crossing the Channel on a dinghy, while 34,999 claimed refuge after arriving on a study, work or visitor visa.
Of this group, 9,442 held a study visa, 14,151 arrived on a work visa, 6,392 used a visitor visa and 5,014 held other forms of leave.
One in 10 asylum seekers were from Pakistan, with 8,305 in total. Most sought protection after arriving on a visa. Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Indians and Nigerians were the most common nationalities to seek sanctuary after travelling to the UK legally.
Eritreans, Afghans, Iranians, Sudanese and Somalis have accounted for the biggest cohorts of small boat migrants so far this year.
Reform’s Zia Yusuf said: “On Tuesday, a Sudanese man called Ibrahim Albashir was jailed for the attempted murder of a 32-year-old woman.
“He ambushed her as she walked home from a meal with friends. He stabbed her 30 times with a broken bottle. She survived only because locals heard her ‘blood-curdling screams’ and intervened.
“Albashir is an illegal migrant. The Tories let him in.
“He had previously tried his luck in France. They rejected his asylum claim and detained him in a mental hospital for six months due to catatonic schizophrenia.
“After entering Britain, the court heard he sexually assaulted a female staff member at a hostel. Despite all this, he was left to roam free.
“It could have been your daughter, wife, sister, or grandmother. Stabbed 30 times with broken glass.
“At this very moment, thousands upon thousands of unvetted illegals continue to roam free.
“This is the consequence of inaction. Every day that passes without mass deportations risks ever more blood on the government’s hands. They do not care about you.”
Home Office spending on asylum in the UK stood at £4.36 billion in 2025/26, down 8% from £4.76 billion in 2024/25 and the second annual fall in a row, Government figures show.
The total covers all Home Office costs related to asylum, including direct cash support and accommodation, plus wider staffing and other migration and borders activity.
It does not include costs relating to the interception of migrants who travel to the UK across the English Channel in small boats.
Spending hit a record high of £5.38 billion in 2023/24.
In a startling admission in the booklet for asylum seekers, officials said: “Women do not need permission from a husband, father, brother or any other man to do any of these things.
“Men and women are treated equally by the law, by employers, by schools and by services like hospitals and the police. It is against the law to treat someone unfairly because of their gender.”
Migrants are also being told domestic abuse is illegal and that the age of consent in the UK is 16.
Immigration chiefs warn: “Sex with someone under the age of 16 is a serious crime in the UK. There are no exceptions to this rule. Even if they say yes, it is still illegal. You could go to prison, lose your support and accommodation, and it will affect your asylum claim.”
Migrants are told not to deny children food, or “cut or harm a girl’s genitals”.
And the staggering advice even details what rape is, insisting that “consent” is needed in every sexual situation.
The document states: “This means even if you are married or in a relationship with someone, they must consent to sex every time.
“If you have sex with someone without their consent, this is called rape. Rape is a serious crime in the UK. You could go to prison, lose your support and accommodation, and it will affect your asylum claim.”
Guidance published in the booklet for asylum seekers adds: “Someone can change their mind at any time, even if they said yes before.
“If someone is asleep, drunk, or unable to respond, they cannot consent.”
Shock Official Figures Reveal Rise in Asylum Seekers Living in Communities Across the UK
Britain’s ongoing debate over immigration and asylum has been reignited following reports of an increase in the number of asylum seekers living in communities across the country. The development is likely to intensify questions about the government’s accommodation strategy, pressure on local services and the ability of the asylum system to process applications efficiently.
For communities already struggling with housing shortages, rising living costs and stretched public services, changes in asylum accommodation can become a sensitive political issue. Residents want to understand how decisions are being made, what support is available and whether local authorities have sufficient resources to manage additional responsibilities.
At the same time, asylum seekers whose claims are awaiting a decision need accommodation and support in accordance with the relevant rules. The government must balance these responsibilities while ensuring that public money is spent effectively and that applications are considered fairly.
The reported rise therefore raises questions extending beyond the number of people living in particular areas. It also highlights the challenges facing a system that must manage applications, provide suitable accommodation and respond to public concerns about immigration.
However, the precise significance of the figures depends on the official data involved, the period being compared and the type of accommodation included. Without those details, it would be premature to conclude that every part of Britain is experiencing the same increase or that the change necessarily reflects a single cause.
Why More Asylum Seekers May Be Living in Communities
People seeking asylum in the United Kingdom can be accommodated in different settings while their applications are considered. Depending on their circumstances and eligibility, this may include initial accommodation, hotels, shared housing or other properties used under government arrangements.
When the number of people living in community-based accommodation increases, several explanations may be possible.
The government may be moving people away from hotels towards other forms of accommodation in an effort to reduce costs. Alternatively, a growing number of applications, lengthy decision-making processes or changes in the availability of accommodation could affect where people are housed.
These possibilities have different implications for taxpayers and local communities.
A move from a hotel to a shared property does not necessarily mean that the total number of asylum seekers has increased. It may simply indicate that people are being accommodated in a different setting. Similarly, an increase in the number of people receiving asylum support could reflect several factors, including the number of outstanding applications and the time required to resolve them.
Understanding the difference is essential when interpreting official figures.
The government needs to explain whether the reported rise concerns the total number of asylum seekers receiving support, the number living outside hotels or the number accommodated in particular local authority areas. Each measure describes a different aspect of the system.
Without that distinction, public debate risks confusing changes in accommodation arrangements with changes in overall migration levels.
Local Communities Want Clear Answers
For residents, the practical consequences of accommodation decisions often matter more than the administrative details.
People want to know whether suitable housing is available, whether local healthcare services can meet demand and whether councils have been consulted before new arrangements are introduced. They may also ask how long accommodation is expected to be used and which organisation is responsible for managing it.
These are legitimate questions about planning, public spending and local accountability.
Local authorities already face significant pressures, including demand for temporary accommodation, social care responsibilities and difficulties balancing budgets. When additional responsibilities arise, councils need clear information about the resources available and the arrangements for managing services.
However, the impact of asylum accommodation differs from one area to another. Some properties may be managed by private contractors, while other arrangements involve different providers and funding structures. The precise responsibilities of councils therefore depend on the scheme in question.
It would be inaccurate to assume that every increase automatically places the same burden on local taxpayers.
Nevertheless, effective communication is vital. If residents hear about accommodation plans through rumours rather than clear information from authorities, uncertainty can create mistrust and increase tensions.
The government and local councils should provide accurate information about the scale of proposed arrangements, the relevant funding and the practical measures in place to address concerns.
The Housing Crisis Adds to the Pressure
Britain’s housing shortage is an important part of the wider debate.
Across many areas, households face difficulties finding affordable properties, while local authorities must respond to demand for temporary accommodation and homelessness support. Rising rents and limited housing availability can make it harder for people on lower incomes to secure suitable homes.
Against this background, news about accommodation for asylum seekers can provoke strong reactions.
Some residents question why properties are being used for asylum accommodation when local families are also struggling to find housing. Others argue that the government should increase the supply of affordable homes and improve the management of temporary accommodation for everyone who needs it.
The issue requires careful analysis.
Accommodation used for asylum support may be subject to particular contracts, eligibility rules and operational requirements. A property being used under one arrangement does not automatically mean it could immediately be transferred to another household or made available for social housing.
At the same time, the existence of administrative restrictions does not remove the need to consider whether accommodation is being used efficiently.
The government should explain how asylum accommodation fits into its wider housing strategy and whether long-term arrangements offer better value than expensive emergency options.
Increasing the supply of suitable housing, improving planning and reducing unnecessary delays could help address pressures affecting both asylum accommodation and the wider housing market.
The Cost to Taxpayers Remains a Central Concern
The financial cost of asylum accommodation has become one of the most prominent issues in the national debate.
Temporary accommodation can be expensive, particularly when hotels are used for extended periods. The total cost depends on the number of people supported, the type of accommodation, contractual arrangements and the length of time individuals remain within the system.
Moving people into more appropriate accommodation may reduce certain costs, but the savings depend on the arrangements involved. Community-based housing still requires funding, management and appropriate support.
The government must therefore look beyond the headline number of people accommodated and examine the cost per person, the duration of support and the reasons people remain in the system for extended periods.
One of the most important factors is the time taken to process asylum applications.
When decisions are delayed, people who qualify for support may remain dependent on accommodation for longer. This can increase expenditure and make it harder to plan future capacity.
Improving decision-making could help reduce avoidable costs, provided that applications are assessed properly and applicants have access to the procedures available under the law.
A more efficient system would need adequate staffing, effective administration and clear processes for reviewing decisions. Simply reducing accommodation budgets without addressing the causes of demand could create new difficulties rather than solving existing ones.
Taxpayers deserve transparency about the costs involved and evidence that government spending is achieving its intended purpose.
The Government Faces Pressure Over Immigration Policy
Any sustained increase in the number of asylum seekers receiving accommodation is likely to attract political attention.
Reform UK has made immigration and border control central to its political message, arguing that successive governments have failed to manage the system effectively. Nigel Farage and his supporters are likely to use concerns about accommodation costs and local pressures to reinforce their criticism of the political establishment.
The Conservatives have also faced pressure to demonstrate that they can deliver effective immigration controls and restore public confidence.
For Labour, the challenge is to show that its approach can deliver practical improvements while meeting Britain’s legal responsibilities towards people seeking protection.
The government must explain how it intends to manage asylum applications, provide appropriate accommodation and reduce unnecessary expenditure. It must also demonstrate that local authorities are receiving the information and resources needed to deal with the consequences of national policy.
Political opponents may demand tougher restrictions or faster removals, but any proposals must be assessed in terms of their legality, feasibility and likely effectiveness.
An asylum claim must be considered according to the applicable rules. Where a claim is refused, the next steps depend on the individual circumstances, including any relevant appeal or other legal process.
A credible immigration strategy therefore requires more than announcements. It needs clear objectives, effective administration and measurable results.
Why the Official Figures Need Careful Interpretation
Official statistics can reveal important trends, but the way they are presented matters.
A rise in the number of asylum seekers living in community accommodation could occur at the same time as a fall in hotel use. Conversely, the total number of people receiving asylum support could increase even if the proportion living in hotels declines.
The relevant reporting period also matters. Comparing figures from different months or years without considering changes in the asylum system can lead to misleading conclusions.
Other questions include whether the figures cover the whole United Kingdom or only particular parts of it, whether they include dependants and whether they refer to people awaiting initial decisions or those at other stages of the process.
The difference between the number of people arriving, the number applying for asylum and the number receiving accommodation is particularly important. These categories are related, but they are not interchangeable.
To understand the reported rise properly, the government should publish clear comparisons and explain the factors driving the change.
Reliable information would help councils plan their services, allow residents to understand what is happening in their areas and enable Parliament to scrutinise the government’s performance.
Without that transparency, debate may be driven more by political claims than by a complete understanding of the evidence.