People unhappy with Britain’s migration policy, survey finds
The Immigration Attitudes Tracker from Ipsos and British Future show that two-thirds of the public are dissatisfied with the government's handling of immigration
By Chandrashekar BhatSep 13, 2023
PUBLIC dissatisfaction with how the government is handling immigration is at its highest level since 2015, according to a new survey.
In May this year, Office for National Statistics (ONS) data revealed that net migration to the UK reached a record high of 606,000 in 2022, driven by people from outside the European Union coming to work or study. People arriving from Ukraine and Hong Kong under special visa schemes also contributed to the number.
The Immigration Attitudes Tracker from the market research firm Ipsos and the think tank British Future show that two-thirds of the public (66 per cent) are dissatisfied with the government’s handling of immigration – the highest level in the tracker’s history. Just 12 per cent say they are satisfied.
A little more than a fifth (22 per cent) of Conservative supporters are satisfied with the government on immigration while more than half of Tories (56 per cent) are dissatisfied – a quarter (26 per cent) being “very dissatisfied”.
Almost three-quarters (73 per cent) of Labour supporters are dissatisfied with how the government is dealing with immigration while eight per cent say they are satisfied. The top reason cited for dissatisfaction is the failure of the government to stop Channel crossings, but responses are divided by politics.
More than 21,000 people reached British shores by crossing the English Channel illegally so far in 2023, official figures showed last week. More than 100,000 migrants have arrived on small boats since the UK started publicly recording the arrivals in 2018.
Prime minister Rishi Sunak has made “stopping the boats” a key priority of his Conservative government which branded the cross-Channel route “illegal”.
It passed legislation blocking asylum applications from anyone arriving without prior authorisation.
The survey findings reveal that for Labour supporters who are unhappy with the government on immigration, “creating a negative or fearful environment for migrants” (46 per cent) and “not treating asylum-seekers well” (45 per cent) are equally important reasons for dissatisfaction as “not doing enough to stop channel crossings” (46 per cent).
Some 82 per cent of Conservative supporters say “not doing enough to stop Channel crossings” is a reason for their dissatisfaction and only nine per cent cite “creating a negative or fearful environment for migrants”.
A reduction in the immigration numbers finds wider support than allowing the figures to remain at the current level or rise, although more people think the arrival of overseas people has a positive impact on the UK than those who feel such development is negative.
The tracker survey finds that 48 per cent of the public now supports reducing immigration (up from 42 per cent in 2022), compared to 44 per cent who would prefer numbers to stay the same (22 per cent) or increase (22 per cent).
Support for reducing immigration is still nearly 20 points lower than in 2015, the first year of the tracker, when 67 per cent of the public backed reductions. More people (43 per cent) think that immigration has had a positive impact on the UK than the 37 per cent who feel its impact has been negative. But negativity has increased by eight points from 29 per cent since 2022.
Attitudes are divided by politics. Twothirds of Conservative supporters (67 per cent) now favour reducing migration, compared to only 38 per cent of Labour supporters who favour reductions. More than half (56 per cent) of Labour supporters say immigration numbers should increase (28 per cent) or stay the same (28 per cent), compared to 30 per cent of Conservatives who say numbers should either increase (16 per cent) or stay the same (14 per cent).
Sunder Katwala, director of the British Future thinktank, said: “The government’s approach to immigration, particularly asylum and small boats, is disappointing everyone – but for different reasons. Liberals think it is inhumane, while hardliners think it isn’t achieving what has been promised. What they all have in common is the feeling that the government isn’t doing a good job.
“Attitudes to immigration are nuanced but the sharp divide along party political lines means we should expect a noisier, more heated immigration debate as Britain heads towards a general election.
“But politicians won’t rebuild public trust by raising the volume of the debate - that will take workable solutions, particularly on asylum, that balance control and compassion.”
Some 71 per cent say they do not trust the Conservatives to have the right policies towards migrants crossing the Channel, with just 21 per cent saying they trust Sunak’s party, the research finds.
About a third (32 per cent) of people say they trust the opposition Labour to have the right policies on Channel crossings, yet it is distrusted by 53 per cent.
About 52 per cent of Conservative supporters say they do not trust their own party on Channel crossings. On the other hand, Labour supporters do trust their party on the issue: 60 per cent say they trust Labour to have the right policies, while 28 per cent do not. However, the new survey also finds that support for migration for specific jobs remains largely steady.
Gideon Skinner
More than half the public would like to see the number of migrant doctors (53 per cent) and nurses (54 per cent) increase, while less than one in seven favour reductions (13 per cent for doctors and 14 per cent for nurses). For care workers, 46 per cent would like to see numbers rise, 28 per cent would rather they stay the same and only 17 per cent would like to see them reduced. Nearly three-quarters of skilled worker visas last year were for health and care roles.
The picture is similar for other jobs as well. Only 18 per cent of the public would like to reduce the number of migrants coming to work as seasonal fruit and vegetable pickers, while 43 per cent would prefer the number to increase and 30 per cent say the numbers should stay the same.
A little less than a quarter of public (24 per cent) want fewer migrant lorry drivers while 66 per cent would rather numbers stay the same (35 per cent) or increase (31 per cent); and 24 per cent would prefer fewer migrants coming to work in construction, while 66 per cent think numbers should stay the same (33 per cent) or increase (33 per cent).
Gideon Skinner, head of political research at Ipsos, said immigration has been moving up the political and public agenda this year.
“But with an election on the horizon and attention on the issue of immigration and asylum unlikely to go away, there isn’t much trust in either of the main parties to get the balance right.”
A satellite image shows Nur Khan air base in Islamabad, Pakistan, May 11, 2025, after Pakistani military said it was targeted by an Indian missile attack. (Photo: 2025 Planet Labs PBC/Handout via Reuters)
A CEASEFIRE between India and Pakistan has eased tensions after four days of intense fighting, but analysts say no clear winner has emerged from the conflict.
Both countries claim to have achieved their objectives in what was their worst confrontation since 1999, without acknowledging significant losses.
The hostilities began last Wednesday when India launched strikes on what it called “terrorist infrastructure” inside Pakistan. India accuses Pakistan of backing the terrorists it says were behind an April attack that killed 26 people in Indian-administered Kashmir. Pakistan denies the allegation.
“If victory is defined by who lost the most manned aircraft, then India certainly lost this one,” said Ashley Tellis of the Carnegie think tank.
“But India also succeeded in effectively interdicting a range of Pakistani surface targets and imposing significant costs on Pakistan,” Tellis told AFP.
“Both sides continue to claim air-to-air kills, but clear evidence remains unavailable at the time of writing,” said Fabian Hoffmann from the University of Oslo.
“What stands out is the extensive use of conventional long-range strike systems by both sides to target military infrastructure deep within enemy territory, including sites near their capitals,” he added.
The international community, including the United States, eventually stepped in, concerned about the potential for further escalation.
Hoffmann said the two countries showed little restraint despite avoiding “deliberate strikes on critical civilian infrastructure.”
“Any shift in that direction would... potentially bring the conflict closer to the threshold of nuclear use,” said Hoffmann.
Tellis said the global trend towards violence by states facing internal unrest requires greater international attention.
The fact that both countries are nuclear powers “makes the conventional balances all the more important. But the fact remains that neither side has a decisive conventional edge in a short war,” said Tellis.
Like other modern conflicts, the fighting saw extensive use of drones, said Oishee Majumdar from British intelligence firm Janes.
India used Israel Aerospace Industries’ exploding drones Harop and Harpy, along with reconnaissance drone Heron, Majumdar told AFP.
According to Military Balance, India also deployed the Indian-made Nishant and Drishti drones.
Indian media reported that New Delhi used French SCALP and Indian BrahMos cruise missiles, as well as AASM Hammer bombs developed by France’s Safran.
The Pakistani army deployed Songar drones from Turkey’s Asisguard, according to Janes.
Military Balance said Pakistan was also armed with Chinese CH-3 and CH-4 combat and reconnaissance drones, Wing Loong, and Turkey’s Akinci and TB2 drones.
At the start of the conflict, China called for restraint from both sides and offered to play a “constructive role”.
However, experts say Beijing’s position has been clear. China said it considers Pakistan an “ironclad friend” and “understands Pakistan’s legitimate security concerns”, said Chietigj Bajpaee from Chatham House.
Bajpaee said that “over 80 per cent of Pakistan’s arms imports over the last five years have come from China.”
“Beijing supplies Islamabad with key systems” including the HQ-9/P surface-to-air missile system, the LY-80 medium-range air defence and FM-90 defence systems, said John Spencer, a former US army officer and researcher at the Modern War Institute.
Spencer added that Pakistan’s “reliance on Chinese exports has created a brittle illusion of strength,” and while the systems are “designed to provide layered protection,” they “failed” against India’s strikes.
Pakistan claims it shot down five Indian fighter jets, including three Rafale aircraft, all while they were inside Indian airspace. India has not confirmed any losses.
Dassault, the French manufacturer of the Rafale, declined to comment.
A European military source said it was “very unlikely” that three Rafales were destroyed but added it was “credible” that at least one was.
Analysts say Indian aircraft were likely brought down by a Chinese PL-15E air-to-air missile, which has a range of 145 kilometres and whose debris was found in Indian territory.
“India lost at least one Rafale to a Pakistani J-10C firing a PL-15 air-to-air missile in an ultra-long-range air engagement,” said Carnegie’s Tellis.
This type of missile can remain undetected until its radar is activated “a few dozen kilometres away, or a few seconds” from its target, according to a French fighter pilot interviewed by AFP.
The Madras State Medical Association UK (MSMA) commemorated its Ruby Anniversary with an elegant evening at the House of Lords, celebrating four decades of service, integration, and achievement in British healthcare.
The evening was graciously hosted by Lord Karan Bilimoria CBE DL, who welcomed attendees and reflected on the House of Lords’ unique role in British democracy. “Here, we win arguments not with slogans but with knowledge,” he remarked, praising the expertise of its members, including judges, scientists, military leaders—and medical professionals.
Sharing his personal journey from India to the UK, Lord Bilimoria paid tribute to his father’s advice: “Integrate wherever you live, but never forget your roots.” He acknowledged the contribution of Indian-origin doctors and lauded MSMA’s vital role in supporting the NHS.
Professor Senthil Nathan, President of MSMA, took the audience through the Association’s inspiring journey—from its humble beginnings as a social group of doctors from the Madras Presidency, to becoming a network of over 200 strong, shaping careers, supporting NHS recruitment, and fostering leadership.
Lord Karan Bilimoria speaks at the event
“Our founding members helped bring in some of the most capable clinicians to the UK,” he said. “From clinical practice to research and teaching, our members have thrived. This evening is to honour their legacy.”
He also highlighted the association’s influence in establishing wider medical bodies such as the Overseas Doctors Association and the British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin (BAPIO).
Former MSMA President Dr S. N. Jayabalan, who arrived in the UK in 1976, echoed similar sentiments. “This association became like a family,” he said, adding that the support system it built helped many overcome early challenges. He noted with pride the rise of a new generation of doctors and urged them to embrace integration while preserving cultural roots.
The evening featured a formal dinner, spirited conversations, and a moving tribute segment honouring pioneering members for their lifelong contribution to medicine and community service. Honourees included: Dr Mallika Mohanraj, Dr Yamuna Rajagopal, Dr Alagappan Ramaswamy, Dr Muthurangu, Mrs Usha Muthurangu, Mr Krishnamoorthy Sarangapani, Mrs Stella Sarangapani, Dr Parthasarathy, and Dr Mallika Parthasarathy.
Keep ReadingShow less
Delhi has downplayed the US role in the Kashmir ceasefire
INDIA and Pakistan have stepped back from the brink of all-out war, with an apparent nudge from the US, but New Delhi’s aspirations as a global diplomatic power now face a key test after US president Donald Trump offered to mediate over Kashmir, analysts said.
India’s rapid rise as the world’s fifth-largest economy has boosted its confidence and clout on the world stage, where it has played an important role in addressing regional crises such as Sri Lanka’s economic collapse and the Myanmar earthquake.
But the conflict with Pakistan over Kashmir, touches a sensitive nerve in Indian politics.
How India threads the diplomatic needle – courting favour with Trump over issues like trade while asserting its own interests in Kashmir – will depend in large part on domestic politics and could determine the prospects for peace in the region.
“India ... is likely not keen on the broader talks (that the ceasefire) calls for. Upholding it will pose challenges,” said Michael Kugelman, a south Asia analyst based in Washington.
In a sign of just how fragile the truce remains, the two governments accused each other of serious violations last Saturday (10).
The ceasefire, Kugelman noted, was “cobbled together hastily” when tensions were at their peak.
Trump said last Sunday (11) that, following the ceasefire, “I am going to increase trade, substantially, with both of these great nations”.
India considers Kashmir an integral part of its territory and not open for negotiation, least of all through a third-party mediator.
“By agreeing to abort under US persuasion ... just three days of military operations, India is drawing attention to the Kashmir dispute, not to Pakistan’s crossborder terrorism that triggered the crisis,” said Brahma Chellaney, an Indian defence analyst.
For decades after the two countries separated in 1947, the West largely saw India and Pakistan through the same lens as the neighbours fought regularly over Kashmir. That changed in recent years, partly thanks to India’s economic rise, while Pakistan languished with an economy less than one-tenth India’s size.
But Trump’s proposal to work towards a solution to Kashmir, along with US secretary of state Marco Rubio’s declaration that India and Pakistan would start talks on broader issues at a neutral site, has irked many Indians.
Pakistan welcomed Trump’s offer, while Delhi denied any third-party role in the ceasefire, saying it was a bilateral decision.
Analysts and Indian opposition parties are questioning whether New Delhi met its strategic objectives by launching missiles into Pakistan last week.
By launching missiles deep into Pakistan, Modi showed a much higher appetite for risk than his predecessors. But the sudden ceasefire exposed him to rare criticism at home.
Swapan Dasgupta, a former MP from Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party, said the ceasefire had not gone down well in India partly because “Trump suddenly appeared out of nowhere and pronounced his verdict”.
The main opposition Congress party got in on the act, demanding an explanation from the government on the “ceasefire announcements made from Washington, DC.” “Have we opened the doors to third-party mediation?” asked Congress spokesperson Jairam Ramesh.
And while the fighting has stopped, tensions persist with several flashpoints in the fragile relationship that will test India’s resolve and may tempt it to adopt a hard-line stance. The top concern for Pakistan, diplomats and government officials there said, would be the Indus Waters Treaty, which India suspended last month, but which remains a vital source of water for many of Pakistan’s farms, households, and hydropower plants.
“Pakistan would not have agreed (to a ceasefire) without US guarantees of a broader dialogue,” said Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, a former foreign minister and currently chairman of the People’s Party of Pakistan, which supports the government.
Moeed Yusuf, former Pakistan National Security Advisor, said a broad agreement would be needed to break the cycle of brinksmanship over Kashmir.
“Because the underlying issues remain, and every six months, one year, two years, three years, something like this happens and then you are back at the brink of war in a nuclear environment,” he said.
An 18-year-old British woman who was reported missing while travelling in Thailand has been located in Georgia, where she has been arrested on suspicion of drug smuggling.
Bella May Culley, from Billingham, County Durham, was seen in handcuffs entering a court in the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, according to footage released by local media. The teenager had not made contact with her family since Saturday, when she failed to check in with her mother, Lyanne Kennedy, as arranged.
Concerned for her safety, Ms Culley’s father and aunt travelled to Bangkok over the weekend to seek information about her whereabouts. They later discovered on Tuesday that she had been detained in Georgia, more than 4,000 miles from where she was last believed to be.
Georgia’s interior ministry confirmed the arrest and said Ms Culley is facing charges that carry a possible sentence of up to 20 years or life imprisonment.
In a statement, the ministry said: “B.K, born in 2006, is charged with illegally purchasing and storing a particularly large amount of narcotics, illegally purchasing and storing the narcotic drug marijuana, and illegally importing it into Georgia. The committed crime envisions up to 20 years — or life imprisonment.”
Ms Culley is facing charges that carry a possible sentence of up to 20 years or life imprisonmentGeorgian Police
According to reports from Georgian media, the teenager was arrested at Tbilisi International Airport in possession of 34 hermetically sealed packages containing marijuana and 20 packages of hashish.
The UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) confirmed that a British national had been detained in Georgia and said it was supporting the individual’s family. Cleveland Police also confirmed Ms Culley’s detention.
Speaking to Teesside Live, Ms Kennedy said her daughter had travelled to Thailand on 3 May, after spending three weeks in the Philippines.
“She flew out to the Philippines after Easter with a friend and she was there for three weeks,” said Mrs Kennedy. “She was posting loads of pictures and then she went to Thailand on about 3 May.”
Mrs Kennedy said the last message she received from her daughter was on Saturday at 5.30pm, in which Ms Culley said she would FaceTime her later that day. “That was the last message anyone has received from what we can figure out up to now,” she added.
THE conflict between India and Pakistan over Kashmir has presented China with a rare chance to gather valuable intelligence, as it monitors Pakistan’s use of Chinese-made jets and weapons in live combat with India.
Security analysts and diplomats said China’s military modernisation has reached a point where it can deeply scrutinise Indian actions in real time from its border installations and Indian Ocean fleets as well as from space.
“From an intelligence perspective, this is a rare target of opportunity right on China’s borders involving a key potential adversary,” said Singapore-based security analyst Alexander Neill.
Two US officials claimed a Chinesemade J-10 Pakistani jet fighter shot down at least two Indian military planes – one of them a French-made Rafale fighter. India has not acknowledged the loss of any of its planes, while Pakistan’s defence and foreign ministers have confirmed the use of J-10 aircraft, but not commented on which missiles or other weapons were used.
The aerial clash is a rare opportunity for militaries around the world to study the performance of pilots, fighter jets and air-to-air missiles in active combat, and use that knowledge to prepare their own air forces for battle.
Security analysts said both India and China have taken steps to strengthen their military facilities and capabilities along the border, but it is also from above that China packs an intelligence gathering punch.
The London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) noted that China now fields 267 satellites – including 115 devoted to intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and a further 81 that monitor military electronic and signals information. It is a network that dwarfs its regional neighbours, including India, and is second only to the US.
“Both in terms of space and missile tracking capabilities, China is much better off now in terms of being able to monitor things as they happen,” said Neill, who is an adjunct fellow at Hawaii’s Pacific Forum thinktank.
China’s defence ministry did not respond to questions about its satellite deployment or intelligence activities.
Pakistan’s military media wing and information minister did not immediately respond to a request for comment on any information sharing with China.
Pakistan previously said it has an “allweather strategic, cooperative partnership” with China.
India has not commented on the issue, but its High Commissioner in London, Vikram Doraiswami, told Sky News that China’s relationship with Pakistan was not a concern for India.
“China requires a relationship with all of its neighbours, that includes us,” he said.
Chinese military intelligence teams would be eager to garner information on any Indian use of air defences and launches of cruise and ballistic missiles – not just in terms of flight paths and accuracy, but command and control information, analysts and diplomats said.
Any deployment of India’s BrahMos supersonic cruise missile – a weapon it developed jointly with Russia – would be of particular interest, some analysts said, given they do not believe it has been used in combat.
Chinese-made J-10 fighter jets used by Pakistan
China has also beefed up its intelligence gathering at sea. It has been increasingly active in the Indian Ocean in recent years, with China deploying space tracking ships as well as oceanographic research and fishing vessels on extended deployments, open source intelligence trackers said.
Regional diplomats said while the Chinese navy has been relatively cautious about extensive warship deployments into the Indian Ocean, still lacking a broad network of bases, it actively seeks intelligence with these other vessels.
Over the past week, some trackers noted unusually large fleets of Chinese fishing vessels moving apparently in unison to within 120 nautical miles of Indian naval drills in the Arabian Sea as tensions rose with Pakistan.
Pentagon reports on China’s military modernisation and analysts note that China’s fishing fleets routinely perform a coordinated militia function that plays an important intelligence gathering role. “These vessels may double up as listening posts, tracking development rhythms and response patterns, feeding early warning, naval intel to their sponsors,” wrote open source tracker Damien Symon in an X post that highlighted the deployment of 224 Chinese vessels near Indian naval exercises on May 1.
Chinese officials do not usually acknowledge the existence of fishing militia or intelligence work carried out by other nominally civilian vessels.
Given its close ties with Pakistan, Beijing is likely to exploit its network of envoys and military teams to gather intelligence.
“The presence of Chinese military advisers and other personnel in Pakistan is well-known given how Pakistan’s Ministry of Defence has been importing some of its most advanced military hardware from China, so we can be certain the PLA would be able to access relevant data,” said James Char, a Chinese security scholar at Singapore’s S Rajaratnam School of International Studies.