The past few days have opened a disturbing new chapter in Britain’s struggle with its multicultural identity. Police are investigating the rape of a young Sikh woman in what they have described as a racially aggravated attack, an assault that has sent shockwaves through minority communities. Even as the nation reeled, London’s streets filled with more than 100,000 demonstrators at a far-right rally against immigration, one of the largest such protests in recent years.
The unrest comes against a backdrop of rising public anxiety over migration. In August, nearly half of Britons (48%) identified immigration as one of the most pressing issues facing the country, according to Ipsos polling. Concern has reached its highest point in almost a decade, surpassed only by levels recorded at the height of the 2015 European migrant crisis.
This growing unease is not confined to Britain. Across the globe, migrants are facing intensified hostility, with calls in many societies for tougher measures and stricter controls. Yet experts warn that while anxieties are mounting, the facts behind migration patterns and their economic and social impact are often far more complex than the rhetoric suggests.
Rhetorics at play
Immigration has long been a complex policy issue in the UK. But in recent years it has shifted from policy-debate to political battleground. Across parties and leaders, immigration is now used as a tool to draw contrasts between politicians and tap into public anxieties, to signal being “tough” to voters who feel economic, cultural or community pressures and to define identity: who belongs, who is “us,” who is “them.”
According to a new report, UK media and politicians are fuelling hostility towards immigrants through the language they use, with people of colour disproportionately portrayed as outsiders.
The Runnymede Trust analysed more than 63 million words from 52,990 news articles and 317 House of Commons debates on immigration between 2019 and the July 2024 general election. It found that the rhetoric has contributed to “reactionary politics and backlash against antiracism which has emboldened the far right in this country.”
The report, A Hostile Environment: Language, Race, Surveillance and the Media, shows that “illegal” has become the defining term linked with migrants and immigrants and used even more frequently in the 2019–24 period than between 2010–14. Researchers said this reinforces the perception of migration as inherently unlawful.
Since 2014, hostile environment policies have also “expanded and normalised the surveillance state” through laws, data sharing and reporting measures, the study claims.
Filtering immigration-related terms in the news by nationality, “Chinese” and “Indian” ranked highly, particularly in UK-focused reporting. “Overwhelmingly, when the UK news media represents immigrants, the image invoked is of an ethnically minoritised person,” the report said.
Parliamentary debates revealed similar trends. While “illegal,” “tackle,” and “reduce” dominated migration discussions, MPs were more sympathetic when discussing Ukrainians, using words such as “guest” and “brave.”
“Racist discourse from the highest levels of UK society, including politicians and the media, is used to frame immigration as an existential threat to the British way of life … this works to justify ever more hostile immigration policies.” the report concluded.
Starmer’s infamous “island of strangers” speech stands as a glaring symbol of this disconnect. Even in the aftermath of the recent protest, he tried to reclaim the moral high ground, posting on X, “Britain is a nation proudly built on tolerance, diversity and respect. Our flag represents our diverse country and we will never surrender it to those that use it as a symbol of violence, fear and division.” Ironic, isn’t it?
Meanwhile, Parliament echoed with speeches condemning the far right and denouncing the open displays of racism on London’s streets. Yet one cannot help but feel this outrage comes far too late, an afterthought, when the damage is already done.
Net migration is falling, so why is rage mounting?
Despite the drumbeat of headlines and rising public unease over immigration, the reality is strikingly different: fewer people are actually coming to the UK. This goes further to prove that the issue is political.
Official figures show net migration fell by half in 2024 and is expected to decline further as tougher visa rules take hold. Health and care visas, once a lifeline for an overstretched NHS, have dropped sharply. Humanitarian routes are closing too—fewer Ukrainians are escaping the war, and Afghans fleeing the Taliban have seen doors slammed shut with the closure of the Afghan scheme. Student migration, often caricatured as an unchecked flood, is also shrinking. Applications in August were down 1.5% on 2024 and a staggering 18% compared with 2023.
Meanwhile, the fixation on small boats and asylum seekers obscures the truth: they make up less than 5% of arrivals. The largest group is students, nearly half of all newcomers, who cannot settle permanently but pay hefty fees and later join the workforce. Skilled workers are the second largest, accounting for 20%, with dependants at 11%.
A Home Office report linked some visa types granted between 2019 and 2023 to Pay As You Earn (PAYE) records for the 2023-24 financial year. Most visa holders recorded earnings, and those without records had likely already left the country. Importantly, work is not limited to those on employment visas: nearly half of people on family visas (48%) reported PAYE earnings, excluding self-employed individuals.
Dependants, often a focus in immigration debates, are also frequently in work. PAYE data shows 67% of health and care worker dependants, 45% of skilled worker dependants, and 25% of senior or specialist visa dependants earned income. Adjusting for those who have left the country increases these figures. By contrast, newly arrived refugees and humanitarian visa holders are the least likely to be employed, with roughly 28% in work.
Employment figures challenge the narrative too. The Migration Observatory at Oxford notes that while employment data is patchy and varies by visa type, recent migrants’ job rates are “not far off existing residents or long-standing migrants.” And their earnings grow quickly: by 2024, the median non-EU migrant earned as much, or more, than the typical UK worker. The numbers tell a quieter, inconvenient story.
Shrimoyee Chakraborty, who moved to the UK 14 years ago for her master’s and is now an entrepreneur based in Brussels, took to Instagram to voice her frustrations over the protest.She said, “I paid three times the cost of education that you would pay. After I paid that, in order to apply for a job, I had to make sure I got a job paying more than £35,000 back in those days so that a company would sponsor my visa. I couldn’t just apply for any job, right? So again, I had to earn £35,000 a year, which meant I had to work much harder than everybody else and pay a lot more taxes.
“And lest I forget, every time I had to apply for my visas, the government took thousands of pounds from me. Then I became an entrepreneur in the UK, I employed people, like many other Indians, and I created jobs. I paid my taxes because someone like me has to pay taxes. I barely use the NHS, and my child goes to a private school, so I don’t even take up free education. And it’s not just me, there are many people like me.
“Finally, I think you’re forgetting your history a little bit. England colonised the whole world, where you did not migrate legally. You came, took our wealth, took our money, took everything, and left. And then, when you had to fight the World War, you had to call us immigrants back to help you. Also, you don’t have enough doctors; most of the doctors in the UK, as well as bankers and other high tax-paying people, are immigrants. I hope you remember that when you’re protesting about it.”
Alba Kapoor, Racial Justice Lead at Amnesty International said, "The devastating tidal wave of racist sentiment which has been fuelled by a number of far-right actors with the backing of foreign billionaires, and the scenes in the middle of our capital last week must act as a major wake up call to this government. There is an urgent need for a reset in our national debate - away from dangerous and irresponsible rhetoric coupled by misinformation and hostile migration policies. We encourage Ministers to back their words up with action: tackling racist violence must finally be made a priority."
So, do recent migrants impose a long-term cost on the UK, as Farage has claimed? Current evidence suggests this is unlikely. Most new arrivals do not immediately enter the school system and contribute to NHS funding, while the majority work and pay taxes, indicating they are unlikely to cost more than other residents.
Cabinet ministers call for stronger minority protections
Health Secretary Wes Streeting has condemned rising racism and homophobia as being “laughably” mischaracterised as free speech, calling for a stronger defence of minorities from the government. Speaking to the LGBT Foundation on Monday, Streeting addressed what he called “the elephant in the room,” acknowledging growing concerns over whether the current administration is truly supportive of marginalised communities.
Reflecting on far-right protests over the weekend, he said, “These are not the kinds of scenes any of us want to see in our country.” Streeting highlighted the specific fears faced by Black and Asian communities, describing an “increasingly visible tide of racism” that hides behind national symbols and falsely claims to champion free speech. “Free speech, that is, unless that freedom includes the right to worship a different God, march through central London protesting atrocities in Gaza, or just walk down Oxford Street without being verbally abused or having your hijab torn off,” he said.
Streeting also raised concerns about the safety of trans people, noting that “trans people in our country today feel less safe than they did 10 years ago.” He stressed the importance of respectful debate, saying: “We’ve got to be able to have debate and disagreement, and we’ve got to be able to do it well, because otherwise what happens is division is exploited, our country becomes polarised.”
The comments, some of the strongest from a cabinet minister, came amid a weekend of public unrest. Shabana Mahmood, Britain’s first female Muslim Home Secretary, also spoke out, asserting, “You can be English and look like me.” Speaking to Parliament on Monday, she condemned the violence, saying, “Those who turned to violence on Saturday do not represent who this country really is,” and added, “We are, in truth, a tolerant country and, yes, we are a diverse one, too.”
Union jacks and onion bhajias
Amid chants of “reclaim the country,” far-right protesters draped in Union Jacks were spotted tucking into Indian street food.
Videos circulating online show demonstrators buying naan wraps and crispy onion bhajias from a stall labelled “Indian Street Food,” sparking widespread debate on social media. Many users questioned the credibility of the protesters’ message, while others highlighted the irony of far-right activists enjoying the very cuisine often associated with the communities they claim to oppose.
The clips underline the reality of Britain’s cultural diversity, where Indian food has long been woven into the national mainstream. With curry widely regarded as a national dish, the scenes raise the question: how do individuals protesting immigration reconcile their love for a cuisine brought to Britain by immigrants themselves?
Social media reactions have ranged from humour to outright ridicule, as the videos expose the contradictions within the far-right movement. In a country shaped by centuries of migration, these moments highlight the complex relationship between nationalism and cultural appreciation.
Was Rishi Sunak right all along?
At present, it feels as though Rishi Sunak has been the only truly wise leader among the last three prime ministers. When he campaigned in the last general election, he warned the British public that a Labour government would mean higher taxes, weaker economic growth, and a lack of clarity in foreign policy. One year into Keir Starmer’s administration, many are beginning to ask whether Sunak’s cautionary words were not just political rhetoric, but a prescient forecast.
Taxes have risen to their highest levels in decades, squeezing middle-income households and businesses alike. Despite Labour’s promises of growth-led prosperity, the economy remains sluggish, with little to show in terms of investment or innovation. Businesses that once looked for stability are instead voicing frustration over regulatory uncertainty and the absence of a clear pro-enterprise agenda.
On the international stage, Sunak warned of Labour’s inconsistencies. That warning appears valid today as Britain’s global influence seems diminished, with trade talks delivering less for Britain than promised and relations with allies at times uncertain. On issues like immigration, where Labour pledged “control with compassion”, public frustration remains high, and border pressures unresolved. While Starmer swiftly scrapped the Rwanda scheme, his plans to address the crisis alongside France hang by a thread: fragile, uncertain, and echoing the wavering politics in France itself.
Sunak’s critics often painted him as overly cautious or too focused on fiscal responsibility. Yet one year on, many of the very concerns he raised, over tax burdens, economic inertia, and weak leadership, are surfacing. The question is no longer whether his warnings were politically motivated, but whether they were accurate assessments of what a Labour government would mean in practice.
For those who doubted him, the unfolding reality may be proof that Sunak’s warning was not alarmism, but foresight.
