A recent investigation has revealed a disturbing pattern in the UK government’s approach to managing irregular migration across the English Channel: private companies stand to gain handsomely while the public foots the bill for ineffective and opaque policies. Since 2017, nearly £2 billion in government contracts have been handed out – primarily to a handful of private firms – to bolster border control and attempt to clamp down on perilous crossings. Yet, despite this enormous expenditure, there is scant evidence that these efforts have made any real dent in the problem.
Among the major profiteers is Mitie Care and Custody, which scooped up an eye-watering £514 million contract to oversee short-term migrant holding facilities and escort services. Serco follows closely, with contracts totaling over £300 million for running detention centres and supporting enforcement efforts in northern France. Meanwhile, American tech giant Leidos has been paid upwards of £96 million to deploy biometric technologies linked to immigration enforcement. Such outsourcing raises serious questions about priorities: the government appears more focused on enriching private firms than on providing practical, efficient border security or humane asylum processes.
Despite the eye-watering sums involved, official transparency regarding actual payments and their outcomes remains elusive. The public cannot assess whether these contracts offer any good value, nor whether they have contributed meaningfully to tackling the root causes or individuals involved in irregular migration. Instead, the status quo persists with migrants often left in costly and unsuitable hotels, trapped in legal limbo due to policies that criminalise vulnerable people simply seeking asylum.
The former government’s ill-judged “stop the boats” approach — which automatically branded boat arrivals as illegals and disregarded their claims — has only exacerbated the crisis. The controversial Rwanda scheme, promised as a solution, was ultimately abandoned, further highlighting the shortcomings of a punitive strategy. Meanwhile, the current Labour administration under Kier Starmer promises to shift focus towards dismantling smuggling networks but has yet to deliver meaningful results. Increased deportations of failed asylum seekers and rhetoric about ending hotel accommodation have done little to alleviate the mounting backlog or deter dangerous journeys.
This laissez-faire attitude towards border control and migration reflects a wider failure to craft policies that are both effective and ethically responsible. The continued reliance on private contractors with little public accountability or scrutiny fuels inefficiency and fosters public distrust. In contrast, a coherent immigration framework rooted in robust enforcement, proper legal channels, and fiscal responsibility—as advocated by the current right-wing opposition—would ensure both national security and fairness without lining the pockets of private interests.
As the government prepares to unveil new policy proposals, there will be no shortage of rhetoric about visa system abuse and smuggling gangs. Yet, without genuine reform, these announcements will amount to little more than window dressing. The public has a right to demand full transparency about where its money is going—and to demand policies that secure the UK’s borders firmly and fairly, rather than feeding a costly and ineffective private contractor gravy train.
Source: Noah Wire Services