The big political story in the UK this
week has been a court ruling that a
hotel in Eping and Essex called the Bell
cannot be used to house asylum seekers
as their claims are being processed. On
Friday, we learned that the government
is going to appeal that decision. It's
going to fight it. We discussed that and
some of the other big events of the week
on this episode of the BBC's Daily News
podcast newscast.
Hello, it's Adam in the newscast studio
which today for one day only is also the
five live studio because we're doing
this episode of newscast on five live.
Joining us down the line is Alex Vythe.
Hello Alex.
>> Hello Adam.
>> Um you're probably on the road to do any
questions for radio 4, aren't you?
Yeah. Well, I've actually arrived. So, I
have been on the road, but I'm currently
sat talking to you from outside a
village hall in the village of Stigeri
in Somerset where we are doing any
questions from tonight. Beautiful day to
be here. I've got to say,
>> have you got any facts that you will
deploy in the intro for any questions?
>> I can't give too much away now, Adam.
Otherwise, no one's going to listen to
my fun facts at the top of the program.
But we are not far from 10. We are not
far from Hley Point C which is obviously
mid construction the big new nuclear
power station. So I've been doing a
little bit of digging into that which
has proved quite interesting.
>> Well and here in the studio with me is
Dominic Cashiani home and legal affairs
correspondent. Hello Dom.
>> Hello.
>> You've been in a lot of courts this week
haven't you?
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. My bum's hurting from
sitting still all day to be honest. I
was going to ask you, do you have a
tactic for like when the judgment is
published and sometimes it's like 80 or
100 pages like what and you need to get
to the news straight away and find the
nuggets. What do you do?
>> I wing it.
>> Great. That's slightly too honest to
answer.
>> No, no, no. There's Okay, there's two
things you need to do. The first thing
is you need to be really, really across
the story first. So you've got a good
understanding of what a judge is likely
to rule one way or another. So that when
a judge says yay or nay,
>> you know why he or she has said that
because you've got the arguments in your
head. Critically as well, um, judges are
quite good these days at structuring
their judgments with basically an
introduction and and then and finally,
>> I find them surprisingly easy to read
actually.
>> Well, I I I've okay, I'm I'm going to
sort of brag a bit here. I've spent a
little bit of time behind the scenes
sort of like lobbying judges as have
other reporters
>> really to make their judging judging
more page turnery.
>> Well, I said I said to one recently he
he he said to me he said, "How can we
make our judgments easier to understand
for journalists?" And I said, "Well,
write them like a news story." And he
thought I was joking.
>> Put the most important bit first.
>> Yeah.
>> Um if you'd like to get involved in this
episode of Newscast, which you actually
can in real time because rather than it
being recorded and you downloading it,
it's live on five. You can message us on
85058 or WhatsApp us on 0808599693
or you can tweet us on X with five as
the handle. And also joining us here in
the studio is Luke Trill who is a
pollster for More in Common. Hello Luke.
>> Good afternoon.
>> So I know you've been away on holiday
the last few weeks. We won't delve into
your holiday staps which are available
on Insta. Um but I was just wonder do
you think and you're a bit of like a
political veteran as well from various
other jobs. Do you think the whole
nothing happens in August thing has just
gone now? It's been a busy August.
>> It's it's over. Uh and I sort of naively
said to the team there'll be nothing to
ask the public around over August. Okay.
Last August was a bit different. there
was a new government and then poor as
well I suppose and then and then I got
back and yeah everything happens uh over
the summer and and I think particularly
as well what's been interesting this
summer is reform UK have clearly
realized that it is a good time to try
and get news and stuff out there which
is why you've seen them having this sort
of regular drum beat of stories as well
so it's not just there's more happening
I think it's that politicians are
learning how to exploit it as well M um
Alex, I know you've been on the road, so
maybe not like reading your emails while
you're driving, but we just had that
statement from the home office and
Cooper, the home secretary, saying
they're going to get involved in the
appeal against the the the the court
ruling that said the Bell Hotel in Eping
couldn't be used for housing asylum
seekers. I suppose I Cooper had to do
that, didn't she, politically and
practically.
>> Yeah, I think I think that's completely
right. And I'll let Dom do the kind of
legalities because it sounds to me like
from my uh limited legal knowledge that
it's a kind of two-step process that
they first have to ask to be a party in
the case and then they can actually ask
to appeal the judgment. But I do think
there was a bit of a sense of
inevitability about this for the reasons
that you say because firstly this
potentially this judgment which was an
interim judgment but it said that the
people who were currently being housed
asylum seekers in the Bell Hotel and
Eping had to be moved out by the 12th of
September. That obviously posed a bit of
a practical headache for the government
because not just where it was going to
put those people, but then immediately
afterwards we had this flurry of
councils saying that they were looking
really closely at this judgment and are
considering what they might do next.
I.e. there could be other councils that
decide to use the courts to say we don't
want to have hotels in our area that
housing asylum seekers. So therefore,
what would the government do when it
came to accommodating these people? So
there was a practical aspect to it as
well. And then from the kind of
political side, I think what's been
interesting is what the government have
been saying this morning is that part of
this they think is that it shouldn't be
up to the judiciary. It shouldn't be up
to judges and the courts to decide where
the government can house asylum seekers.
So they're kind of trying to argue it on
a democratic mandate as much as anything
else. But it's perhaps not surprising
that immediately the Conservatives who
were kind of quick out the gates
welcoming the court decision, saying it
was a victory for local people are now
saying that the government's wrong to
challenge it. Of course, under the
Conservatives, hotel use reached a peak.
>> And Dom, just explain why it was that
the government, the government of the UK
were basically sort of bystanders in
this court case rather than being like
right in there in the first place.
>> Um, because they didn't take the
opportunity to get involved early
enough. They they were put on notice
that this
um case was being brought by Eping
Forest District Council and they were
going for an injunction against the
owners who are called Somi Hotels and
they uh for whatever reason didn't find
a barristister in time um to get into
court um something along those lines. Um
the suggestion being that most
barristers are in the door this time of
year who can uh say one way or another.
So, we had this weird situation this
week where a very very um very very
experienced barrist who works does a lot
of government work, you know, turned up
on Tuesday and literally, you know, with
effectively the legal equivalent of a
begging letter to the judge
>> saying, "Please can we be involved?
>> Please can we be involved?" Yeah. Yeah.
So, um I mean where we're at now is a
slightly weird situation because um you
know the government you know obviously
from an optics position has decided it
wants to be seen as appealing trying to
appeal or challenge but they're actually
at a very early stage. There's no
guarantee they're going to get an
appeal. It's a bit like forgive the
crass analogy here but it's a bit like
when you're six year years old and your
mum has said you can't have a biscuit
and you're just going oh please can I
have a biscuit please? But you're not
actually entertained.
>> Doesn't get you any closer to the
biscuit. No, no, it doesn't. And then
the government is kind of in that
position at the moment. They've got to
get the court of appeal to to just
listen to the basic principles about why
they can appeal before they can actually
appeal.
>> Um, look, talk about the the sort of
calculations of Cooper will be making
and in saying this actually, it's sort
of the most she can say, but it's not a
great deal, is it?
>> No, it's not at all. And I think you
know this we know that the hotels policy
is exceptionally unpopular uh
exceptionally with the public
I mean a very sort of clear majority uh
against and what's interesting is that
when we asked in 2023 we said uh what
would you think about asylum seekers
being kept in temporary accommodation
such as hotels in your local area. It
was actually basically split.
just slightly more maybe two points more
opposition um than support. That has
totally shifted and opposition to that
temporary accommodation in people's
neighborhoods has risen by over 20
points uh over a 2-year period and that
has coincided
>> which in opinion terms is a lot very
quickly.
>> That is a big shift. You know, public
opinion doesn't generally shift that
quickly absent, you know, major
developments. But alongside that, what
we've seen over the past year is the
salience of immigration and asylum
issues.
>> In other words, how much people care
about it and notice it as a thing.
>> Exactly. We ask every week, what are
your top issues? What are the top issues
facing uh the country? Uh and cost of
living is way out ahead as it has been
since the pandemic. But what's happened
uh you know basically since the start of
this year is you've seen that creep up
of immigration and asylum issues. And
this week, for the first week, levels of
immigration just overtook the NHS for
the number two spot. So, the
government's in a real bind here because
it's an issue that people care about a
lot and think is important and they're
very opposed to the hotels policy. And
you can understand why if you're a local
council, you've seen all of these other
councils falling to reform. you think,
I've got to get on this bandwagon of
trying to get the asylum hotels out of
my area and it could all sort of spiral
very quickly.
>> Um, you can see where the incentives are
for everyone to just leap on it. Um,
Dom, we had an interesting conversation
earlier on this week on Newscast when we
were kind of digesting the ruling. And
it was about actually where these
protests outside the Bell Hotel featured
in the judge's mind when he made this
ruling and said it had to be shut down.
Just explain to us how to what extent it
was about the protests. Well, it would
well it it wasn't about the protest
directly um for for a simple legal
reason that the courts will not be
swayed by unlawful action because by
definition then the courts would be
taking into account something which is
illegal. The courts are about the law
which is actually just as an aside you
know Alex has mentioned that the the
home office is a bit cross with jud
judges suggesting there's a democratic
problem with this that will raise a lot
of eyebrows among the judiciary and the
legal world today because judges
enforced the law and what happened on
Tuesday was about the law wasn't about
>> yeah it's a bit it's reminiscent of
Brexit do you remember when the male had
the front page saying enemies of the
people and then Liz Truss who was
justice secretary got at the time got it
in the neck for not defending the judges
from that front page. Yeah. So, we're
actually back in that territory kind of.
>> Well, well, potentially, we certainly
are with some polit some political
figures and there's a lot of concern
among within the legal world about some
of this rhetoric. But let's let's let's
break down what the judge said.
Basically, what the judge said is if
there are lawful protests taking place
outside some hotel being used for asylum
seekers, crack on. The court is not
going to use look at that and see that
as a lawful reason to to intervene and
injunct the use of that hotel to
accommodate um asylum seekers. That's
lawful protest. You have to put up with
it whether you like it or not. In a
democratic society, it's the price to be
paid.
>> If there is unlawful protest, that is
not good enough reason either.
>> But this is where it gets a little bit
complicated and a little bit nuanced.
The council's case was that Smani hotels
the owners were acting unlawfully by
having moved asylum seekers in and the
unlawful action there is they were
breaching their planning controls. Now
the hotel owners deny that and that
unlawful action in turn had led to other
unlawful action which were the protests
and then the arrival of you know lots of
police and fear of crime.
>> Yeah. And all of this amounted to what's
called a loss of immunity or an arguable
loss of immunity, which is basically
planning talk for the character of the
area is changing and becoming less nice.
>> Right?
>> And on those specific grounds, the judge
said if the council's got an arguable
case that the area is becoming less
pleasant, that is a breach potentially
of planning law. And therefore, I'm
going to temporarily lob this injunction
in until we can resolve whether or not
the hotel is acting lawfully or not. So
the the protest kind of coming in
directly,
>> but Alex, it just shows you that when it
comes to immigration, asylum, the
housing of asylum seekers, it's a bit
like whack-a-ole for the government,
isn't it? Like they they do one
initiative like doing the the the the
quite innovative deal with France, the
oneinone out deal, um which means that
if people come over the channel, um they
can get deported back to France and in
return somebody will be brought over
legitimately and legally. they they that
was quite hard for them to get in place
and they were quite pleased with it when
they did but yet then this pops up over
there.
>> Yeah, I I think that's completely right
and I think that is why the government
makes this case that when it comes to
this whole issue of people crossing the
channel on small boats and where they
then go they they completely acknowledge
and actually claim there is no one thing
that's going to fix this and their hope
is that there's a whole range of
measures that they are doing. So it's
like that one in oneout deal with
France, which at the moment is just a
pilot scheme. The initial numbers are
expected to be quite small, but they're
hopeful that will ultimately be a
deterrent. The stuff they're doing about
toughening the criminal regime and the
way that they can approach some of the
smuggling gangs, they hope eventually
all of this is going to come together
and start to bring those numbers of
small boat crossings down and then
subsequently the use of hotels down. But
I think the kind of problem for them is
that these two issues in particular, so
the small boat crossings and the use of
hotels, they've become just these really
visible tangible focal points for public
frustration about this issue. And with
the hotel use, for example, I mean the
government's position is it wants to end
the use of hotels, but what Avette
Cooper the home secretary saying today
about this judgment is that she thinks
that it needs to be done in an orderly
fashion. I.e. She doesn't want it just
to be the case that the courts say you
can't have people here and then the
government's stuck with where do they
go. But the the bit behind that is that
where do they go? Because when there
have been alternatives considered so for
example when the previous administration
was looking at disused military bases or
do you remember the barge the BB
Stockholm and and that there were some
people housed on the barge that
attracted an awful lot of local
opposition as well. And when you look at
other alternatives, so it might be
private rental sector or houses of
multiple occupation in local areas. Yes,
they can become points of tension or
points of concern. But there's also the
bigger problem that there is just a real
strain when it comes to housing and
there are lots of people on housing
waiting lists and local authorities are
already really struggling to find
accommodation for families. So you know
I think that the kind of what we have
referred to as a political headache for
the government about all of this because
they are under such significant
political pressure. It is a really big
practical challenge as well and I think
that is why we have seen ministers out
this week in the wake of that judgment
about the Bell Hotel and Eping being you
know not being able to say well what are
what are the alternatives. It's kind of
like they they just they're very hopeful
and I mean they would say if you speak
to people in government they say they're
pretty sure but there is undoubtedly an
element of hope that eventually all of
the different things they're doing are
going to start to have an impact.
>> Uh we had a message from Bill who says
please can you tell us how many hotel
beds are being occupied by asylum
seekers. That's a more reliable figure
he says than the number of hotels.
Renting 200 hotels sounds better than
400 which is what it was before but not
if the number of hotel occupants has
gone up. And Dom, I happen to have the
number in front of me right now because
the Home Office released it yesterday.
It's 32,059
people in hotels. And that's 200ish
hotels.
>> That's right. And 300 fewer than in
March.
>> But that's more than at the time of the
election
>> and lower than the peak which was
56,000.
>> So it's gone down and then up then down
and it's going down but staying flat.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Look or something.
>> Yeah. I mean
>> don't do graphs in a podcast as well.
podcast, but I mean look, a lot of this
is about what's happening with the
backlog. Um, it's not just about
arrivals. So, if you think about, you
have cases coming into the asylum
system, they have to be processed. Only
so many can be processed in one go. So,
you inevitably get a bit of a backlog at
any given time. The backlog got bigger
and bigger after 2018 because of policy
changes in the home office, then the
pandemic, then a rush of arrivals when
the pandemic ended and then critically
decisions the conservatives took not to
process cases in the hope of sending
people to Rwanda. Yeah,
>> that led to an enormous backlog. Labour
came in and said, "Right, we're going to
we're going to deal with this because
they know they've got to deal with that
because only by getting the backlog down
and processing people either through to
settlement as genuine refugees or
basically saying they have to be removed
because they haven't got a case. Until
that until that happens, you have to put
these people somewhere and they've run
out of housing. So, you put them in
hotels. The big problem though, Adam,
now is that the the backlog is coming
down. So, that's progress by the home
office because they're taking decisions
faster. But there's a new backlog in the
appeal courts. 50 odd thousand cases
there. People saying, "Hang on a
second." So until the appeal courts deal
with that, you're not going to see the
hotels come down.
>> Um Bob has messaged us from night and
saying, "Living in a hotel is far from
ideal for anybody. People would be
better housed in the community where
possible. And if local residents were
encouraged to open their homes to a
refugee, it happened for Ukrainians,
didn't it? There might be less room for
misunderstandings." Bob with a very
optimistic view of human nature there.
based on what the the what people are
then saying about the alternatives of
housing people in like houses.
>> Yeah, absolutely. It's really
interesting that when you look at the
homes for Ukraine scheme actually
continues to command massive uh public
support, you know, and that was over a
100,000 people that came to uh the
country. So, it's not quite as simple as
people oppose refugees, people oppose uh
asylum. There is something specific
about channel crossings which is it's
seen as well we don't know who's coming
in we've got no way of vetting it and
also break back but it's also breaking
the rules and people will say in focus
groups you know um how do we know
they're the people most in need even
whilst you know they expressed sympathy
or empathy uh for people crossing but
the interesting thing about homes for
Ukraine was not only that people
understood the conflict they could see
there was genuine need it did something
else it put communities in control
because rather than it being government
saying I'm going to, you know, put
people in this hotel in your area, it
was people coming forward and saying
that's what we want. And actually, a lot
of this debate comes down to community
and control. It's it's not just that
people are worried about levels of
immigration. They are, but it's the way
in which the policy is delivered. And
when we've tested uh community
sponsorship to that exact point from uh
the message there, it actually
significantly reduces uh opposition to
asylum if it's a scheme where it's local
people saying we want it rather than it
being imposed.
>> Interesting. Right now for something
completely different, Alex, when you
were driving to Somerset today, did you
see more St. George's flags or Union
Jacks than you might normally expect?
Well,
>> or maybe you weren't measuring it
because you didn't know I was going to
ask
>> and and I was on the train.
>> Oh, right. I I always think of you in
the in the car.
>> Yeah. No, I I often am in the car, but
today I was on a really busy train.
Don't I just warn you if you're going
from London to the Southwest on a bank
holiday weekend. Bag yourself a seat
early if you can because
>> And also, please do not try and hang up
a flag by a railway line. That is not
safe.
>> Do you have some kind of any questions?
>> Oh, yes. I have my own personal fleet of
No, I don't. No, we we public transport
wherever we possibly can. No, no. So, I
didn't really have the chance, but I
totally take your point that this is
something that is happening in lots of
communities, right, of social media
trends, but lots of flags popping up all
over the place.
>> And this all started because there's
this campaign group called Operation
Raise the Colors. Although, actually
saying campaign group, it's more just
some people on Facebook and sending
messages to their mates saying, "Let's
put up all these flags." And they've
started raising money. They're doing
some crowdfunding. And this phenomenon
is is kind of spreading all over the
place and then you get the backlash to
it. For example, Tara Hamlet's council
saying, "Hang on, lamp posts aren't
public property. They're council
property. You're technically vandalizing
our stuff." And the flags get taken down
and that then creates some tension.
Look, as a as somebody who looks the
British public in the eye every day,
what do you think is behind this
phenomenon? Is it more than just a
really popular Facebook group? Well,
look, I think it is uh and I think we
might have spoken about this before on
the very good antisocial uh podcast. I
think
>> one of my other side hustles this time
on Radio 4. Um I you know there is no
doubt that flag wars have become a
feature uh of our politics. Um, you
know, earlier uh the in the summer we
were talking about reform councils and
their battles to stop uh you know
official buildings flying the Pride
Progress flag or even the Ukrainian
flag. You've now got the the flip side
of that is where should you uh be
displaying the Union Jack or the St.
George's Cross. And look, most Brits
they like seeing the St. George's Cross.
They like seeing uh the Union Jack. They
want us to be proud of who we are as a
country. We haven't pulled on this yet.
We will be doing. I suspect though that
the median member of the public is a
little bit eye rolly about this slightly
we must have them on every lamp post and
we must have them everywhere. You know,
as Brits want to celebrate the flag,
they particularly during national events
or when the football uh is on. I I'm not
sure this approach of trying to hang
them from everything that is basically a
pole is going to work.
>> And polling of a different kind rather
than the ones you're used to. Um, Alex,
and of course, Robert Genrich, the
shadow justice secretary, lo loves, some
people might say he loves a passing
bandwagon, but he's posted on on social
media that hoisting hoisting a flag
proudly himself. Although, I noticed he
went for a Union Jack, not not an
England flag. So, he obviously wants to
be one nation rather than England.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Maybe, maybe. I mean, I just
think there is something utterly
fascinating at the moment with this
thing that's going on on social media
when you have like just politicians
trying to almost like be the quickest
off the mark or keen to kind of outdo
each other when they can quite literally
attach their flag to whatever cause it
is that they think is going to get them
some public support. I mean, I guess you
could argue that politicians have always
done that, right? You know, they rely on
public support to get them to where they
want to be. But I think there is
something that's going on at the moment
and this is absolutely not limited to
Robert Gener. But if you just as I do
keep half an eye on that political
social media and it is like you know
social media video post battle for who
can get there first to back whatever the
thing is that they think is going to
prove popular. It's quite extraordinary.
>> Dom I think there's a lesson from
history here from Northern Ireland. Not
in terms of paramilitaries. I stressed
that at the outset, but I I used to work
in Northern Ireland on and off in the
early days of my career for the BBC and
you I have a lot of love for the place
and the people there. But one of the
things you notice when you first go in
as as what BBC Belfast used to call
blowins, people like me have come from
London
>> is you notice the painted flagstones, uh
pavers, the curbstones, red, white and
blue in unionist areas and then the
Irish trickler in in in in nationalist
areas. Um, and that is very much linked
to a sense of of really trying to
articulate national identity and very
often it's also linked to a sense of
uncertainty about what national identity
is
>> in politically uncertain times.
>> It's a sign of insecurity. Yeah,
>> it can be for some people it's a sign of
pride as well, but it really strikes you
when you first go there because you
think why do these people need to do
this? I don't see this on the streets of
Nottingham or Leeds or wherever else at
home. And and I've I've been very strict
this week to see flags being used in a
context of trying to project something.
>> And also people need to be careful what
they wish for because the times I've
been to Northern Ireland at election
times, every lampost is covered in
pictures of candidates. And so what
starts with flags can become pictures of
politicians and I'm not sure people want
their mugs all over the place.
>> I think that anxiety point is a really
uh key one. We did some research earlier
this summer which basically found that
one of the big fault lines now in
British politics is whether you think
British identity is disappearing
nowadays or whether you think it's been
strengthened through diversity. And I
think this um the appearance or putting
up the flags everywhere is an expression
of that anxiety of people saying if we
don't do something British identity is
going to disappear. And then on the
other side, you've got people saying,
well, you know, British identity is
about diversity and that the flag is uh
important, but there are lots of other
things as well. And I think I think
we're seeing that play out now in real
time.
>> Yeah. And Alex, classic newscast, I
wanted to ask you loads of stuff about
all the speculation about what's going
to be in the budget because every day
there's a new story. But in classic
newscast
lore, we've talked about one thing for
too long because we got too into it
because everything is interesting when
you look at it in enough depth. So,
we'll save that for another episode.
>> You know, I just say I don't think
there's going to be any shortage of
opportunity for us to speculate about
what might not be in the budget ahead of
November. To be perfectly honest,
there's going to be plenty of chat about
that.
>> Um, Alex, enjoy any questions.
>> Thank you,
>> Dominic. Thanks for your analysis all
week.
>> Thank you very much.
>> And Luke, thanks for coming in as well.
>> Thanks for having me.