In its handling of the Epping asylum hotel protest, what exactly has Essex Police done wrong?
Fair enough. These seem to be local folk, and they're concerned about what's been going on around the Bell Hotel, which has been requisitioned by the Home Office to house some asylum seekers. Much of the activity there seems genuine.
The fact is that an irregular migrant has been charged with certain offences – three counts of sexual assault; one count of inciting a girl to engage in sexual activity; and one count of harassment without violence.
Essex Police now face an impossible job, and are perfectly open about this. Superintendent Tim Tubbs has said that the 'impact on the community is not lost on me'. The police have stepped up patrols, and have belatedly issued a dispersal order that gives officers the power to tell anyone suspected of committing or planning antisocial behaviour to leave the area, or else face arrest.
Some local residents have demanded the hotel be closed, and have been making their feelings known on the street for the best part of two weeks now.
That is their right. They can, if they want, shout 'Paedo protectors!' at police officers, despite the man in question having pleaded not guilty. What they don't have a right to do is to attack the police and cause affray and disorder. Yet that seems to be the attraction for many who have descended on this normally quiet corner of Essex, as well as at sites in London and Norfolk, to cause trouble and give the impression that there's some sort of political revolution – a fascist revolution – afoot.
It is also the right of those who don't live in the area to make their views known there, and the duty of the police to protect all concerned under the law. The Essex police can manage that. But they can't deal with a mass civil unrest.
The work of the police and the safety of all involved, and that includes asylum seekers who've committed no offence whatsoever, is being jeopardised because of the intervention of organised far-right groups, certain politicians issuing self-fulfilling prophecies about 'societal collapse' and a mass of misinformation being amplified in social media.
It is similar to what went wrong last year when certain politicians went around 'asking questions' about the ethnicity of the Southport murderer. Rumours – incorrect, as it turned out – that he was an 'illegal migrant', and a Muslim straight off a small boat, took hold across the country.
And so the rumour mill has fuelled the Epping protests. First, a claim that police 'bussed in' a left-wing mob of counter protesters. Untrue, according to Essex Police. The counter-protesters with placards saying 'Refugees Welcome', as is their wont, were neither violent nor 'bussed in': they were escorted on foot by police to protect them from being beaten up on their way, and shoved in a van at the end of proceedings for the same reason.
That seems like a legitimate role for any police force. People who were peaceful were given protection. People who used violence were arrested. Again, perfectly legitimate.
The 'bussed-in' story – which featured on the front page of one major newspaper – was given further credence by Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK. The man who played an unhelpful role in last July's riots said: 'Essex Police were literally escorting and bussing masked thugs to and from the protest in Epping. They were caught red-handed helping to light the fuse that led to violence. This is simply unacceptable.'
No, Nigel – what is unacceptable is for you to undermine the forces of law and order in such an irresponsible and untruthful way. Reform UK claims to want to be toughest party on crime, and yet its leader is putting this sort of nonsense about the police around.
Escorting people on their lawful business to protect them is part of normal police work, and they do it all the time – every time there's a football match, they need to make sure the away supporters don't clash with the home supporters.
The police can be criticised, but they also have a right to operational independence, free of political interference so they can do their job impartially. Farage can call for the chief constable of Essex to quit, but he shouldn't be exerting that kind of pressure. The same goes for judges doing their job and implementing sentencing rules set down by parliament. Why? Because, otherwise, politicians could order coppers to arrest people they don't like, and then tell judges to lock them up – and that is hardly an ideal situation in a free society.
Nor is implying that the police, with their response, lit the fuse for violent action – they were acting under the law and their oath to keep the King's peace. If an MP such as Farage doesn't like that, then he can campaign to change the law.
Farage calls the troublemakers at these events 'a few bad eggs'. Maybe – but when a neo-Nazi organisation such as Homeland is getting involved on the Facebook pages, when Tommy Robinson is taking an interest, and, yes, when a politician who thrives on grievance such as Farage is making irresponsible statements, then the riots start, and they solve nothing.
The people of Epping do want to protect their kids, they want the politicians to do something more, they want to have confidence in the police. Their pleas have not been responded to adequately. They are right to go out and demonstrate. But it appears these worried parents are also being cynically exploited by people who want to use their anguish for their own political projects, and understand no more about Epping than they did about Southport last year.
We really don't need any more summer riots.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
a few seconds ago
- The Sun
Asylum seekers are still getting money on taxpayer-funded credit cards after being granted refugee status
ASYLUM seekers are still receiving money on taxpayer-funded credit cards even after being granted refugee status. A probe has been launched after we uncovered cases of migrants saying they were still getting the handouts - despite rules stating payments must stop once leave to remain is granted. It piles fresh pressure on the Home Office, which is already facing questions over the ASPEN card scheme after it emerged thousands of attempts were made to spend the cash in gambling venues. 1 One migrant wrote in a Facebook group: 'I was granted refugee status in January 2025. I'm still getting money on my ASPEN card… do I need to inform the Home Office or will it stop automatically?' Another user replied: 'I know someone else this happened to. But he had payments for a whole year. 'He did not touch the money as the Home Office could ask you to refund if you are not entitled to this.' Another admitted they are getting payments for dependants who have gone home. When asylum seekers arrive in the UK, they are typically housed in fully catered hotels and receive £9.95 a week on their ASPEN card, rising to £49.18 a week if they are later moved to self-catered accommodation. A Home Office spokesperson said: 'The Home Office rules state that – when an individual ceases to qualify for support – their subsistence payments will automatically end, and their card will be cancelled, after a short transitional period. 'As part of our investigation into the functioning of Aspen cards, we will look into any instances where cards have not been cancelled as intended, and take whatever action is necessary to correct any faults.' The Tories last night insisted it was 'further evidence' Labour has 'lost control of the immigration system'. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'We have seen luxury hotels provided for illegal immigrants, record ever numbers crossing the channel, rapes and sex offences being committed by asylum seekers, taxpayers' money being used to fund gambling by illegal immigrants and now we find they can't even switch the payment cards off when they should. 'This system has become a complete farce. No wonder it costs billions each year. It is an insult to taxpayers that illegal immigrants get better treatment than they do.' Reform UK's Richard Tice also let rip: 'We keep being told that there is no waste in government yet it's clear to see taxpayers are being taken for a ride by asylum seekers. 'The solution to this is simple. If you stop the boats, you stop the benefits and the enormous costs that are associated with illegal crossings. Only Reform will do this.' The wider investigation into ASPEN card misuse began earlier this week, after a Freedom of Information request by PoliticsHome revealed more than 6,500 gambling-related transactions had been attempted by asylum seekers in the past year. Although online gambling was blocked, migrants were able to use the cards in physical sites such as casinos, slot machine arcades and lottery retailers. In some cases, they withdrew cash in or near gambling venues. There are currently around 80,000 ASPEN card users in the UK.
Daily Mail
a few seconds ago
- Daily Mail
Woman in Union Jack dress was turned away from Wetherspoons during anti-migrants protest
A woman wearing a Union Jack dress was turned away from a Wetherspoons so as 'not to increase tensions' after an anti-migrant protest in the area. Tanya Ostolski, 54, from Sutton-in-Ashfield, Nottinghamshire, says she was knocked back from The Picture House last night, despite being a regular in the pub. Dozens of protestors had gathered in the town centre from around 4.30pm after Reform MP Lee Anderson went against police advice to make an unverified claim that a local man charged with rape was an asylum seeker. It followed similar anti-migrant demonstrations outside The Bell Hotel in Epping, near Essex, and the Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf in central London, in recent weeks. Last night's protests in Sutton-in-Ashfield had ended at around 7pm when protestors made their way back to the where the gathering began, around 50 metres from the pub. Many of those who took to the streets were waving Union flags or were wrapped in the St George's Cross flag and had sought to get into the pub after the demonstrations were over. But clashes with bouncers outside the pub quickly ensued when they were denied access due to a 'no-flag' policy deployed by Wetherspoons in their establishments. Ms Ostolski says she was holding a St George's Cross flag when she was first refused entry by bouncers on the door, before putting it in her bag in the hope that would allow her access. But the 54-year-old said she was 'absolutely disgusted' when she was told by those on the doors that she still wasn't allowed in because of her dress. She said: 'I go in there all the time and they refused entry. They didn't let me in with my flag, the flag is the English flag, so why shouldn't I be allowed to have an English flag? 'It's our flag, it's our nation's flag. I wasn't being aggressive or anything I didn't get lairy or anything. I put the flag back in my bag, and they said I can't come in because of my dress. 'They kept refusing me. I'm probably going to get barred now. They just said Tanya, you're not coming in. I feel absolutely disgusted, why should I be refused entry for wearing a dress or a flag?' The spokesman for Wetherspoons, Eddie Gershon, said the decision was made to ensure calm in the area and 'as a matter of common sense'. He said: 'Pub managers have a duty under the licensing laws, and as a matter of common sense, to judge every situation on its particular circumstances. 'In this case, the pub manager felt that it was important not to increase tensions. Therefore, on this occasion the manager asked customers not to enter with flags or any placards.' Ms Ostolski's knockback comes just days after a schoolgirl was put into isolation for wearing a similar Union Jack dress to celebrate being British at her school's culture day. 'Straight A' student Courtney Wright, 12, wore a Spice Girls-esque dress and wrote a speech about history and traditions as part of the celebrations on July 11. But the Year 7 pupil was told the dress was 'unacceptable' before being hauled out of lessons and made to sit in reception until her father collected her. Downing Street would go on to condemn that decision, with a spokesperson for the Prime Minister saying: 'The PM has always been clear that being British is something to be celebrated. 'You can see that from everything this government has done. We are a tolerant, diverse, open country, proud of being British.'
The Sun
31 minutes ago
- The Sun
Our political party system is shattering and Britain could soon become ungovernable
Days before the 2015 General Election, then Prime Minister David Cameron tweeted: 'Britain faces a simple and inescapable choice - stability and strong Government with me, or chaos with Ed Miliband.' Given the decade since: six Prime Ministers, four elections, Brexit gridlock, a pandemic, a cost-of-living crisis, partygate and the mini-budget, many rightly wonder: if that was stability, how bad could chaos have been? 3 But at the time, Cameron's pitch worked, partly because many Brits feared Labour might end up governing in a three-party combo with the Lib Dems and SNP, with the late former Scottish First Minister, Alex Salmond calling the shots. Unlike our neighbours on the Continent, we aren't used to coalitions and dislike the idea of smaller parties potentially holding the Government to ransom. Fast forward to 2025 and it looks like Brits might have to get used to coalitions. Our political map has been reshaped. Fewer than half the public now describe themselves as strong supporters of any one party. The days of being 'a Labour family' or voting for 'anything with a blue rosette' are over. Voters are now far more promiscuous, shopping around to see what they like best. 3 As recently as 2017, the two main parties took over 80 per cent of the vote. That plummeted to 57 per cent in last year's election, a post-war low and our polling suggests it's fallen further still since - just 43 per cent now say they'd vote Labour or Tory. Instead, voters are turning to new emerging parties on the right and left. Last year's General Election was the first time post-war that more than three parties each won over ten per cent of the vote, and more than four won over five per cent. Why is this happening? More in Common's latest report Shattered Britain delves into what's behind our growing fragmentation. Simply put - it finds the old dividing lines of left and right no longer cut it. New political fault lines are emerging. These include whether we can fix a country many feel is broken by improving our institutions or, as 38 per cent think, we need to 'burn them all down'; whether the answers to our problems are common sense or complex; whether diversity strengthens or erodes British identity; and crucially whether we trust mainstream news or prefer independent voices online. Just as our politics is fragmenting, so too is where we get our information with a knock on effect on politics, reducing the stranglehold the big two parties have in communicating with the public. 3 None of these divides map neatly onto our existing political landscape and our First Past the Post system is struggling to cope as these new fault lines scatter Britons votes across multiple parties. More in Common's latest MRP - a model for projecting what the next Parliament might look like, helps to show how this might all play out: it suggests an election tomorrow could deliver a political map we've never seen before. Reform UK would come first on 290 seats, Labour trailing on 126, Tories barely third on 81, the Liberal Democrats snapping at their heels on 73. With 325 seats needed for a majority, the likeliest outcome would be a Reform UK–Tory coalition. But how comfortable would the Conservatives be as junior partners to Farage's Party, given the bad blood between them? Even those headline numbers hide more turbulence beneath the surface. Nearly 100 seats could be won on under 30 per cent of the vote and small shifts could flip many of them. Sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds, voting for the first time at the next election, will make up just two to three per cent of the electorate, but in tight races, that could make all the difference. With only a modest Labour recovery from midterm blues and a Reform dip, we could end up with the only viable option being a five-party coalition: Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, Greens and Plaid Cymru. How's that for a stable Government? And that's before factoring in Jeremy Corbyn's newly announced party, which our polling suggests could take 10 per cent of the vote, further muddying our electoral waters. At this stage it's fair to ask will the next Parliament be ungovernable? Maybe, but we've been here before. In 2019, the Brexit Party was topping the polls, the Lib Dems surged, and the two main parties were barely registering a third of the vote. Come election day, Boris Johnson won a stonking majority. In the early 1980s, the SDP–Liberal Alliance looked set to reshape politics, only to fall back. Still, as Britain drifts into uncharted political waters and the two main parties continue to struggle, it might be wise to use our summer holidays on the Continent to pick up a few tips on coalition-building from our European neighbours. THE UK used to be known worldwide for its stable, two party political system. The choice was binary: Tory or Labour. Elections nearly always delivered a majority government. But all that could be about to change. Old party allegiances have shattered. Our political system has become fragmented. Nigel Farage and his Reform Party have redrawn the political map and decimated the Tory vote. On the Left, Labour are being challenged by the rise of the Greens and creation of Jeremy Corbyn's far-left party. But that begs the question: is Britain about to become ungovernable? We are not used to Coalition governments - but all the evidence suggests we are about to get one. Pollsters say the most likely outcome is a Reform Tory Coalition. But can we really imagine Nigel Farage and Kemi Badenoch in bed together - after they have spent five years at each other's throats? The alternative is a rainbow coalition of Labour, the Lib Dems, SNP, Greens, and Plaid Cymru. That's a dizzying mix. I doubt a government stuffed with so many different political personalities and policies would last five minutes - let alone five years. The result would surely be another snap election and yet more political turmoil? The next general election is still four years away and much can happen in that time. One thing is clear - voters are desperate for Britain to break out of its current quagmire. They want politicians who can actually get things done and aren't held to hostage by their backbenchers. It's why they gave Boris Johnson a majority to get Brexit done - and took it off him again when the Tories sank into civil war. It's why they handed Keir Starmer a landslide - then sent his poll ratings tumbling when he failed to come up with a big package of reforms. If the polls stay the same then it looks like Britain is heading for more political turbulence and a coalition. But who knows? Voters may decide to gamble big and hand Nigel Farage a majority next time. I wouldn't bet against it.
