In the aftermath of the Southport killings, there were riots, arson and disorder fuelled by misinformation and despair. What has followed has been a series of low-key, largely peaceful demonstrations outside migrant hotels, and what has characterised those protests has been that the participants are by and large ordinary citizens rather than the usual suspects.
Those arriving by boat from France are illegal immigrants who have bribed their way here from a perfectly safe country. They do not, therefore, qualify for either asylum or sympathy in the same way that, say, Afghan interpreters do.
It is a matter of public knowledge that we are spending billions of taxpayers’ cash on these hotels at a time when ordinary Britons are being asked to tighten their belts and pay higher taxes.
**ARE YOU READING THIS ON OUR APP? DOWNLOAD NOW FOR THE BEST GB NEWS EXPERIENCE**
Housing migrants in hotels previously used by tourists, visitors or businessmen undeniably changes the character of a neighbourhood, and finally, there is a perception of danger.
Some of it is unfair, but it needs only one case of rape or serious sexual assault for people to feel women and girls are at daily peril of attack by those from a very different culture.
Now, supposing we were to do what I have been advocating since 1999, when I was Shadow Home Secretary and which arose out of my direct experience as immigration minister between 1995 and 1997, and housed all new asylum seekers in secure reception centres.
I have warned Whitehall about the migrant crisis since my experience in 1995. No one listens — Ann Widdecombe | Getty Images
Let us look at each of the above grievances. If the illegal migrants were in secure camps, people would think they were where they ought to be and not feel called on to have sympathy, they would not resent the money spent half as much because they would perceive it as being spent in controlling rather than accepting the situation and there would be no danger if the camps were secure.
Furthermore, there would be no perceptible change in the character of any neighbourhood as hotels would revert to their original purposes and the detainees would not be walking the streets.
That, of course, is not the main purpose of setting up secure reception centres. The principal motivation for that is to provide a strong deterrent for illegal immigrants.
At the moment, the message that goes out is “ once you get into Britain, you’re very unlikely to be removed”.
That is because we do not practise routine detention, do not have national identity cards, but do have a flourishing underground economy, which makes us the easiest country in the West in which to disappear.
If instead the message is “come to Britain with a false claim, you will be immediately detained, you will be dealt with quickly, and you will be deported”, then the magnet loses its force.
It is no good for ministers to shrug and say it cannot be done. If we were in a situation of international hostilities and we had to house prisoners of war, we would build camps at high speed in suitable locations.
Given the speed with which the army built the Nightingales during the COVID crisis, I am convinced it would not be impossible.
If the deterrent effect then follows, the numbers needing such detention will fall, as will the bills and the now growing resentment.
Of course, nobody will want such a camp in their backyard, but I draw on my experience from my days as prisons minister.
Then, because we were running out of space, I brought in a prison ship from the United States and located it at Portland, and I had many anguished representations from the then MP because his constituents were in an uproar about the prospect of a prison ship being stationed where normally they would expect to see cruise liners or other shipping.
I predicted that when the ship was finally decommissioned, which it was nine years later, people would resent its going. That is exactly what happened!
The people had valued its contribution to their economy (prison officers spending money locally, work for tradesmen, etc) and they felt quite safe because if a man escapes from prison, he doesn’t hang about but keeps going! Anybody listening in Whitehall?
More From GB News