Britain’s immigration debate is far from won

Today is any given day in any given year, so France is once again on fire.

What began last month as ‘student protests’ has descended into full-scale, nationwide riots, complete with looting, arson and violence. Needless to say, my feed on X has become a hellscape. Footage of the burning wreckage of Limoges town hall and business owners mourning their shopfronts in front of nihilistic, leering teenagers has proved radicalising.

Almost as striking as the fracas is the character of the rioters. I am not the only one to point out that many do not look like secondary school children aggrieved at the size of their classrooms. Many are clearly adults, and a number have been recorded flying the flags of Algeria, Morocco and Palestine. Kemi Badenoch has noticed this, too.

The Conservative Party leader told Times Radio that unless the Home Secretary cracks down on immigration, we will end up with France-style civil disorder. Under Shabana Mahmood’s current plans, foreign citizens would have to live in Britain for 15 years before they could be granted permanent settlement, up from five years at present.

Some migrants would be able to reduce their wait for indefinite leave to remain (ILR) if they earned a salary above a certain threshold or proved a commitment to their local area through volunteering. The Conservatives believe that these plans do not go far enough. “Volunteering” is a nebulous term and there is only so much tightening of the immigration system Mahmood will be able to achieve while hamstrung by a party emotionally and ideologically committed to multiculturalism and immigration.

Badenoch’s intervention shows how far the migration debate has shifted, yet anyone tempted to conclude that the argument is won should have spent an hour or so at the recent Battle of Ideas festival.

“Immigration is as natural as pregnancy”. This was the view of left-wing commentator and The Critic contributor

Stella Tsantekidou, appearing on a panel about the extent of legal migration to Britain.

Tsantekidou made the argument that mass migration should be celebrated as evidence of Britain’s prosperity and goodwill. We should be grateful that we remain an attractive prospect, so the logic goes. Each new arrival on our shores is paying us a compliment, one can assume.

To the Britons of 2026, angry with the Boriswave and preceding waves of migration since the turn of the century, potentially on the brink of voting in the most right-wing government of this century, these opinions not only seem outdated but frankly insulting.

, over 4 million people were handed long-term visas to reside in Britain. Over 90 per cent came from outside the European Union. According to the Office for National Statistics, a low-wage migrant arriving at the age of 25 will cost £125,000 by the time they reach state-pension age and £500,000 by the age of 80. Our generous welfare state has become not just a pull factor but a global cashpoint. Britain cannot afford to be a nation of pull factors for those who are net drains and push factors for those who contribute.

In some respects, the panel was a resounding Tsantekidou success. The audience was incensed and there will be clips to mine for social media. But the episode was helpful for the Right in that it reminds us that outside of our X algorithms, in the bars of East London and small-plate restaurants of Borough, views like Tsantekidou’s remain common.

The Overton Window has indeed opened in the Right’s favour. Politicians are talking about migration in a way that would have been unimaginable just a decade ago, but windows shut just as easily as they open. The traditional arguments in favour of mass migration – that it would usher in an era of unprecedented economic growth or that diversity is intrinsically a strength – do not carry the weight they once did, but that does not mean they have vanished.

Also on the panel was Guy Dampier, my colleague at the Prosperity Institute. Dampier likened Britain’s migration saga to an obese person getting off the sofa to run five kilometres.  Mass immigration is the junk food – tasty, but ultimately damaging and short-sighted. Now, after years of consumption, getting off the sofa and putting in the hard yards to wean ourselves off the junk food is a tremendous task.

Politicians from across the Right are now making positive noises about doing just this in government, but those who feel betrayed by the undemocratic importation of millions must not relent in making their cases heard. Most importantly, they should never bet against the sheer idleness of Britain’s political class. If the prospect of running five kilometres seems too tough, our leaders have proven that they will return to the sofa and the junk food.