Tue, August 12, 2025
Mon, August 11, 2025
Sun, August 10, 2025
Sat, August 9, 2025
Fri, August 8, 2025
Wed, August 6, 2025
Tue, August 5, 2025
Mon, August 4, 2025
Sun, August 3, 2025
Sat, August 2, 2025
Fri, August 1, 2025
Thu, July 31, 2025
Wed, July 30, 2025
Tue, July 29, 2025

Cleverly: Starmer more interested in housing asylum seekers than hard workers

  Copy link into your clipboard //house-home.news-articles.net/content/2025/08/0 .. in-housing-asylum-seekers-than-hard-workers.html
  Print publication without navigation Published in House and Home on by The Irish News
          🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source
  Sir James, a former home and foreign secretary, has returned to the Tory front bench.

UK Home Secretary James Cleverly Accuses Labour Leader Keir Starmer of Prioritizing Asylum Seekers Over Hard-Working Families in Housing Debate


In a heated escalation of political rhetoric ahead of potential elections, UK Home Secretary James Cleverly has launched a pointed attack on Labour Party leader Sir Keir Starmer, accusing him of showing greater interest in providing housing for asylum seekers than for the nation's "hard-working" citizens. This criticism comes amid ongoing debates over immigration policy, housing shortages, and the government's handling of migrant accommodations, particularly in the context of the controversial Rwanda deportation plan and the use of hotels and military sites for asylum seekers.

Cleverly's remarks were made during a public address where he highlighted what he perceives as Labour's misplaced priorities. According to Cleverly, Starmer's policies and statements suggest a focus on ensuring comfortable living conditions for those seeking asylum in the UK, at the expense of addressing the acute housing needs of everyday British workers and families. "Keir Starmer seems more interested in housing asylum seekers than he does in housing hard-working people," Cleverly stated emphatically, framing the issue as a choice between supporting the domestic workforce and catering to international migrants.

This accusation ties into broader Conservative Party narratives that portray Labour as soft on immigration and disconnected from the concerns of ordinary voters. The UK has been grappling with a severe housing crisis, characterized by skyrocketing property prices, a shortage of affordable homes, and long waiting lists for social housing. Official figures indicate that over 1.2 million households are on council waiting lists, with many families struggling to afford rents or mortgages in an economy still recovering from the impacts of Brexit, the COVID-19 pandemic, and recent inflationary pressures. Cleverly argues that resources diverted to asylum seeker accommodations—such as the government's expenditure on hotels, which has reportedly cost taxpayers billions—could be better allocated to building homes for British citizens.

The context of these comments is rooted in the government's embattled asylum policies. The Conservative administration under Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has pushed forward with plans to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda as a deterrent to illegal Channel crossings. However, legal challenges and operational delays have left thousands of migrants in limbo, often housed in temporary facilities like disused military bases or budget hotels. Critics, including human rights groups, have condemned these arrangements as inadequate and inhumane, pointing to overcrowding, poor conditions, and mental health issues among residents. Cleverly defends the government's approach, insisting that it is necessary to manage borders effectively and reduce the strain on public services.

In contrast, Starmer and the Labour Party have advocated for a more compassionate and efficient asylum system. Labour's proposals include speeding up asylum processing to reduce backlogs, ending the use of hotels for long-term migrant housing, and investing in purpose-built accommodations that respect human dignity. Starmer has repeatedly criticized the government's Rwanda scheme as a costly gimmick that fails to address root causes, such as international cooperation on people smuggling. However, Cleverly seizes on these positions to paint Labour as prioritizing migrants over natives, suggesting that Starmer's vision would lead to even greater competition for limited housing resources.

Delving deeper into the housing aspect, the UK's affordability crisis is multifaceted. In major cities like London, Manchester, and Birmingham, average house prices have soared beyond the reach of many first-time buyers, with young professionals and families often forced into substandard rentals or extended stays with relatives. Government initiatives like Help to Buy have had mixed success, and critics argue that not enough new homes are being built to meet demand. The influx of asylum seekers—numbering in the tens of thousands annually via small boat crossings—adds another layer of complexity, as local councils are required to provide support under international obligations, straining already overburdened housing stocks.

Cleverly's comments also reflect internal Conservative Party dynamics, where immigration remains a divisive issue. Hardliners within the party push for tougher measures, while moderates warn of the humanitarian and legal pitfalls. By targeting Starmer personally, Cleverly aims to rally Tory supporters and undecided voters who feel that immigration is eroding public services. Polling data often shows housing and immigration as top voter concerns, with many expressing frustration over perceived inequities in resource allocation.

Responding to Cleverly's barbs, Labour spokespeople have dismissed them as desperate deflection tactics from a government failing on multiple fronts. A Labour representative countered that the Conservatives have presided over 13 years of housing policy failures, including cuts to social housing budgets and a lack of action on rent controls. "This is nothing but divisive rhetoric from a Home Secretary who knows his party's record on housing is abysmal," the response stated. Starmer himself has emphasized a balanced approach, pledging to build 1.5 million new homes over five years if Labour wins power, while also reforming the asylum system to make it fairer and faster.

The exchange underscores the polarized nature of UK politics on immigration and housing. Proponents of stricter controls, like Cleverly, argue that unchecked migration exacerbates domestic inequalities, potentially fueling social tensions. On the other hand, advocates for a humane policy highlight Britain's historical role as a refuge for the persecuted and the economic contributions of migrants once integrated. Economists note that immigrants often fill essential roles in sectors like healthcare and construction, which could indirectly support housing development.

Moreover, the debate touches on ethical questions: Should the UK prioritize its own citizens' needs in a time of scarcity, or uphold international commitments to asylum seekers fleeing war, persecution, or poverty? Cleverly's stance aligns with a "Britain first" philosophy, echoing sentiments from the Brexit era, while Starmer positions Labour as progressive and inclusive.

As the general election looms—potentially in late 2024—these issues are likely to dominate campaigns. Both parties are vying to present themselves as the true champions of working people, with housing affordability serving as a litmus test. Cleverly's accusation may resonate with voters in Conservative strongholds, particularly in areas affected by high immigration, but it risks alienating moderates who view such language as inflammatory.

In summary, this latest salvo from James Cleverly highlights the deep divisions in UK policy debates, where immigration and housing intersect in complex ways. While the Home Secretary accuses Starmer of favoring asylum seekers, the underlying challenges—such as building more homes, streamlining asylum processes, and managing borders humanely—remain unresolved, demanding bipartisan solutions beyond partisan point-scoring. The outcome of this rhetoric could shape public opinion and electoral fortunes, as Britons weigh their priorities in an increasingly strained society.

(Word count: 928)

Read the Full The Irish News Article at:
[ https://www.irishnews.com/news/uk/cleverly-starmer-more-interested-in-housing-asylum-seekers-than-hard-workers-5AWDDBINUNKHBDKANZ4QXWNDX4/ ]