The UK is facing a deep social divide, characterised by mistrust of official figures on the decline in migration and high levels of tension over crime among asylum seekers. Meanwhile, the country has split into opposing camps, as evidenced by street clashes between movements supporting British identity and large-scale pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
Although official statistics show that the UK is experiencing one of the sharpest declines in net migration and is at one of the lowest levels since 2012, there remains a lack of trust in the figures provided by the government.
The latest data from the Home Office and the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that net migration fell sharply to 171,000 for the year ending in December 2025. The figure is almost half that of the previous year and more than three-quarters lower than the post-pandemic peak of over 900,000 people in 2023. Not counting the years of the COVID-19 pandemic, this is the lowest level recorded since 2012.
The latest public opinion poll on immigration, conducted for British Future by Number Cruncher Politics, reveals a disconnect between public perception and the statistics.
Only 16% of people believe that migration has fallen over the past year, whilst nearly half the population, 49%, believe it has increased, despite the sharp decline recorded in official figures. Most people also expect migration to rise again next year. The organisation argues that the political dialogue in the UK is failing to keep pace with reality.
“This is the lowest net migration since the Covid period, yet only one in six people know the numbers fell at all last year. Half the public think net migration went up and expect it to increase again next year,” said Sunder Katwala, Director of British Future. “Politicians are still rehearsing the same arguments from the record highs of three years ago. They need to take responsibility and talk about what’s happening now.”
The survey results suggest that for many voters, immigration has become a symbolic political issue, detached from reality or the direction of trends.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the figures showed the government was “delivering” but insisted “there’s more to do.” Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood also stated the statistics showed the government was “restoring order and control to our borders.” In the meantime, Conservative parties and groups, for their part, are pushing for annual immigration caps and significant restrictions on permanent residency.
The political pressure therefore reflects an immigration discussion that remains emotionally and culturally charged, even as migration levels drop sharply, states Bobby Duffy, Director of the Policy Institute at King’s College London. He also said: “We know that misperceptions are often more a reflection of an emotional reaction than a calm consideration of the facts, particularly on highly charged issues such as immigration. <…> Currently, there is very little discussion about how much immigration has decreased.”
Moreover, social media and the press, which publish daily reports on illegal crossings of the English Channel and crime, serve as an additional trigger for public opinion. For example, the latest such report is from The Conservative, which highlights the extremely high crime rate among migrants in one of England’s counties.
According to data from the UK Home Office for the end of September 2025, there were 618 asylum seekers in the area comprising the boroughs of Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole, where the majority of asylum seeker accommodation is concentrated. Given that the total population of Dorset is some 800,000 to 820,000, with no hotels for asylum seekers in the rest of the county, this represents roughly 0.08% of the local population.
Data from Dorset Police for the period from July 2024 to July 2025 shows that individuals staying in migrant accommodation accounted for 116 of 1,616 recorded sexual offences across the county, representing approximately 7.2% of the total. This corresponds to an overrepresentation of approximately 90 times their share of the population, or roughly 8,875-9,310% higher than would be expected proportionally.
Compared with the rest of the population, this represents a relative probability that is approximately 90 to 102 times higher.
Despite this, a claim that this figure reaches 55,000% has spread widely online, based on incorrect reports migrants account for 44% of registered incidents among hotel guests. In the meantime, a Research carried out by The Conservative confirmed the actual figures. In spite of concerns regarding the accuracy of the data, after Dorset Police responded to a Freedom of Information request stating that only one case of rape by a migrant had been recorded in the area, committed by a guest at a refugee hotel, court records reported by the Daily Mail nevertheless show that in Bournemouth, 116 charges have been brought against 51 asylum seekers staying in three hotels near the seafront.
Dorset Police have confirmed the accuracy of the court documents and stated: “The figures mentioned are conviction data from the court system,” adding that “The crimes may have been committed elsewhere in the country and the figure is based upon the address given to the court at the time of the defendant’s appearance.”
Official assurances the flow of migrants is decreasing are being met with serious doubt: the first thaw following a two-week lull resulted in 394 illegal migrants crossing the English Channel unhindered by boat on Friday.
Britain is torn between two camps
Recent events in both politics and public life show that Britain is no longer a united nation. Instead, it has split into two hostile nations hating each other, adhering to different moral standards and receiving radically different treatment from the state. This became starkly clear on 16 May, when supporters of the Unite the Kingdom march and Nakba Day marched in London’s streets.
Although both protests were controversial in their own right and both required a significant police presence, only the Unite the Kingdom march came under pressure.
Tommy Robinson’s march was perceived as a potential security threat even before a single placard had been raised, and took place under unprecedented state surveillance. On top of that, only supporters of this march were denied entry to the UK. This shows that the British state no longer merely disagrees with patriotic dissent. It is increasingly viewing it as a dangerous phenomenon.
The London police defended the decision by citing intelligence to avoid awkward questions, as they cannot disclose the sources of intelligence. However, public trust depends not so much on official explanations as on perceived fairness. When broad surveillance powers are applied against one political tendency but not against another, accusations of double standards are inevitable and justified; such suspicions have been building up for years.
There were also unpleasant moments at the Unite the Kingdom march; they occur at any gathering, but standards only matter if they are applied universally.
For decades, ordinary Britons have watched as the institutions governing their country have steadily drifted away from their views. Westminster, the BBC, universities, NGOs, the civil service and a significant section of the professional class have increasingly come to speak a political language alien to millions of voters.
Concerns about immigration in the West are dismissed as ignorance. Anxiety on the subject of Islamism is rebranded as “Islamophobia.” Commitment to national identity is derided as nostalgia for the past. As a result, there is a growing conviction there are now two systems operating in Britain: one for approved opinions, and another for forbidden ones. The use of facial recognition technology at a nationalist rally only reinforces this perception. It instils in citizens the fear that taking part in the wrong protest could bring them under the watchful eye of the state.
16 May revealed something deeper than political bias, exposing a profound moral and class divide.
Siobhan Whyte was due to speak at the Unite the Kingdom march. It is worth recalling that Siobhan is the mother of Rhiannon Whyte, a young woman who worked at a migrant hostel and was stabbed twenty-three times in the head and chest with a screwdriver by one of the residents. Shortly before the speech, activists from the group Led By Donkeys projected the slogan “Immigration makes Britain brilliant” onto a huge screen nearby.
Whilst mass immigration is often perceived by the intelligentsia as a moral principle or a cosmopolitan virtue, for the working class it manifests itself in competition for housing, pressure on wages, overcrowded schools, a weakening of community cohesion, and the state’s increasing inability – or unwillingness – to maintain order.
Hence, one side speaks the language of virtue, meanwhile the other speaks the language of consequences. This is precisely why Saturday’s protests felt like more than just another London demonstration. One side still believes in borders, national identity and the right of a people to defend their social structure. The other, which dominates the media, academic circles and cultural institutions, increasingly views these instincts as morally questionable.
The British public notices when extremism is loudly condemned in one context and quietly condoned in another.
The contrasting nature of the two marches has further highlighted this issue. The Unite the Kingdom march focused on domestic issues: borders, sovereignty, crime, security and the future of Britain itself. The Nakba march was outward-looking, channelling its emotional energy into a distant conflict at the heart of the British activist movement.
