‘Our country’s ruined’: Protesters on why they oppose asylum hotels

Published

2 months ago

August 29, 2025

admin

“It’s an invasion,” Dinah Bentley tells me, standing next to a cardboard cut-out of Nigel Farage.

The 78-year-old retired teacher says she “doesn’t laud” the Reform MP, whose grinning likeness is a permanent fixture in her West Yorkshire conservatory, but he “says what I believe”.

“Everybody talks about migration, but our country’s ruined,” Dinah adds. “They’ve ruined it.”

The “they” in her mind? People who have crossed into the UK on small boats.

We have seen asylum hotel protests intensify over the summer and wanted to speak to the people who’ve joined them.

Over the coming weeks, we’ll speak with counter-protesters too, but today, we meet Dinah, a grandmother of two who has joined those calling on asylum hotels to close.

She was, like many of the protesters we met, initially sceptical to speak to a journalist.

Dinah says she “doesn’t watch mainstream news” because of “media lies” over Brexit.

Instead, she says she gets her news from social media.

It was on social media that Dinah learnt about a protest being organised outside a hotel in Wakefield, which has housed asylum seekers for several years.

It was the first migration-related protest she had ever attended.

“We’ve put up with so much for so long and I think ordinary people now, they’ve decided it’s no good sitting, doing nothing,” Dinah says.

After reading about a male asylum seeker being charged with a sexual assault in Epping, she says she is “fearful” for her granddaughters’ safety.

“They’re undocumented,” she says, referring to those who have arrived in the UK on small boats.

“We know nothing about them. We don’t know where they are wandering the streets. It’s not right, is it?”

She’s also angry about the cost of housing asylum seekers in hotels.

I ask Dinah what she thinks about the government plan to close asylum hotels, stop illegal crossings and deport people who do not have a legal right to remain.

“It’s all talk, all talk”, she says. “I don’t believe them.”

“I would be happy if the Navy went into the Channel, we’re an island for God’s sake, and stopped the boats.

“That would make me over the moon.”

Dinah tells us people used to be “afraid” of saying what they really thought about migration.

No more, she says.

The ‘migrant watch’ group

On the other side of Wakefield, we meet 47-year-old James Crashley.

He’s also been to the local asylum hotel protests.

An army veteran and former policeman, James says he does not think asylum seekers should be housed in hotels or houses of multiple occupancy.

“I’ve served in Kosovo and in Iraq, within the British Army,” he says. “And if I can be housed in a tent for six months, then they can too.”

The prime minister has pledged to end the “costly use of hotels to house asylum seekers in this parliament” – which would be 2029, if not earlier.

James has, by his own admission, become somewhat notorious in his local area for trying to set up what he’s called a “community watch”.

He says the police are “very good at dealing with serious crime” but believes “they seem to forget that day-to-day crime exists”.

Called “5 Town Migrant Watch” and advertised by him on social media, James says the volunteer group will support the Wakefield hotel protests and act as a “gentle presence” in public areas to tackle “all anti-social behaviour”.

But it will focus on “illegal migrant men” who James describes as having “conflicting traditions and cultures”.

“They come from cultures that aren’t as civilised as ours,” he says. “They don’t seem to adhere to our laws.

“And because of the cultural differences, as in the sexual assaults on children and women, they believe that’s fine in their cultures. Well, it’s not here.”

I say to James that no culture accepts sexual assaults on women and children are “fine”, a point he says he “accepts”.

But he claims that, by definition, people have already “broken the law” when they arrive on small boats in the first place.

James’ group has attracted hundreds of supporters online, but also criticism from people who believe the group – and James himself – is not only divisive but dangerous.

James admits he has previously had a police caution for a public order offence, not related to the community watch, but stresses this group “isn’t vigilantism”.

“It’s a peaceful movement,” he says. “But if needs be, we’ll stand our ground and will prevent crime. We’re not allowed to commit crime.”

‘People are angry’

A few days later, we meet Dinah again outside the Cedar Court Hotel in Wakefield.

Protesters line the road, waving Union and St George’s flags. Some are shouting “send them back” and “stop the boats”.

Groups of counter-protesters are there too, chanting “Nazi scum” over the police barricade.

I ask Dinah how that feels.

“I think it’s hilarious,” she says. “I know what I am, I don’t value their opinion, so I couldn’t care less what they call me.”

But standing next to Dinah, also waving a Union flag, is Sharon.

She says she’s “a little bit frightened being here” and feels it’s unfair to be put in that position just “to try and get the government to listen to you”.

She added: “I’m a 60-year-old mum. I work 40 hours a week. And nobody gives me anything free. You just want fairness.”

In the crowd, we find James.

I ask him what he thinks about the government plan to appeal a court ruling to shut the asylum hotel in Epping.

“Of course they were going to try and block it,” he tells me.

“The smiles here and the good attitude and the positivity is masking the anger of what’s happened to the English.

“People are angry. People know that once they’re out of here,” he says, gesturing at the hotel behind us, “they’re going to be put in the community”.

“What happens then, who knows?”

Dinah and James are among thousands of protesters who share a sense of being ignored by the government – leaving an overwhelming sense of pressure and uncertainty about what will happen next.

UK

‘Victory for Virginia’, says family of Prince Andrew’s accuser – as royal gives up all his titles

Published

8 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

'Victory for Virginia', says family of Prince Andrew's accuser - as royal gives up all his titles

The family of Virginia Giuffre has said Prince Andrew’s decision to give up his titles, including the Duke of York, is “vindication for our sister and survivors everywhere”.

“This is not just a victory for her, but for every single survivor of the horrific crimes perpetrated by [Jeffrey] Epstein and his co-conspirators,” they said in a statement.

Andrew will no longer be known as the Duke of York, in a move which finally completes his banishment from royal life. However, he will remain a prince, as the son of Queen Elizabeth II.

His former wife, Sarah Ferguson, will also no longer use her title of The Duchess of York, it is understood.

In a statement, Prince Andrew said: “In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.

“I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life.

“With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.

“As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

Why is this happening now?

The decision comes following increased pressure on Prince Andrew after continuing reports of his relationship with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein, and his relationship with an alleged Chinese spy.

The posthumous memoir of Virginia Giuffre, who died in April, is due to be released on Tuesday. She had accused Andrew of sexual assault, and sued him in August 2021.

The book will go on sale a week after an email emerged showing Andrew told Epstein “we are in this together”, three months after he said he had stopped contact with the convicted sex offender.

On Friday evening, the US House Oversight Committee also released documents from Epstein’s estate showing “Prince Andrew” listed as a passenger on the financier’s private jet – the so-called Lolita Express – from Luton to Edinburgh in 2006, alongside Ghislaine Maxwell.

He was also listed on another flight to West Palm Beach, Florida, in 2000.

The flight logs have been reported on for years but the release may have added to pressure.

“The situation has become untenable and intolerable, and this week in particular, the tipping point had been reached,” said Sky News royal correspondent Laura Bundock.

What is Prince Andrew giving up?

Prince Andrew is giving up his Duke of York title
His knighthood as a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO)
His Garter role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter
Christmas with the Royal Family at Sandringham
He had already stopped using his HRH title and and was stripped of military patronages by the Queen in 2022
He will retain his dukedom, which can only be removed by an Act of Parliament, but will not use it
He will also remain a prince as he was born the son of Elizabeth II

It is understood the changes will take effect immediately, with the Giuffre family calling for the King to go further and “remove the title of Prince”.

King ‘glad’ of the outcome

The King is glad of the outcome, it is understood, and the decision was taken in close consultation with His Majesty and other members of the Royal Family.

Andrew will continue to be known as Prince Andrew and will remain living at the Windsor Estate at the Royal Lodge.

The move does not impact the position of his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

For the second year running, he is not expected to attend the Royal Family’s annual Christmas celebrations at Sandringham.

‘An unwelcome distraction’

Sky News royal correspondent Rhiannon Mills said: “This is quite an extraordinary move. I think it shows that, actually, things had gone too far.

“Prince Andrew, and allegations about him and Virginia Giuffre, were continuing to be too much of a distraction for the Royal Family.”

Jack Royston, chief royal correspondent at Newsweek, told Sky News: “This does not go far enough.”

There should be an acknowledgement from the Royal Family, he said, “irrespective of whether Prince Andrew denies the substantive allegations against him [that] it was morally wrong for him to grovel to Jeffrey Epstein”.

The Guardian’s former royal correspondent Stephen Bates also told Sky News: “He’s shown no sign of any sort of contrition. He continues to deny all the allegations against him. And he speaks of his duty to the family. Well, it’s a bit late to be thinking about that.”

What is Prince Andrew accused of?

Prince Andrew has denied allegations made by Ms Giuffre – one of Epstein’s victims – of sexual assault.

She had filed a civil lawsuit against him, accusing him of sexually assaulting her on three occasions after she was introduced to him by Epstein.

In a 2019 interview with BBC Newsnight, Andrew said he had no knowledge of ever meeting Ms Giuffre, claiming a well-known image of them together had been doctored.

The case was settled outside court for a sum believed to have been around £12m.

Following Ms Giuffre’s death in April, aged 41, her family said she “lost her life to suicide” at her farm in Western Australia.

Giuffre’s family: ‘Victory for Virginia’

In a statement, the family of Ms Giuffre said they supported Andrew’s decision but repeated accusations that he had made misleading statements. Andrew has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.

Analysis: Prince Andrew giving up titles was clearly not entirely his decision

It is extraordinary that it has come to this but the distraction had to stop.

The statement comes straight from Prince Andrew, the tone of it very personal as he says he is putting his “duty to my family and country first”.

But this was clearly not entirely his decision.

From the first sentence, where he says “in discussion with the King”, we’re left in no doubt that his brother must have said enough was enough.

UK

Prince Andrew giving up titles was clearly not entirely his decision

Published

8 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

Prince Andrew giving up titles was clearly not entirely his decision

It is extraordinary that it has come to this but the distraction had to stop.

The statement comes straight from Prince Andrew, the tone of it very personal as he says he is putting his “duty to my family and country first”.

But this was clearly not entirely his decision.

From the first sentence, where he says “in discussion with the King”, we’re left in no doubt his brother must have said enough was enough.

The fact we’re being guided that the King is glad of this outcome says it all; for the monarch and the wider family, the questions of what they were going to do about Andrew had to stop.

After years of upset caused by his association with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, he has done the family one favour by personally announcing that he will no longer use his titles.

For the King to forcibly remove them would have taken up precious parliamentary time and weeks of column inches.

To be clear, his titles aren’t removed, they remain extant but inactive like his HRH title.

But Andrew won’t use them any more, and that will be humiliation enough for a man who has already been stripped of his military affiliations, his charity patronages and his ability to have any kind of public profile.

This ends the questions on what more the monarch could do to show how the family felt about the accusations, the upset and the embarrassment caused.

Will it stop the stories, the allegations and the interest in Prince Andrew? That is far less certain.

But in what is his first public statement since that ill-fated Newsnight interview in 2019, it is striking that he signs it off by saying: “I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

UK

Everything we know about Prince Andrew’s titles decision

Published

8 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

Everything we know about Prince Andrew's titles decision

Prince Andrew has announced he is giving up his royal titles, including the Duke of York.

The decision is understood to have been made in close consultation with King Charles and other members of the Royal Family.

Prince Andrew said continued accusations against him were distracting from the King’s work.

He had been accused by Virginia Giuffre, who died in April, of sexual assault. He denies this.

Which titles is he giving up?

Prince Andrew is giving up his Duke of York title. Sky News understands this will be immediate.

He will also give up his knighthood as a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO) and his Garter role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.

He will retain the dukedom, which can only be removed by an Act of Parliament, but will not use it.

Prince Andrew will also remain a prince, as the son of Queen Elizabeth II.

Why is this happening now?

Ms Giuffre, who was one of billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, alleged Prince Andrew sexually assaulted her on three occasions when she was 17, and sued him in 2021.

In her posthumous memoir Nobody’s Girl, due to be published on Tuesday, she alleged he was “entitled” and “believed having sex with me was his birthright”.

Prince Andrew has always denied the allegations.

He has also always claimed that a well-known image of them together was doctored. Before her death, which her family said was by suicide, the case was settled outside of court for a sum believed to have been around £12m.

Ms Giuffre’s posthumous memoir goes on sale a week after an email emerged showing Andrew told Epstein “we are in this together”.

The email was reportedly sent three months after he said he had stopped contact with the convicted sex offender.

He was also listed on another flight to West Palm Beach, Florida, in 2000.

The flight logs have been reported on for years but the release may have added to pressure.

“The situation has become untenable and intolerable, and this week in particular, the tipping point had been reached,” said royal correspondent Laura Bundock.

It is understood that the changes will take effect immediately.

The Giuffre family has called for the King to go further and “remove the title of Prince”.

Prince Andrew’s decision to relinquish his titles also comes following increased pressure over his relationship with an alleged Chinese spy.

Will this affect his ex-wife and daughters?

Sky News understands that Andrew will continue to live at the Windsor Estate at the Royal Lodge. His ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, will also remain living at the Royal Lodge.

But for the second year running, he will not attend the Royal Family’s annual Christmas celebrations at Sandringham, it is understood.

Andrew’s ex-wife will also no longer use her Duchess of York title.

She was dropped by numerous charities last month after it emerged that she wrote to convicted sex offender Epstein, calling him a “supreme friend”, despite publicly disowning him in the media.

The decision over Andrew’s titles will not impact on the position of his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, it is understood.

Sky News royal correspondent Rhiannon Mills says the move may not stop the influx of negative stories about him.

She said: “This ends the questions on what more the monarch could do to show how the family felt about the accusations, the upset and the embarrassment caused.

“Will it stop the stories, the allegations and the interest in Prince Andrew? That is far less certain. But in what is the prince’s first public statement since that ill-fated Newsnight interview in 2019, it is striking that he signs it off by saying, ‘I vigorously deny the accusations against me’.”

What did Prince Andrew say in his statement?

In his statement, Prince Andrew said: “In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.

“I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life.

“With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.

“As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”