There have been precious few victories for the British people of late, and zero (to my mind at least) against the Starmer Inquisition (sorry, government). Tuesday’s temporary High Court injunction however, secured by Epping Forest District Council against the housing of illegal migrants at the Bell Hotel is, unmistakably, a victory. Contrary to media depictions of concerned parents as ‘far-right’ xenophobes, the local tension was sparked when a resident (Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu) was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl in the town. Thanks to a sustained period of peaceful protest around the hotel, most notably from Epping’s ‘pink ladies’ (despicable, ‘far-right’ racists to any Guardian readers out there), Mr Justice Eyre ruled ‘asylum seekers’ must be removed by 16:00 BST on 12 September.
Highly notable in this affair was the predictably lame response from the Home Office. Home Secretary Yvette ‘refugees welcome’ Cooper, shamefully attempted an unsuccessful 11th hour dismissal of Epping Forest’s application. Undoubtedly, she knows only too well how flimsy the immigration house of cards truly is. Having failed to prioritise the rights of illegals over the British people, the Home Office not only admitted the department had been left “reeling” by the ruling, but proceeded to warn how the decision would “substantially impact” its ability to house asylum seekers in hotels across the UK. True to form, Starmer’s government doesn’t quite grasp what a ‘warning’ is.
The injunction is a major coup for the British people and the safety of our children, and has widespread implications for the future war on mass immigration. First and foremost, despite the best efforts of the police and far-left counter-protestors the protests were almost exclusively peaceful. That’s no small matter, because even Starmer’s stormtroopers may be reluctant to engage in the mass arrest of women doing nothing more ‘thuggish’ than waving flags.
Second, standing tall and standing together really does count. Whether it’s love of country, the shared history and heritage symbolised by a flag, uniting against a common enemy, or simply opposing the decadent direction the nation is headed in: the authorities are terrified of unity. This of course, is why they will do absolutely anything to discredit the banner under which it comes.
Keir Starmer in particular is an utter coward, who buckles to the slightest show of strength if he considers it politically expedient. Whether it’s flip-flopping on winter fuel payments, chicks with dicks, or opposing the grooming gang inquiry – the Prime Minister is merely a weathercock without the balls. Safely ensconced inside Number 10, presumably the Pillsbury Doughboy-in-chief is considering whether to jail the parents of Epping en masse, and install the ‘asylum seekers’ as unusually well-built au pairs?
Third, and perhaps most importantly, the Battle of Epping proves one thing: there is courage and a sense of community still alive and kicking in Britain today. I for one am overjoyed to see it, for there have been periods recently where such a commodity seemed in scant supply.
Going forward, Epping may well be the template other councils follow. Broxbourne Borough Council, for instance, has been quick off the mark:
Meanwhile, Starmer’s political opponents are taking full advantage. Robert Jenrick, clearly desperate to get photographs with local residents, appears to have forgotten that as Immigration Minister he oversaw a rise in the procurement of asylum hotels. Nigel Farage, whose credit is slightly better, released the following statement on X:
“This is a victory for the parents and concerned residents of Epping. They do not want their young women being assaulted on the streets.
This community stood up bravely, despite being slandered as far right, and have won. They represent the vast majority of decent people in this country.
Young, undocumented males who break into the UK illegally should NOT be free to walk the streets anywhere. They must be detained and deported.
I hope that Epping provides inspiration to others across the country.”
Rupert Lowe, whose stance on immigration has been nothing short of unimpeachable, added this missive to Yvette Cooper’s in-tray:
While the politicking takes centre stage, lawyers suggest the real story may be the possibility of a chain reaction – which could leave Starmer the embarrassment of having to house the 30,000 asylum seekers chez Lord Alli.
The Battle of Epping may be over, but the war is far from won. Before we get carried away, there’s a few points that deserve attention. It is notable for example, that the injunction was served due to the council’s complaints that planning law had been breached – not the breach of ‘little girls’ right not to be raped on the way to school’. It must also be said, the snobbery against the protestors themselves is still palpable. It’s not so long ago that Reform UK’s Richard Tice dismissively referred to Tommy Robinson’s supporters (precisely the kind of people protesting outside the Bell Hotel) as “that lot”. And although victorious, Conservative councillor and Leader of Epping Forest Council, Chris Whitbread, couldn’t mask his disdain for the plebs:
“The reason I didn’t go on the demonstrations or protests, whichever way you want to look at it, was in some cases the people who were attending them. Let’s just leave it there.”
Meanwhile, the far-left campaign for fake asylum seekers has not thrown in the towel (call me old-fashioned, but I fail to understand how “stop complaining about the rape of your daughters” became quite so catchy, but whatever floats your dinghy I suppose). Still refusing to relinquish the old ‘war-zones are so bad, only women and children can bear them’ canard, Refugee Council Chief Executive, Enver Solomon, bizarrely claimed the government’s use of hotels was “completely unsustainable”:
“Through our frontline work we see how protests and hostility leave people who have fled war and persecution feeling terrified and targeted in the very places they are forced to live. This makes an already traumatising situation worse and robs people of any sense of safety.“Instead of relying on costly hotels, the Home Office should partner with local councils to provide safe, cost-effective accommodation within communities. But to end hotel use for good, the government needs to think differently about how we can speed up and improve asylum decision-making.”
A contemptible take from someone who should immediately have his spare bedrooms filled for him. He’s right about one thing though: if the asylum hotel scam has finally been put to bed (and assuming the government has no desire to actually deport the scammers), where exactly do these sexually rapacious young men go? As bad as the hotels are, at least young women currently know which places to avoid. If they’re subsequently moved to unknown houses of multiple occupancy, the British people have another problem on their hands.
Frank Haviland is the author of Banalysis: The Lie Destroying the West and The Frank Report, which you should probably subscribe to.
If you enjoy The New Conservative and would like to support our work, please consider buying us a coffee – it would really help to keep us going. Thank you!
(Photograph: The Bell Hotel by Alex McGregor, CC BY-SA 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons)
It’s a hollow victory though when Labour/LibDem local authorities won’t seek similar rulings and instead will double down on any protesters outside hotels.
It does not solve the problem, it just moves it on.
If it’s done one thing, the Epping skirmish cum battle, it has put the illegal migration and its consequences, centre stage. The Left, the Labour Party, can’t shut it down with false claims of “far right thugs”, “bandwagons”, thereof. The people’s simmering beneath the surface resentment has surfaced and with confidence…..the hoisting of the flag of St George, and the Union Jack, in various locations is an example of that.
The government’s room for manoeuvre has been constrained by this new front which has opened up by Epping. It might be for a limited time, but people can counter with more ‘strength’, in peaceful demonstrations, exercising the free speech of which Starmer says he’s “proud”.