The promise to ‘stop the boats’ and bring down levels of net migration have been made central to both Labour and Conservative plans for immigration.

On World Refugee Day, we look at what the parties are promising in this key policy area - in which Kent finds itself centre stage - and speak to a refugee who now calls the county home…

When Prime Minister Rishi Sunak unveiled his five key priorities in January 2023, one of his commitments to the nation touched directly on an issue affecting us here in Kent.

The Conservative leader said his government would “pass new laws to stop small boats” making the perilous crossing of the English Channel.

But despite the passing of legislation in April implementing the government’s plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, the small boats continue to cross the seas to our county. Already this year more than 12,000 people have made the crossing, a figure which will continue to grow as the summer months bring more favourable conditions in which to navigate the Channel.

One piece of political theatre managed to symbolise Kent’s place in this ongoing crisis. On May 8, Dover MP Natalie Elphicke crossed the floor of the House of Commons and defected from the Tories to Labour. In a statement outlining the reasons for her shock move, she said: “Rishi Sunak’s government is failing to keep our borders safe and secure.”

Therefore it comes as no great shock that both the Conservatives and Labour have produced election manifestos which make secure borders a central plank of their platform on immigration.

The Conservative manifesto claims that it is “the only party with a plan to stop the boats” and reiterates the party’s commitment to “a relentless, continual process of permanently removing illegal migrants to Rwanda” as a deterrent to those hoping to make the small boat crossing to the UK.

Labour’s manifesto derides the Rwanda scheme as one of what it describes as the Tories’ “desperate gimmicks”. The section entitled ‘Secure Borders’ goes on to promise that an incoming Labour government would “go after the criminal gangs who trade in driving this crisis” with a new border security command armed with “powers, to pursue, disrupt, and arrest those responsible for the vile trade”.

Mike Tapp, a former soldier who has worked in counter-terrorism, is the Labour candidate for Dover. He told KentOnline he believes that – as Ms Elphicke argued last month when she joined Labour – the current government has failed to deliver on its promises.

“Any plan, or supposed plan, that the Conservatives have pushed or are pushing simply isn't working,” he said. “They've thrown millions of pounds into a gimmick policy which grabs the headlines, in the case of Rwanda, and we've seen that that doesn't work as a deterrent because the legislation has passed yet the crossings have increased significantly the moment they passed it.

“So they are lying to us when they say that it's working because it's not - the stats say that. The approach that the Labour Party will take is sensible, pragmatic and it will work. It's not headline-grabbing like Rwanda, but it has that steely diplomacy behind the scenes, that hard graft to make sure that we can get on top of the problem.”

While the two major parties talk tough on the need to prevent the small boats crossing the Channel, those working closely with refugees here in Kent say that only the introduction of so-called ‘safe routes’ for those seeking asylum in the UK will prevent people seeking to make the dangerous journey by sea.

Resettlement programmes such as those for people coming from Ukraine, Syria and Afghanistan are cited in the Labour manifesto as “important routes for refugees seeking sanctuary” but campaigners would like to see this type of route made available more widely.

Roya Rasully is an ambassador for the charity Kent Refugee Action Network (KRAN) which works with young refugees and asylum seekers, also known as unaccompanied asylum-seeking children (UASC). She explains that safe routes are one of five areas for improvement outlined in a manifesto KRAN has drawn up for the election.

She said: “All of the major parties do have a specific stance on immigration but none of them are really emphasising safe routes, and we think it's something that should really be emphasised because, at the end of the day, no policy is going to stop refugees and asylum seekers making the journey - and unless a safe route is established, human lives will continue to be lost.”

The 19-year-old, who came to the UK from Afghanistan as a small child and now lives in Canterbury, expressed a hope that – regardless of policies and the outcome of the election on July 4 – people could find a way to be more empathetic towards those whose circumstances have led them to seek sanctuary in this country.

“They talk about these people that cross as statistics and it's just really dehumanising,” she said.

“Each of them has their own stories, they have their own personalities, and grouping them all together as a number to dehumanise them, along with dehumanising language, it's just really disheartening to hear.

“These refugees and asylum seekers do have every right to come to the UK to seek a safe country and I feel like everyone really needs to start being more empathetic.

“Our young people really try to fit in to the UK community - they always want to learn about British culture. But I feel like in order to fully integrate, the host community also needs to reciprocate that effort - it requires mutual effort from both sides. I feel like we all need to do better as a community.”

She added: “We're human just like everyone else. Every human in the world has a right to life and so do we as refugees and asylum seekers. We have a right to life and we have a right to seek safety if our home countries weren't safe enough for us.”

The smaller parties have expressed support for the creation of safe routes for people seeking asylum in the UK. The Green party says that, if elected, its MPs would push for “safe routes to sanctuary for those fleeing persecution”, while the Liberal Democrat manifesto calls for the creation of “new humanitarian travel permits that would allow asylum seekers to travel to the UK safely to proceed with their claims”.

Unsurprisingly, in what it is describing as an “immigration election”, Reform UK takes a tough line on the issue of small boats, which it says is a “national security threat”. Its manifesto includes a commitment to “offshore processing for illegal arrivals” and a threat to leave the European Convention on Human Rights over the issue, something that some Conservatives have also advocated in the effort to see their party’s Rwanda scheme through.

The issue of small boat crossings may have become emblematic of the political battle over immigration, but it is also important to remember that those arriving in the UK by this means are but a small fraction of the overall number of people coming to the country. Despite Brexit, which for many “leave” voters was seen as a chance to reduce levels of immigration, net migration stood at 685,000 in 2023.

In its manifesto, the Conservative party argues simply that “immigration is too high” and it commits to introducing “a binding, legal cap on migration” which would be reduced in each year of the next parliament.

Labour also promises a reduction in net migration.

“We will reform the points-based immigration system so that it is fair and properly managed, with appropriate restrictions on visas, and by linking immigration and skills policy,” the party’s policy platform states.

The challenge for whoever forms the next government will be to strike a balance between the commitment to control, and reduce, legal migration without exacerbating labour shortages in certain sectors of the economy.

Public services, and in particular the NHS, are heavily reliant on workers from overseas, and in the private sector areas such as hospitality and agriculture are also struggling with recruitment post-Brexit.

Kate Nicholls, who is chief executive of the trade body UKHospitality, said: “With more than three-quarters of hospitality’s workforce recruited from within the UK, our commitment to recruiting, training and developing our own is unwavering.

“While we recognise the need to control migration, this debate cannot be arbitrary and divorced from economic reality.

“There needs to be a serious debate about a pragmatic and stable employment plan that balances investment in skills and training, including reform of the apprenticeship levy, with sensible access to work visas.”

Ms Nicholls’ view is echoed by the Confederation of British Industry. Matthew Percival, the CBI’s future of work and skills director, said: “The need for work visas is increased by skills and labour shortages and businesses want to see all political parties put forward credible plans to ease shortages and support growth.

“The CBI has long called for a stronger link between shortages and the training that is available. It’s a key part of a more honest conversation about immigration.”

According to regular polling carried out by Ipsos, in the spring of 2024 public dissatisfaction with the way the current government is dealing with immigration was at its highest level since before the referendum on leaving the European Union. Some 69% of those surveyed told pollsters they were dissatisfied with the government’s performance on this issue, and just 9% were satisfied.

Rightly or wrongly, many people perceive that the country’s border security is not being managed properly. Regardless of who wins on July 4, the biggest challenge of all looks likely to be restoring public trust on this issue.