Member's statement: Illegal Immigration
Member's statement by Mr David Brooks on .
- MLA
- Mr David Brooks
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 19 May 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Illegal Immigration
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5549141
Read the official Assembly record
Text
It is not unusual to hear politicians bash the BBC, and perhaps that is especially so on these Benches, but, credit where it is due, in the past couple of weeks, it has done a fair bit to shine a light on the realities of the conveyor belt of small boats coming to the UK and on the division and resentment that illegal immigration causes in our communities, as it does south of the border in the Republic of Ireland, which is not immune. In the recent podcast 'Intrigue: To Catch a King', the podcasters, while seeking to find a person sought by their family in the Kurdish regions of northern Iraq, tracked "Kardo Ranya", an alias used by a kingpin at the top of multiple trafficking networks. We saw more such networks in this week's documentary, 'The Smuggling Business: Undercover', as they trafficked people across multiple safe countries, offering their customers a menu of illicit and dangerous routes across Europe and, ultimately, on to their small boats or into shipping containers across the English Channel. We saw competing gangs at the lawless "Jungle" camp near Calais, where shootings and stabbings were reported apparently for non-payment and traffickers boasted of the thousands whom they had helped to illegally invade British shores. On one day of filming, 600 crossed the channel, representing another £700,000 for the £7 billion-a-year trafficking industry. They offered a range of places and ways to pay and an international list of outlets in Afghanistan, France and Belgium, as well as a car wash in Cambridgeshire, a Newcastle upon Tyne wholesaler and a mobile phone shop in Woolwich. Yesterday, some in the Assembly sought to raise the spectre of parties who want to confront immigration head-on, as though UK voters are the danger. At Westminster, we have a Labour Government who are less focused on the country and more focused on their own psychodrama, another flailing Prime Minister who has failed to secure our borders or stop the boats, and a would-be Prime Minister in Andy Burnham, who, in a recent interview, said that Reform's rise is because things have got too expensive. If you ever wonder why the traditional parties of government in the UK face such challenges, consider how hesitant some have been to talk about the issue that they know is foremost in the minds of their working-class communities. Illegal immigration is the issue that dare not speak its name. It is organised crime, and modern-day slavers are running a deadly ferry service for those who would abuse our asylum system. We are a final destination: a catastrophe for those who are trafficked, our communities and our public services, which are left to deal with the consequences. Others may hide from drawing attention to it and its corrosive impact on our communities, but this party will not. Credit, for once, to the media for exposing that brutal trade, even if some in the Chamber would prefer that it was not talked about.
497 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.18 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- Criteria met: Dog-whistle messaging (0.75).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.73).
- Subject area: Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.21 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.45 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.75 | Yes |
| Controversy escalation | 0.12 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.43 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.18 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.73 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.25 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:41 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.