NotKindle.com ( No Worries ) . 100% FREE

Whether somebody agrees with that anger or not, it is real. A government that ignores public frustration makes the problem worse. But there is another important question. **Why were hotels being used in the first place?** The answer is largely connected to the size of the backlog and the lack of sufficient alternative accommodation. Hotels are expensive. They were intended as temporary accommodation. If people remain in them for long periods, the cost becomes much greater. That creates a strong argument for faster processing. ## Cost is not the only issue There is another mistake we should avoid. It is tempting to say: ?They cost Britain money, therefore they should not be here.? That is too simple. Some people who arrive will eventually receive protection and may go on to work, pay taxes and contribute to British society. Others may have their claims refused. Others may remain in Britain for different legal reasons. The financial effect therefore depends on what happens after arrival. This is why simply counting the cost of accommodation does not tell us the whole story. ## The taxpayer deserves clarity There is, however, a perfectly reasonable principle. **If public money is being spent, the public should know how much and why.** That applies to asylum seekers. It applies to pensions. It applies to hospitals. It applies to foreign aid. It applies to defence. It applies to everything. Taxpayers should not have to rely on rumours on social media to understand where their money is going. Government should publish the figures. And it should explain them. ## The hidden cost of delay One of the biggest costs may not be the individual asylum claim. It may be the delay. Suppose a case could reasonably be decided in a few months but instead takes years. During that period, accommodation may be required. Staff time is required. Legal processes continue. And the person remains in an uncertain position. Multiply that by thousands of cases and the cost becomes substantial. This is why improving the speed of the system could potentially save money as well as improve fairness. ## What about British public services? This is where immigration becomes a much wider political question. Britain already has pressure on housing. The NHS has waiting lists. Local councils have financial difficulties. Schools need resources. People are struggling with the cost of living. Immigration is only one part of those problems. It would be wrong to pretend that every problem in Britain is caused by immigration. But it would also be wrong to pretend that population growth has no effect on demand for housing, healthcare, schools and other public services. A serious discussion needs to consider both sides. ## The question we should ask Instead of asking: **?How much do immigrants cost??** we should ask several more useful questions. How much does the asylum system cost? How much does irregular migration cost? How much does legal immigration contribute? How much does temporary accommodation cost? How much could be saved by processing claims faster? How much does removing people who have no right to remain cost? And what is the long-term economic contribution of people who are eventually allowed to stay? Those are questions that can be answered with evidence. And evidence is what this debate desperately needs. ## The danger of exaggerated numbers There is another reason to insist on accurate figures. If politicians exaggerate. If campaigners exaggerate. If social media exaggerates. Eventually people stop knowing what to believe. One person says there are millions of recent arrivals. Another says the numbers are tiny. Neither statement may tell the whole story. This