Home Office spends £90k on 3 months of social media adverts to ‘deter’ Channel migrants - but numbers rocket

The government has spent almost £90,000 on three months of social media adverts aiming to deter English Channel crossings, but numbers have surged to new records in the period.

Migrants in northern France and Belgium are being targeted with sponsored Facebook and Instagram posts, which contain messages in multiple languages including “you could die trying to get to the UK” and “don’t trust smuggling gangs”.

Charities called the adverts “useless and absurd” after several specialist groups rejected an appeal to help the Home Office “understand migrant perceptions” for the campaign.

A Freedom of Information (FOI) request by The Independent shows that over £87,000 has been spent on the campaign so far and that the “assumed total spend” would be £100,000. The figure could rise further if approved by ministers.

More than 20,000 migrants have arrived on small boats since it was launched in June, and the total for 2022 has already surpassed previous years.

The publicity drive was announced after Priti Patel signed an agreement to send asylum seekers to Rwanda in April, when a government source told the Mail on Sunday the campaign would “let people know the rules have changed and if you arrive illegally to the UK, you can be deported to Rwanda”.

But the Home Office’s FOI response shows that none of the social media adverts mention the scheme, which is on hold amid several undecided legal challenges.

If asylum seekers click the “learn more” icon on the posts, they are taken to a government website that mentions the Rwanda deal halfway down.

“From 1 January 2022, you will be considered for relocation to Rwanda if you make an illegal journey to the UK and have travelled through or have a connection to a safe country,” it says.

No one has yet been deported to Rwanda and the first attempted flight, which saw asylum seekers restrained and attached to plane seats after self-harming and threatening suicide, was grounded following injunctions by the European Court of Human Rights.

Other posts from the Home Office’s campaign focus on new legal penalties for crossing the English Channel in small boats, although the government has not confirmed whether anyone has yet been prosecuted under the Nationality and Borders Act.

One social media advert says “new measures” make it harder to remain in the UK, while another claims: “You could face up to four years in jail and deportation for coming to the UK illegally”.

The linked government website lists “safe and legal ways to get to the UK” but none of them apply to asylum seekers who have already reached Europe and do not have close family in Britain.

The posts are being sent out from Home Office accounts on Facebook and Instagram, in Albanian, Arabic, Farsi, Kurdish, Pashto and Vietnamese, and are marked with UK government branding.

A previous government influence campaign was criticised after The Independent revealed it was using what looked like a charity website claiming to “provide migrants in transit with free, reliable and important information”.

No analysis of that campaign’s effectiveness was made public and the “On The Move” website was deleted following the end of the Home Office’s contract with Hong Kong-based company Seefar in December.

Research company Britain Thinks was commissioned for the current scheme, alongside agencies Story UK and Manning Gottlieb.

In June, several charities revealed that they had been sent an email requesting assistance with a campaign aiming to “reach potential irregular migrants warning them of the risks and dangers of illegal migration – particularly via small boat crossings – and encouraging them to seek safe and legal alternatives, or claim asylum in the country in which they find themselves”.

Several groups said they had refused interviews with Britain Thinks on asylum seekers’ perceptions of the UK and awareness of its laws.

Among them was Refugee Action, which urged new home secretary Suella Braverman to “learn from the failures of her predecessor” and create alternatives to Channel crossings.

Chief executive Tim Naor Hilton added: “People risk their lives to claim asylum in the UK for reasons we can all understand – to be reunited with family or community, or because they speak English.

“Half-baked and expensive social media adverts will fail because they focus on keeping people out – ignoring the reality that people who want to be reunited with family will do almost anything to get here.”

The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants said the government had been told “time and again” that it must reduce demand for Channel crossings by providing alternatives.

Spokesperson Ravishaan Rahel Muthiah said it had instead chosen to “punish the refugees who arrive and squander heaps of money on a useless and absurd anti-refugee scare campaign”.

He added: “We knew their scaremongering propaganda campaign was cruel and wouldn't work from the offset, which is why we resisted this government's request for our support with it.”

Clare Moseley, founder of refugee charity Care4Calais, said the government was driving people into the hands of smugglers.

“The record number of small boat crossings is a direct result of the government’s own failings and no amount of publicly-funded PR will fix that,” she added.

A Home Office spokesperson said it remained “steadfastly committed to breaking the business model of people smugglers” and stopping further loss of life in the Channel.

“There is no single solution to the global migration crisis and change will not happen overnight, which is why the Government is working tirelessly to implement a range of innovative solutions,” a statement added.

“Our targeted communications campaign aims to discourage migrants from leaving safe European countries and making potentially lethal journeys to the UK. The message of the campaign is clear – do not put your life in the hands of dangerous criminals.”