Daily Express, on UK Politics, 5 November 2026

8.0out of 10Severe

GB News bombshell as Burnham decision 'set to benefit 450,000 '

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.5 findings

GB News bombshell as Burnham decision 'set to benefit 450,000 illegal migrants' The news channel highlighted the cost to the taxpayer of Labour's migrant U-turn. Share Article Share Article Facebook X LinkedIn Reddit Bluesky Email Copy Link Link copied Add us as preferred source Comments By Fran Winston , Showbiz Reporter 07:44, Thu, Nov 5, 2026 Updated: 07:58, Thu, Nov 5, 2026 Border security expert blasts Labour's migration U-turn International Border Security expert Henry Bolton has issued a warning that Labour's migration U-turn could potentially see another 450,000 migrants claiming benefits .

The Tories have declared Labour’s migrant U-turn could lead to a £5billion increase in Britain’s benefits bill. Kemi Badenoch ’s party warned another 450,000 could claim Universal Credit after who arrived during the beginning of this decade. Speaking to hosts Stephen Dixon and Dawn Neesom on GB News Breakfast on Thursday November 5, Bolton explained how the numbers had increased since Brexit due to the influx of non-European migrants in the UK.

"What's happened is that subsequent to Brexit , a lot of those who were here have applied for a settlement, and in the lead-up to Brexit, applied for settlement. Article continues below ADVERTISEMENT "We always knew that that was going to happen, so that...changed the numbers over the last couple of years of Brexit in terms of the European migrants. "But certainly, what's happened since is that the vast majority are non-European. So that was the unexpected consequence of Brexit.

"Because instead of the government applying tighter controls, which is essentially what everybody voted for, the government liberalised the controls for non-Europeans, and so really opened the door wide open for them. Article continues below ADVERTISEMENT "So those numbers, the non-European numbers, went through the roof," he said. Article continues below ADVERTISEMENT GB News' Stephen Dixon and Dawn Neeson discussed migration with Henry Bolton (Image: GB News) "Of course, ... a number of Labour MPs, a large proportion of their supporters and support base, [are] ideologically absolutely opposed to tighter immigration controls.

"I live down here in Folkestone in Kent, and the Green and Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats have all voted in the local authority to make this Folkestone, where we've had people landing on the beach, turn it into a district of sanctuary. "They're not on the same wavelength as those people like me who say: 'Hang on, we need tighter controls. We need to manage this properly. We need to manage the numbers. We need to vet the people.'

"They just don't have that sort of that that sort of thought pattern," he said. Andy Burnham's migrant policy has been questioned (Image: Getty) Strictly exit 'confirmed' as Jaime Winstone announcement sparks outrage Andy Burnham torn to shreds after King Charles humiliation | TV & Radio | Showbiz & TV | Express.co.uk His remarks came as new analysis suggested that of the 1.4 million people expected to gain indefinite leave to remain, around a third could claim benefits.

Some 220,283 people with Indefinite Leave to Remain were receiving Universal Credit in December 2025 – around 32 per cent of the estimated 690,926 non-EU citizens with settled status, according to Department for Work and Pensions figures. If a similar rate goes on to claim Universal Credit from the so-called Boris Wave, it will cost £5.2 billion. comes as the Conservatives try to convince voters they understand the fury over .

GB News Andy Burnham Migrant Crisis Benefits Share Article Share Article Facebook X LinkedIn Reddit Bluesky Email Copy Link Link copied Add us as preferred source Comments

Read the original article on express.co.uk (opens in a new tab)
What we found (5)

The Daily Express headline calls 450,000 people "illegal migrants" in quotation marks, when its own body says they are people gaining indefinite leave to remain, a lawful status. The article calls a conditional projection "alarming" in its own voice, lets the Conservatives' charge against Shabana Mahmood slip partly into its narration, and ends on a gross four-year arrivals figure. It carries no response from Labour or the Home Office.

  1. Makes a false claim

    Severe

    “illegal migrants”

    Why this matters
    The headline calls the 450,000 people "illegal migrants" and puts the words in quotation marks.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes Labour is about to hand benefits to 450,000 people who entered or stayed in Britain unlawfully.
    The context
    The body says nothing of the kind. It describes people gaining settlement rights or indefinite leave to remain, a legal status, from the arrivals of the early 2020s. Nobody quoted in the article uses the word "illegal". The Express's own figures count people with Indefinite Leave to Remain, who are lawful residents.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“settlement rights for the record influx of foreign nationals”
    • Elsewhere in the article“Some 220,283 people with Indefinite Leave to Remain”
    • Elsewhere in the article“1.4 million people expected to gain indefinite leave to remain”

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Tories claim Labour settlement policy could let 450,000 more legal residents claim Universal Credit.

  2. States one side's claim as fact

    Minor

    “Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood failed to clamp down on settlement rights for the record influx of foreign nationals”

    Why this matters
    The Express states in its own narration that Mahmood "failed to clamp down" on settlement rights. That is the Conservatives' charge.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes it as established that the Home Secretary failed in a duty to restrict settlement.
    The context
    This is the opposition's characterisation of a policy choice. The article attributes the warning to Badenoch's party in the same sentence, then drops the attribution for the verdict. No Labour or Home Office account of the policy appears.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“The Tories have declared Labour’s migrant U-turn”

    Show it in the article

  3. Uses figures that mislead

    Minor

    “more than 4 million people moving to the UK in four years”

    Why this matters
    The article ends on a gross arrivals figure over four years, with no mention of people leaving or of the trend.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes migration is running at a high and continuing level.
    The context
    Net migration peaked in 2023 and fell by around three-quarters of a million by 2025. The gross four-year total hides that fall and is left as the article's last word.

    How we know

    • On the recordNet migration to the UK fell by around three-quarters of a million between 2023 and 2025, and London recorded its fewest homicides since 2014 in 2025.newscord.org (opens in a new tab)
    • Our analysis“Net migration peaked at 944,000 in the year to March 2023 and had fallen to 171,000 by the end of 2025”Love Without Substance

    Show it in the article

  4. One side gets the space

    Minor

    “for [Shabana Mahmood] and the Labour Party, in terms of the U-turn, they've got the problem that”

    Why this matters
    Labour's position reaches the reader only through Bolton's account of what Labour MPs and supporters think.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes Labour has no answer to the charge and is ideologically opposed to controls.
    The context
    The article quotes Bolton at length and relays the Tories' warnings. It carries no statement or response from Labour, Burnham, Mahmood or the Home Office.

    How we know

    • Checked against the whole articleIt never uses the words “Home Office”.

    Show it in the article

  5. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “The alarming projection”

    Why this matters
    The Express calls the projection "alarming" in its own voice.
    The impression it gives
    A reader is told how to feel about a figure before being given any basis to judge it.
    The context
    The figure is a conditional estimate resting on an assumed claim rate. The article gives no period or named source for it.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“If a similar rate goes on to claim”

    Show it in the article

How other outlets reported it

Our analysisLove Without Substance

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Daily Express

  1. 5 NovThe nastiest money surprises hidden in the Budget's small print - 'this one will sting'3.0
  2. 5 NovJohn Healey just changed the state pension rules - and he's made it really complicated8.0
  3. 5 NovBrexit bombshell as 'euro optional for rejoining EU' - but there's a massive catch3.0
  4. 5 Nov‘Smoky bacon’ crisps face ban under Andy Burnham Brexit reset deal3.0
  5. 5 NovState pensioners told 'it's likely to count' over tax changes announced in Budget6.0

Everything we scored from Daily Express