Stop The Boats! If reducing illegal immigration is a priority for you, it’s worth grounding the debate in how the British system actually works today and what choices Scotland realistically has.

The reality behind the numbers

Across the UK, the overwhelming majority of irregular arrivals now come via small boats crossing the English Channel, tens of thousands per year. By contrast air arrivals without proper documentation are only a few thousand annually (UK-wide). Sea port detections are in the low hundreds

A Scotland-specific estimate suggests roughly 250–320 people per year arrive via Scottish air and sea ports combined. In other words, Scotland is not a primary destination for illegal migration. The issue that has so many Scots angry is largely shaped by policies and pressures centred on the south coast of England.

Why that matters politically

A vote for Reform UK by Scottish voters is, in effect, a vote to influence a UK-wide system that Scotland does not control and is not the main focus of. Even with tougher rhetoric or enforcement the geography doesn’t change, Channel crossings remain a south of England issue and the policy levers remain centralised in Westminster.

Scotland’s role stays largely downstream, housing a share of asylum seekers after arrival because Westminster transports them northwards, out of England.

What independence would change

With independence, Scotland would move from being a policy taker to a policy maker on immigration. That means:

1. Direct control over borders and visas. Instead of relying on Westminster priorities, Scotland could design a system tailored to Its own labour market, population needs and regional pressures.

2. A different enforcement focus. Given the small scale of irregular arrivals into Scotland itself, policy could become more targeted, more proportionate. Focused on actual routes affecting Scotland, not those 500 miles away in England.

3. Integration aligned with economic need. Scotland faces demographic challenges, an ageing population, skills shortages in key sectors. An independent system could prioritise controlled, legal migration on a points based system. Reduce incentives for illegal routes by making legal pathways clearer and more accessible to those with skills that Scotland needs

A strategic choice

If your objective is simply to reduce illegal migration numbers in Scotland, the data shows the problem is already relatively small in terms of illegals arriving in Scotland directly, the main reason you see so many illegal immigrants in our hotels and on our streets sit outside Scotland’s control in the hands of England. So the real question becomes one of governance. Do you try to influence a UK system where Scotland is not the focal point? Or do you support a model where decisions are made within Scotland, for Scotland?

The basic facts are

Supporting stricter immigration control in the UK does not mean you will see less illegal immigrants in Scotland.

For voters in Scotland concerned about illegal migration, the choice shouldn’t just about toughness, it should be about who has control over where migration policy is focused, and whether it should reflect Scotland’s priorities or England’s. You can have thousands of illegal immigrants driven up to Scotland each year and housed at your expense or you can have a few hundred entering our air and sea ports and being turned away before clearing immigration. The choice is yours.