The Cycling Show

26/09/2026

⚖️ OUR AUGUST 2025 OPEN LETTER — NOW THE LAW HAS CHANGED

In August 2025, we published an open letter questioning the Government’s legal and political responsibility for protecting the public, enforcing immigration law and dealing with unlawful entry into the United Kingdom.

Now there is another question that deserves a clear answer:

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ILLEGAL MIGRATION ACT 2023?

On 2 December 2025, the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 received Royal Assent.

Section 41 expressly repealed major parts of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 — including sections 1–6 containing the duty-to-remove framework, together with numerous associated detention, removal and claims provisions.

The Government says its replacement legislation is designed to strengthen border security, tackle organised immigration crime and improve the asylum and immigration system.

But that leaves legitimate questions for the Government, including those who have held responsibility for its immigration policy:

❓ Why was the statutory duty-to-remove framework repealed?

❓ Why was so much of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 removed from the statute book rather than implemented?

❓ What removal framework has replaced it in practice?

❓ How many people entering the UK unlawfully are subsequently removed?

❓ How do the Government’s claims about increasing removals compare with the actual statistics?

❓ And most importantly: is the immigration law currently on the statute book being enforced effectively?

Our open letter was published in August 2025. Parliament has since fundamentally changed the legislative framework.

The public can reasonably ask what changed, why it changed, and what measurable results the replacement system is delivering.

THE LAW MATTERS. ENFORCEMENT MATTERS. ACCOUNTABILITY MATTERS.

26/09/2026

THE LAW EXISTS. THE PUBLIC DESERVES TO KNOW HOW OFTEN IT IS ACTUALLY BEING ENFORCED.

This is an open letter to Prime Minister Andy Burnham, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, former Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour Government and Parliament.

⚖️ WHAT HAPPENED TO ENFORCEMENT OF THE NATIONALITY AND BORDERS ACT 2022?

The 2022 Act amended section 24 of the Immigration Act 1971, including offences concerning knowingly arriving or entering the UK without the required permission.

So publish the numbers.

🔴 How many people detected entering Britain through illegal routes have been arrested for illegal-arrival or illegal-entry offences?

🔴 How many have been charged?

🔴 How many have been prosecuted and convicted?

🔴 What percentage of detected illegal arrivals does each figure represent?

🔴 Where prosecution is not pursued, what are the principal legal, evidential or public-interest reasons?

The scale makes those questions important. In the year ending June 2026, the Home Office recorded 38,086 detected arrivals through illegal entry routes, including about 33,000 by small boat. (GOV.UK⁠)

Government has also issued asylum seekers guidance specifically addressing sexual consent, harassment, domestic abuse, gender equality and child abuse.

That guidance itself is not evidence that asylum seekers collectively pose a sexual-violence threat. But it raises another legitimate public-policy question:

Why has Government decided this particular education is necessary, what evidence informed that decision, and is its effectiveness being measured?

UK law applies regardless of nationality or immigration status.

If somebody commits r**e, sexual assault, violence or another serious offence, prosecute the individual responsible.

The Government should publish transparent statistics allowing Parliament and the public to compare detected illegal arrivals → arrests → charges → prosecutions → convictions → removals.

PUBLISH THE DATA.
ENFORCE THE LAW.
EXPLAIN THE DECISIONS.
PROTECT THE PUBLIC. 🇬🇧⚖️

26/09/2026

🇬🇧 WHO REALLY CONTROLS THE VOTE? 🗳️

What happens when millions of people receive their wages, benefits or essential support directly or indirectly through the state?

And what happens when private-sector voters simply DON’T VOTE?

Our 20 MILLION figure is a hypothetical illustration of scale — not 20 million proven state-dependent voters and certainly not evidence that their votes can be “bought.”

But it raises a legitimate democratic question:

⚠️ Does dependence on public spending influence voting behaviour — and if so, how much?

If roughly 20 million people were compared with the electorate that actually turned out at the last General Election, the scale would be enormous.

Does that make Britain a socialist or communist state? Not by itself.

The bigger questions are:

🗳️ Are elections genuinely competitive and free?
💷 How large should the state become?
🏢 Is the private sector large enough to finance public spending sustainably?
⚖️ Are institutions independent of whichever party governs?
📈 Which balance between markets and government produces sustainable growth and prosperity?
🔍 And should governments of any political colour be scrutinised when expanding state power?

Public-sector workers and benefit recipients do not vote as a single bloc. Receiving public money is not evidence that somebody’s vote has been controlled.

So instead of assuming the answer, ask the question:

🇬🇧 WHAT IS BRITAIN TODAY — A CAPITALIST DEMOCRACY, A SOCIAL DEMOCRACY, OR A STATE BECOMING TOO DEPENDENT ON GOVERNMENT?

And if millions of private-sector voters stay home on election day, who ultimately decides the direction of the country?

PRIVATE-SECTOR VOTERS: YOUR VOTE COUNTS. USE IT. 🗳️

24/09/2026

🇬🇧 WHO GAVE THEM THE MANDATE? FOLLOW THE TIMELINE.

Blair. Brown. May. Starmer. Burnham.

Different Prime Ministers. Different eras. Different parties and circumstances. But decisions on immigration, EU integration, international migration agreements and Britain’s relationship with Europe have repeatedly been made at Westminster — sometimes without the specific issue ever being put directly to voters.

From the Blair-era immigration changes and 2004 EU enlargement, to Brown and the Lisbon Treaty, to May’s government endorsing the UN Global Compact for Migration in 2018, and today’s argument about Britain’s future relationship with the EU.

Critics call it betrayal. Supporters argue governments are elected to make these decisions.

But the question belongs to the electorate:

🗳️ When fundamental decisions change Britain’s borders, sovereignty and relationship with Europe, should the British people get a direct say?

Read the timeline. Check the documents. Decide for yourself.

21/09/2026

A quarter of a million victims and counting…

There’s a striking CORRELATION between GOVERNANCE & GANGS, COMMUNITY, COVER UPS & CULTURE!

The ONLY question left to answer…

Is the United Kingdom the
R@PE CAPITAL OF EUROPE
or
THE CHILD TRAFFICKING CENTRE OF THE ENTIRE WORLD??

**ecapital **egangs

02/09/2026

Daily Mail Daily Mail UK 🇪🇸

30/05/2026

28/05/2026

Lanzarote Cycling
IRONMAN Spain

18/05/2026

🇪🇸 Spain is also done with extreme Socialist Left Wing Policies

09/05/2026

England , Scotland & Wales

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 - 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 - 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

Please stand up - look at how racist we are using the national Flag on this post!