Edwina Currie’s Brothel Remark Reveals Britain’s Migration Delusion

Former Conservative health minister Edwina Currie is no stranger to controversy. In the 1990s, revelations about the junior minister’s affair with Prime Minister John Major were part of the association with sleaze that led to the party’s seismic defeat in 1997. Yet what she said last Thursday has shocked many.

Clips uploaded to X showed part of a discussion involving her on Times Radio, the successful centrist broadcasting element of The Times. In it, she suggested that asylum seekers should be given access to brothels.

The comment was sparked by the government's plans to house 1,250 male asylum seekers at a former military site near the small Oxfordshire village of Piddington. That has seen locals protest about the impact on their picturesque home.

Currie’s remark was driven by practicality. There have been multiple high-profile cases involving asylum seekers raping or sexually assaulting British women. Some have involved gang rape. Her implication appears to be that the baser urges of these men should be met by paid professionals, rather than having them target women instead.

The Cultural Challenge of Integration

For a young man without much of a future at home, the attraction of coming to Europe, and particularly Britain, is not difficult to understand. Youth unemployment is around 22% on average across North Africa and the Middle East. There is a lack of economic prospects and little hope in many of the countries of origin. Europe, meanwhile, offers safety, welfare, opportunity and the possibility of building an entirely different life.

Once in Britain, they will receive new clothes and a phone. Their accommodation and food are paid for. In many cases, they have been hosted in hotels where they can enjoy buffets, games of pool and pleasures that guests usually have to pay for. If their asylum claim is approved, then they can work, and even if it is refused, they will almost certainly not be deported and can work illegally. Whether legally or not, they will likely earn more than at home.

There is more, however. For some, the attraction is also access to women in the West.

Western Europe is a culture shock to the many asylum seekers who come from Islamic countries or the more conservative parts of the world. Women in the West can walk the streets without male escorts. They can wear whatever clothes they want, including provocative ones. They can dance and drink and have sex outside marriage. Or they can choose not to.

To Europeans, many of these freedoms seem so ordinary that they are barely noticed. But they depend on widespread acceptance of certain cultural norms, not least that sexual freedom requires both parties to consent. A woman can wear what she wants and flirt with whom she wants without that meaning that she is going to sleep with someone.

The asylum seekers convicted in Britain of rape often preyed on young women who were on nights out and intoxicated. Some will have seen that as a way to find easy prey. Others may have felt that women who acted in such a way were without honor and therefore could legitimately be targeted.

What Newcomers Owe Their Host Society

It would be foolish to think that cultural attitudes disappear at the border. Migrants and even tourists are used to learning about the countries that host them so they can make sure they behave appropriately. The same is expected of migrants, including asylum seekers, who move to the West. Many countries offer courses on integration that are supposed to facilitate exactly this.

Instead of that, Currie's comments seem to suggest that asylum seekers cannot be expected to control their behavior. It seems unlikely that this will make them a good fit for Western society even if their asylum claims are accepted.

It also says something about how the liberal establishment sees women. In order to protect one group of women, they suggest sacrificing another. Prostitution is harsh work that borders on the criminal even in countries where it is legal. It involves women selling their bodies in return for money, in this case from the taxpayer. Such an instrumental view leaves little room for human dignity.

If commentators think that placing 1,250 asylum seekers next to a village of 350 people is likely to lead to bad behavior, then that should bring into question the asylum system which produced such a situation.

Western nations already have the most generous asylum laws in the world. Those seeking refuge can expect to be fed, housed and clothed. That is part of the attraction for many of those coming, who will enjoy a higher and more comfortable standard of living than at home. Now some think sex should be offered as well.

It is time for integration to stop being a list of things Britain or any European nation owes new arrivals and instead become a conversation about what newcomers owe those taking them in. It should also mean deporting those who abuse the sanctuary they are offered, without remorse.