More or Less: Behind the Stats

Episode: Was it easier to deport migrants to France before Brexit?

Date: September 24, 2025
Host: Tim Harford, BBC Radio 4

Brief Overview

This episode of More or Less, hosted by Tim Harford, dives into debated statistics and policy claims surrounding four timely topics:

• Whether deporting migrants to France was easier before Brexit under the Dublin Convention
• The facts and errors about the UK’s ageing population statistics
• Why beef prices have surged far ahead of general inflation
• An investigation into the rise of Americanisms and possible ChatGPT authorship in UK parliamentary speeches

Statistics are carefully dissected with expert guests, myth-busting analysis, and the program's trademark wit.

1. Was It Easier to Deport Migrants to France Before Brexit?

(Main discussion: 01:07–09:15)

Key Points:

• The UK government’s post-Brexit struggle to deport illegal migrants to France has been in the spotlight, with the Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davy claiming it was simpler pre-Brexit due to the Dublin Convention.
• Peter Walsh, Senior Researcher from Oxford’s Migration Observatory, explains the Dublin system’s operation when the UK was part of the EU.

Insights & Data:

• How the Dublin System Worked
  EU members (including pre-Brexit UK) could request asylum seekers be “transferred back” to their first EU country of arrival.

  • Ultimately, the requested country could refuse (“that option was always open to them.” – Peter Walsh, 06:43).

• Actual Numbers and Trends

  • 2008–2015: UK was a net sender (transferred out more than it took in). In 2008, UK transferred out 1,200, received 403 (net 814).
  • 2016–2020: Trend reversed—UK received more than it sent. Numbers were “quite small.”
  • Conversion rates plummeted: 2008—54% of requests to transfer out successful; 2020—only 1% (8,500 requests, ~100 transfers out).

    “In 2020 … the UK made 8,500 [transfer out] requests, but only transferred about 100 people.”
    (Peter Walsh, 05:01)

• Why Did Effectiveness Drop?

  • Possible dysfunction within the Home Office unit overseeing transfers
  • UK’s stronger access to legal challenge for asylum seekers
  • Recalcitrance of first-arrival countries with high asylum numbers

• Very Small Impact Overall

  • From 2008–2020: “UK actually sent out about 2,000 more individuals than it received. But in the grand scheme of things, that’s not very many.”
    (Peter Walsh, 07:10)
  • Example: In 2024, over 108,000 asylum claims. Dublin transfers constituted a “tiny fraction.”

• Deterrent Effect?

  • Very limited. Asylum seekers rarely cited Dublin as a concern before Brexit.
  • Now, the fact that the UK isn’t in the EU’s system is perceived as an advantage by migrants (interviews post-Brexit).

Notable Quotes:

• “So, Sir Ed was not wrong that the government had this tool … But was the Dublin system a powerful tool?”
  (Tim Harford, 03:45)

• “The numbers … don’t sound very big compared to the total volume of asylum seeking.”
  (Tim Harford, 06:55)

• “When we speak with asylum seekers and ask them — why the UK… Dublin was never mentioned in the pre-Brexit period, which is understandable because the numbers are so low.”
  (Peter Walsh, 08:04)

2. UK’s Ageing Population: Sorting Fact from Fiction

(Main discussion: 09:15–16:25)

Main Story:
An incorrect statistic—“by 2040, 40% of the UK population will be over 64”—was erroneously attributed to the Bank of England Governor and picked up by leading papers.

Key Insights:

• Correct Numbers:
  • By 2040, actual ONS estimates show 22.6% will be 65 or over (not 40%).
  • Present level: ~18.9%
  • 40% is a projection for 2121, not 2040.

With: Professor Jennifer Dowd, Demographer, University of Oxford

• Why Is the Population Ageing?

  • Main cause isn’t just people living longer, but lower birth rates and the demographic “bulge” (e.g., post-WWII baby boomers now turning 65).

    “Population aging really reflects changes in how many babies we’re having.”
    (Professor Dowd, 14:18)

• Long-term Outlook:

  • Aging intensity will eventually level out:
    "Eventually things kind of even out … especially if younger generations are more similar in size over time."
    (Jennifer Dowd, 15:27)

Notable Quotes:

• "So the claim 40% of the UK population is going to be 65 or over by 2040. True or false?"

  "False."
  (Jennifer Dowd, 10:40)

• "It's also not that different from the 18.9% that we are around now."
  (Jennifer Dowd, 11:10)

• "2121 is a very long time away."
  (Jennifer Dowd, 13:05)

Timestamps:

• 10:24: Interview with Prof. Jennifer Dowd begins
• 11:00: Correct number for 2040 provided
• 13:05: Discussion of long-range projections

3. Why Is Beef So Expensive Now?

(Main discussion: 16:54–23:29)

Key Points:

• Over the past year, beef prices in UK shops have surged by 25%, far outpacing general inflation (<4%).

With: David Swales, Head of Economics & Analysis, AHDB (Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board)

• What is Happening to Prices?
  • Farmers received ~£5/kg for cattle in January, rising to £7/kg by May 2025 (a 40% increase).
  • Domestic beef supply is down ~4% (Jan–July 2025, year-on-year).
  • Imports can’t fill the gap—supplies are also down in leading exporters like Ireland (down ~4–5%).

Root Causes:

• Reduced Domestic Supply:

  • Dry weather lessened grass growth and slowed production.
  • More fundamentally: phasing out of EU agricultural subsidies post-Brexit (Common Agricultural Policy), with support payments decreasing and to be eliminated in England by 2027.

    “Certainly in England, that policy is probably a little less generous to farmers.”
    (David Swales, 21:56)

• Future Outlook:

  • High prices might incentivize increased beef production, but cattle take two years from birth to steak—so relief is not imminent.

Notable Quotes:

• "When I look at the data … we were having to redraw all of our graphs because the line had gone off the top."
  (David Swales, 19:31)

• "From an animal giving birth to a steak appearing on our shelf is typically about a two-year period."
  (David Swales, 23:06)

Timestamps:

• 18:32: Segment and guest introduction
• 21:56: How subsidies have changed since Brexit

4. Is ChatGPT Writing UK Parliamentary Speeches?

(Main discussion: 23:29–29:39)

Key Points:

• UK MPs are increasingly using the phrase “I rise to speak”—an Americanism.
• Suspicions abound that AI tools (ChatGPT and others) are behind this linguistic shift.

Contributors:

• Lizzie McNeil (More or Less AI correspondent)
• Anthony Cohn (Professor, University of Leeds)
• Zoe Crowther (Politics.co.uk journalist who analyzed parliamentary speech records)

Evidence:

• Usage of “I rise to speak” in Parliament:

  • 2023 (to end August): 131 times
  • 2024 (to end August): 601 times
  • 2022 (same period): 227 times

    “601 times versus 131 times a year ago, that is a very sudden change in linguistic habits.”
    (Tim Harford, 27:09)

• AI “tells”: use of Americanisms, certain buzzwords (“pivotal,” “intricate,” “showcasing,” “realm”) have spiked in scientific and political writing since ChatGPT’s launch.

Possible Causes:

• MPs may be copying each other or reflecting broader societal trend of AI-generated language.
• Staffers and interns under pressure may be using AI tools.

Limits of Detection:

• Almost impossible to conclusively prove a text is AI-written, though sharp shifts in style and vocabulary are “suspicious.”

Notable Quotes:

• “AI has certain tells that can show its metaphorical hand, for example, using Americanisms such as ‘I rise’.”
  (Lizzie McNeil, 25:16)
• “In the case of MPs, I think it probably is [AI-generated]. But you know, would I want to swear in a court of law? That is, no, I wouldn’t.”
  (Anthony Cohn, 29:19)

Timestamps:

• 25:05: Lizzie McNeil explains AI “tells”
• 26:16: Analysis of phrase frequency in Parliament
• 27:59: Comparison to scientific paper trends

Notable Quotes & Moments

| Time | Speaker | Quote | |---------|--------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 02:36 | Sir Ed Davy | "Yeah, it's a disaster, isn't it?" | | 05:01 | Peter Walsh | "In 2020 ... the UK made 8,500 [transfer out] requests, but only transferred about 100 people." | | 10:40 | Jennifer Dowd| "False." (on 40% of UK over 65 by 2040) | | 11:00 | Jennifer Dowd| "ONS estimates are that 22.6% of the UK population will be 65 or over in the year 2040." | | 19:31 | David Swales | "We were having to redraw all of our graphs because the line had gone off the top." | | 27:09 | Tim Harford | "601 times versus 131 times a year ago, that is a very sudden change in linguistic habits." | | 29:19 | Anthony Cohn | "In the MP case it probably is [AI-generated]. But ... would I want to swear in a court of law? No." |

Useful for Those Who Haven’t Listened

This episode separates fact from myth in the heated debate over immigration returns, corrects media misstatements on demography, illuminates the beef price squeeze, and playfully but seriously explores how AI is changing even the language of Parliament. With robust data, impartial guests, punchy quotes, and trademark More or Less clarity, it is a model for anyone seeking to understand UK policy through numbers.

[End of summary]