TikTok video shows migrant's 'step-by-step guide' to cross the Channel
There, he told followers he was in 'the best place' while broadcasting from his free accommodation near Heathrow Airport. Alexandra left Calais at around 4am on Saturday, The Sun reported. He first shared a 13-second clip from the middle of the Channel, which showed a French lifeboat alongside which was also full of migrants making the dangerous crossing. In a second clip, he shared a video of himself grinning in an orange jacket and pointing to the sky.
He then showed the boat as it was surrounded by huge freight ships, set to the theme tune of US drama Prison Break. It comes as the number of small-boat migrants reaching Britain under Labour passed 50,000. Keir Starmer was slammed for 'incompetence' over the handling of the Channel crisis, with the soaring figure a clear indication of the lack of a plan since he axed the Tories' Rwanda deportation scheme on his first day in power. Former Labour home secretary Jacqui Smith blamed the Tories, claiming: 'What is happening is the result of the last government.'
Yesterday, Reform Leader Nigel Farage criticised the Prime Minister on social media. He wrote: 'As I predicted 5 years ago, unless we deport illegal migrants the invasion will be huge. 50,000 since our weak Prime Minister took office and there is no sign of it stopping.'
Alexandra was one of more than 400 arrivals on Saturday and was taken in by Border Force officials to be processed in Kent. He was then taken to the four-star Crowne Plaza Hotel near Heathrow, where he started live streaming to his followers. In the stream, he gave viewers a tour of his room, with two single beds and an en suite bathroom. He said: 'This is dedicated to those haters who were happy thinking we either drowned or ended up dead.' Alexandra later claimed the boat he illegally travelled on began to deflate halfway through the journey and would have sank if Border Force officials had not rescued them.
He said: 'It was dangerous. Our boat sank. It was punctured. The water came from the inside of the boat. On the other side, three people pumped the water. If the British boats hadn't come in an hour, we would have been in trouble.' Despite nearly facing serious danger, he encouraged others to pay the people-smugglers to risk the dangerous crossing. He said: 'I risked my life, I spent my money, I came. Your country is not your mother. Those who want to come, this is the best place. Don't be stingy. Your country is not your father, that you are so stingy. Live your life. Tell your four friends to come. Why are you so stingy? Being stingy is not good for God. You see, I risked my life! Why don't you come? My wish was to come to this hotel and live. I came here just for this.'
He claimed that after being told about the risk of deportation, he told officials 'I will commit [self-murder]', The Sun reported. Alexandra finished his video by spinning on his chair and shouting 'welcome to London'. The Government's 'returns deal' with France appears to have done little to deter those determined to get to Britain, with the latest total including more than 1,500 arrivals in the seven days since the 'one in, one out' scheme launched. Official figures revealed there were 474 arrivals on Monday alone, bringing the total since the general election on July 4 last year to 50,271, despite the Prime Minister's promise to 'smash the gangs' behind the trafficking trade. The milestone was passed seven months earlier than under his Conservative predecessor, Rishi Sunak.
Baroness Smith – who is now an education, women and equalities minister under Sir Keir – said: 'It is a completely legitimate claim to say that what is happening is the result of the last government that chose to focus on gimmicks with the Rwanda scheme.' Asked if the crossings were not Labour's fault, she insisted that the Government was taking responsibility now, but added: 'I don't believe it is our fault that it was enabled to take root in the way in which it has done by a government who failed to do what was necessary at that point. The last government enabled this hideous criminal activity to really get its roots into Europe. There was a lengthy period at the time in which the criminal gangs... behind this had the opportunity to have this operation set up and really embedded. And that's the task that this Government now has – to deconstruct that.'
However, her attempt to evade responsibility was met with incredulity. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'The Government has confirmed 50,000 illegal immigrants have crossed the Channel in Labour's short time in power – the worst crisis in our history. 'Labour has surrendered our borders, and the consequences are being felt in our communities, from rising crime to shocking cases of [expletive] and sexual assault by recent arrivals. Labour has scrapped Conservative deterrents and created the conditions for chaos, leaving the British people to foot the bill.' Labour scrapped the Tories' Rwanda asylum deal – designed to deter migrants from crossing – as one of its first acts, pledging instead to 'smash the gangs' by boosting law enforcement.
However, small boat numbers are soaring, with 27,029 arrivals this year, up by 47 per cent on the same point last year and 67 per cent on the same point in 2023. Since the start of the crisis in 2018, 178,167 migrants have reached Britain, with only about four per cent of them removed. A Home Office spokesperson told The Sun it is unacceptable 'to promote the criminal services of people-traffickers or for social media companies to allow it'. The Home Office has been contacted for further comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
30 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Chinese wind farm owner to build 900ft turbines off coast of Scotland
A Chinese state-owned company is to install Britain's largest wind turbines after plans were revealed for dozens of 900ft structures off the Scottish coast. SDIC Power, which is based in Beijing, is planning to install the machines through its European subsidiary Red Rock Renewables at the proposed Inch Cape Wind Farm. It has joined with the Irish electricity company ESB Engery to pursue the venture. Once complete, the site will be one of the UK's largest and most visible, lying just 11 miles off the coast of Angus, where it will be clearly visible from tourist towns like Arbroath and St Andrews. It will also be among the most controversial – the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) has warned that it will threaten UK populations of puffins, northern gannets, black-legged kittiwakes, guillemots and razorbills. Details of the scheme, which was originally planned with smaller machines, emerged with the latest financial results from Danish turbine manufacturer Vestas, which is building the giant new turbines. The turbines will measure 919ft from base to blade tip – five to six times taller than Nelson's Column. It means they will be visible across a radius of more than 35 miles, including from St Andrews, whose 'Old Course' is renowned as the home of golf. Donald Trump, who has named the Old Course as amongst his five favourite courses in the world, has long protested at the expansion of wind farms along Scotland's east coast, including one built just offshore from his Aberdeen links. John Constable, director of the UK charity Renewable Energy Foundation, said: 'The sheer gargantuan scale of offshore wind projects such as Inch Cape is a good index of their underlying risk, which is very large indeed. 'However, that risk is not being taken by the overseas investors, but has been loaded onto UK electricity consumers. A future administration will have to unwind these contracts, however embarrassing and painful that might be.' Much of the UK profits will come from the Government's lucrative Contracts for Difference, which was awarded to Inchcape Offshore Power, the subsidiary set up by Red Rock and ESB. These will guarantee its investors, including the Chinese government-owned SDIC, a minimum price of up to £78 per megawatt hour for the power generated Red Rock Renewables is based in Edinburgh, but its website says that it is a subsidiary of SDIC Power Holdings, which is owned by China's State Development and Investment Corporation, which is, in turn, owned by the Chinese government. Inchcape Power – the Red Rock and ESB venture – confirmed it had just installed the offshore substation and foundations for the 72 turbines it will install over the coming months. Xiaomeng Chen, the chief executive of Red Rock, said that the wind farm would generate almost five terawatt hours of energy each year or enough to power half the homes in Scotland. He said: 'It's fantastic to see the project making such strong progress.' However, a spokesman for the National Trust for Scotland said it had already raised concerns about the Inch Cape, saying it could kill 'thousands of seabirds every year'. 'The Trust's St Abb's Head National Nature Reserve was predicted to be affected by these windfarms, with already vulnerable populations of kittiwakes and razorbills at risk of additional mortality,' the Trust said. The Scottish Fishermen's Federation also objects to the windfarm, partly because fishing boats will be effectively excluded from a prime fishing ground, but also over fears that the damage done to the seabed would impact fish stocks. Elspeth Macdonald, the chief executive of the federation, said: 'Our concern is about their impact on fishermen's livelihoods, which we think count for more than someone feeling upset about their view.' An RSPB Scotland spokesperson said: 'RSPB Scotland considered that the Inch Cape project, in combination with other offshore wind farms, is predicted to have substantial negative impacts on protected seabird populations, in particular Gannets and Kittiwakes.'
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Jimmy Kimmel says he got Italian citizenship amid Trump presidency
"A lot of people I know are thinking about where they can get citizenship," Silverman said. Kimmel replied, "I did get Italian citizenship." 'The personal is political': Rosie O'Donnell moves to Ireland amid Trump presidency The "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" host has long been an adversary of the president's policies. Trump, for his part, has openly criticized Kimmel's career over the years. USA TODAY has reached out to Kimmel's reps for comment. Kimmel says 'what's going on' is 'unbelievable' Kimmel didn't specifically cite Trump's presidency for his new Italian citizenship, but he and Silverman did allude to the current state of American politics. "What's going on is as bad as you thought it was going to be," Kimmel said, to which Silverman replied, "Way worse." "It's so much worse. It's just unbelievable," Kimmel said. "Like I feel like it's probably even worse than he would like it to be." Silverman added, "Every once in a while I'll Google Trump regrets or MAGA regrets." The comedians went on to elaborate on the political climate, with Kimmel mentioning Joe Rogan and other Trump supporters who have questioned the administration's policies. Kimmel is latest comedian to consider overseas move If Kimmel opts to move abroad, he wouldn't be the first comedian to do so amid Trump's presidency. Rosie O'Donnell, who notably has a long-standing feud with the president, moved to Ireland in January as Trump entered office. She said in a TikTok video in March that she is relieved not to be "singled out by the President of the United States." "I feel healthier (and) I'm sleeping better without the stress and anxiety over what was happening politically in the country," O'Donnell said. Similarly, Ellen DeGeneres and wife Portia de Rossi also headed across the pond in 2024 and haven't been back to the United States since. "We got here the day before the election and woke up to lots of texts from our friends with crying emojis, and I was like, '(Trump) got in,'" DeGeneres said during an event in South West England on July 20. "And we're like, 'We're staying here.'" Melina Khan is a national trending reporter for USA TODAY. She can be reached at
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
How Reeves's inheritance tax changes will affect families
The Autumn Budget might be two months away, but speculation over which taxes the Chancellor will increase has already begun. Rachel Reeves is constrained by her manifesto pledges to keep income tax, VAT and National Insurance at the same level, despite calls to 'substantially' increase taxes. What inheritance tax do people pay now? IHT has historically only affected the very wealthy. At the moment, just 4 per cent of estates pay it. That is set to rise because house prices are increasing, while the threshold over which people pay inheritance tax stays the same. IHT being levied on private pensions left to descendants from 2027 will drive a further increase. Since 2009, an individual has needed to be worth £325,000 if you are single, or £650,000 if married or in a civil partnership, for beneficiaries to incur any death duties. This allowance is known as the nil-rate band. If you are married, own a property and leave your main home to direct descendants (children or grandchildren) you each get a further £175,000 allowance, known as the residence nil rate band. Collectively, it means a couple that meet this criteria could pass on £1million tax-free. The £325,000 nil rate band has been unchanged for 16 years, which means that rising property prices have dragged more people into paying IHT. Had it risen in line with inflation, it would be £585,996, meaning fewer people would be affected. How gifting can reduce inheritance tax There are some ways to minimise the amount of IHT paid, by gifting money to beneficiaries while you are still alive. You can gift £3,000 a year, and unlimited small gifts of up to £250, free from tax. However, if you die less than seven years after making the gift then you will start to pay IHT. This is levied on a sliding scale, from 8 per cent if gifts were made 6-7 years before death, to 40 per cent, if made within a year. This rule is designed to stop people making large gifts to family just before they die, in a bid to avoid IHT. Like the nil rate band, the gifting allowance has not changed since its introduction in 1986. If it had risen in line with inflation, it would be quadruple its current level at £12,297. As more people gift cash or assets to beneficiaries, they are more likely to fall foul of the rules. Why is Reeves looking at the gifting rules? Financial advisers tell This Is Money there has been a significant behaviour shift among their clients. More individuals are gifting their money to children and grandchildren to minimise their inheritance tax burden ahead of the pension changes in 2027. However, figures show that most people are not paying tax on their gifts, even if the giver has died within seven years. This is because you can actually gift far more than the £3,000 gifting allowance, so long as it doesn't breach the £325,000 nil rate band. These gifts will form part of your estate - but if it is below that threshold, you still won't pay tax. For example, if you have very few assets and you gift £10,000, and remain within the nil rate band, your estate will not pay tax on it. It means that it's very difficult to know how many people are gifting money tax-free, and likely why Reeves is eyeing changes to the rules. How much does the Treasury make from tax on gifts? A Freedom of Information request by This Is Money shows the number of families that are taxed on gifting was relatively low in the three years to 2021-22, the latest figures available. The figures have remained stable, with around 1,000 families being stung by IHT on their gifts each year, but some advisers suspect this doesn't paint the full picture. 'There will be people who gift and die within 7 years and then it's clawed back from the nil rate band, which don't appear in the figures,' says Lisa Caplan, director of advice and guidance at Charles Stanley. Shaun Moore, tax and financial planning expert at Quilter, also suspects 'people are gifting within the allowances and not suffering tax on the gifts.' For example, a gift of £250,000 wouldn't appear in the gifting table, but the estate will pay the tax because they've lost that amount from the nil rate band. Caplan predicts that the number of people who fall into the 'gfiting trap' will be higher as more people take out their tax-free cash early and start the seven-year clock. But this may not go far enough for Reeves, who needs to plug a £40billion black hole. What could Rachel Reeves change? Reeves is reportedly looking at a lifetime gifting allowance to minimise the amount people can pass on to their beneficiaries without incurring tax. The Guardian reported that the Treasury is mulling a lifetime cap to limit the amount of money or value of assets an individual can give away. This would be an additional administrative burden and mean HM Revenue & Customs would have to hold long-term records of gifts over decades. Rachel Griffin, chartered financial planner at Quilter says a cap 'might encourage people to make large gifts earlier in life to use up their allowance, potentially moving significant assets out of their control before they are financially ready.' Gianpaolo Mantini, chartered financial planner at Saltus, thinks Reeves could introduce lifetime capital transfer charges, as is already the case with trusts. 'They might do something like the French system where you can give a certain amount within a 15 year period [but] I think it would be very difficult logistically.' Another option for Reeves is to extend the seven-year rule to 10 years, although this would fly in the face of the reduction to five years, as first explored by the now-defunct Office for Tax Simplification. This is likely to receive significant backlash and only encourage people to gift earlier before they can afford to do so, experts say. Instead, it is more likely that the Treasury, which the Guardian reports is reviewing taper relief rules, removes the taper entirely. Taper relief is widely misunderstood and is generally only available to small numbers of the very wealthiest. Individuals only get taper relief if the value of the gift takes you above the nil rate band of £325,000. So if you gave someone £100,000 and then you died within 7 years, all that has done is reduce the available nil rate band, and the taper relief would not apply. As such, taper relief tends only to benefit the very wealthy, according to advisers. This could be a more palatable way for Reeves to change IHT rules for the wealthy, without imposing a wealth tax. One of Reeves' other options is to hand over more powers to HMRC and the Probate Office to ensure people are properly reporting gifts. 'I suspect there's a bit of underreporting [of gifts],' says Mantini. 'The solicitor doing probate might not know of any gifts made within seven years unless they go through bank records to see large sums given out. 'Unless the family or beneficiary declares it to the executor might not have any realistic way of knowing. 'A lot of gifts are small in nature and the larger ones might not always be fully declared.' This would mean more investment in public services at a time when the public purse is stretched as is, and it would prove difficult to establish whether a large sum is a gift or payment. Finally, Reeves could change capital gains tax (CGT) rules - the tax people pay when they make a profit on selling assets such as a house or shares. Currently, when you inherit assets the CGT slate is wiped clean and the base cost of is reset at the value at the date of death. So if someone inherited their parents' house, then sold it straight away, capital gains tax would only be payable on any profit they made above the value of the property when they inherited it - likely nothing. Reeves could change this, so families may have to pay tax on the entire 'profit' made by the child. It could make some families pay the double hit of CGT - up to 24 per cent - and IHT at 40 per cent. What it means for you Any changes to the IHT rules are intended to bring more people into the tax net. A lifetime gifting cap would mark a significant departure from the way IHT has historically been imposed, and advisers say it would mark a huge change to the way families pass on wealth. 'Such a cap would bring more gifts into scope for IHT and could capture not just large transfers designed to reduce tax bills but also modest, routine support between family members,' says Griffin. Ingrid McCleaver, partner at DMH Stallard, says a lifetime cap could spell the end of the 'bank of mum and dad', with children who receive a house deposit potentially facing an IHT bill. 'Not only are parents that work hard and save having to pay income tax on their salaries and savings, they may after the next budget suffer an additional tax on death, on amounts they have not had the benefit of for possibly years,' she says. Despite possible changes to how IHT is imposed, experts advise not to make drastic changes. Daniel Hough, wealth manager at RBC Brewin Dolphin says: 'There is a fine line between passing down wealth as efficiently as possible and enjoying a comfortable retirement. There are important discussions you need to have about the sustainability of your retirement pot and that may require scaling back ambitions – or you may find that you have to live with the consequences of your pension running out in your 80s or 90s.'
