Migrants land on Algarve beach… and are immediately detained & ordered to be deported in WEEKS in stark contrast to UK
BOOTED OUT Migrants land on Algarve beach… and are immediately detained & ordered to be deported in WEEKS in stark contrast to UK
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
DOZENS of migrants landed at an Algarve beach - but were immediately detained and ordered to return in a stark contrast to the UK under Labour.
A wooden boat, carrying 38 people including seven children, arrived on Friday evening near the town of Vila do Bispo, Portuguese authorities said.
Sign up for Scottish Sun
newsletter
Sign up
6
Dozens of migrants arrived at an Algarve beach
Credit: X
6
GNR rescues 38 migrants aboard a vessel with seven minors on board
Credit: Instagram/@gnr_guardanacionalrepublicana
6
They were quickly rounded up by cops near Burgau, a part of the Algarve coast popular with tourists
Credit: Instagram/@gnr_guardanacionalrepublicana
6
The judge ordered that they will face forceful deportation if they fail to board flights back home
Credit: Instagram/@gnr_guardanacionalrepublicana
Footage showed the migrants from Morocco walking out of the boat and getting on the beach.
Beachgoers as well as locals watched in surprise as the dehydrated and hungry migrants reached the shore.
However, they were quickly rounded up by cops near Burgau, a part of the Algarve coast popular with tourists.
It comes as small boat crossings have surged past 50,000 - one illegal migrant every 11 minutes - under Labour.
read more in migration
ASYLUM PERKS Small boat migrants given taxpayer-funded days out including £1 Prem tickets
Three of the children, aged 12 months, eight and ten, were taken to a paediatric emergency clinic in Faro.
A few more men were taken to a hospital in Portimão. They were all soon discharged.
One of the Moroccan nationals on the boat claimed that four people had died during their five days at sea in the Atlantic Ocean, Daily Mail reports.
Authorities said: "The migrants were in a debilitated state and in need of medical care, showing signs of dehydration and hypothermia."
They were given food kits containing biscuits, juice, milk, bread and daily needs products.
Public broadcaster RTP reported that the vessel had departed from Morocco and spent six days at sea before reaching Portugal.
However, Portuguese authorities wasted no time in taking action against the migrants under their no-nonsense policy on illegal immigration.
Out of the 38 people, 31 were taken to a court on the very next day, where a judge gave them 20 days to voluntarily return to Morocco.
The judge ordered that they will face forceful deportation if they fail to board flights back home.
Small boat crossings under Labour are on brink of hitting 50,000 - one illegal migrant every 11 mins since the election
Portugal's Navy said Saturday it has increased patrols along the country's southern coast following the arrival of the migrant boat.
It is a stark contrast to the UK, where Sir Keir Starmer is facing enormous pressure to tackle illegal immigration in Britain.
Home Office statistics show 49,797 have crossed the Channel since July 5 2024, when Sir Keir Starmer took charge with a promise to get a grip on our borders.
That is expected to hit 50,000 as soon as today after more boatloads were picked up in the shipping lanes yesterday.
Dozens of illegal migrants — who mainly appeared to be young men — were seen disembarking Border Force cutters at Dover.
FRENCH STOP JUST 15%
EXCLUSIVE by Julia Atherley, Home Affairs Correspondent
FRENCH police stopped just 15 per cent of small boat crossings last week despite a landmark treaty.
Home Office data shows 227 of 1,486 migrants were prevented from coming to the UK.
Around 730 of the 1,200 French officers patrolling its northern border are paid for by UK taxpayers.
Labour's new 'one-in, one-out' deal — signed by Sir Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron — also came into force last week.
The Government has so far refused to release the number of people detained, and none have yet been sent back to France.
Another 435 people — mainly young men — were picked up by Border Force on Saturday.
Smugglers are expected to cash in on good weather by sending thousands more across the Channel in the coming week.
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said the new deal 'will have no deterrent effect whatsoever'.
A Home Office spokesman said a 'serious plan' is in place to take down people-smuggling gangs.
The 50,000 arrivals are the equivalent of a population the size of Durham, with the majority in taxpayer-funded accommodation.
It comes as No10 denied its flagship plan to 'smash the gangs' had flopped.
The PM's spokesman said: 'There's clearly much more to do. These gangs had a six-year head start to establish their networks.'
From election day to the end of 2024, 23,242 migrants arrived to enjoy bed and board on the taxpayer.
In 2025 — so far — another 21,117 have crossed, up a staggering 56 per cent compared to 2024 and a shocking 75 per cent higher than in 2023.
Labour has vowed to end the use of asylum hotels by the 2029 election, in part by moving migrants to cheaper forms of taxpayer-funded accommodation.
But just days ago, Sir Keir sparked uproar by claiming there was plenty of spare housing for both illegal migrants and homeless Brits.
6
Portugal's Navy said Saturday it has increased patrols along the country's southern coast following the arrival of the migrant boat
Credit: Instagram/@gnr_guardanacionalrepublicana
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Europe speaks with Donald Trump after Ukraine ceasefire talks
The Prime Minister joined a call with Trump and Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy, alongside leaders from Italy, France, Finland, Germany and Poland, as well as Nato's Mark Rutte, and Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission KEIR Starmer has spoken with Donald Trump after the US president's summit with Vladimir Putin ended without a deal to stop the war in Ukraine . Trump did not secure a deal to end the conflict in Ukraine after nearly three hours of talks with his Russian counterpart at a military base in Anchorage, Alaska. The highly anticipated summit in Alaska yielded no agreement to resolve or pause Russia's war in Ukraine, although both Trump and Putin described the talks as productive before heading home. After the negotiations, which took place alongside senior officials, the two presidents refused to answer questions from reporters. READ MORE: Labour MP resigns as trade envoy over northern Cyprus visit During a brief appearance before the media following the nearly three-hour meeting in Alaska, the two leaders said they had made progress on unspecified issues. But they offered no details and took no questions. Trump also did not take questions when he landed in the United States at Joint Base Andrews. During his presidential campaign and upon taking office, Trump had vowed to quickly end the war in Ukraine that began with Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022 but has thus far failed to deliver on that promise. Starmer is due to speak again with European leaders this morning. Axios reporter Barak Ravid said, citing a source, that Trump spoke for more than an hour and a half with Zelenskiy and European leaders. Zelenskiy later said he would travel to Washington on Monday.
Spectator
3 hours ago
- Spectator
Tories split on Ricky Jones' verdict
The decision to clear Ricky Jones of encouraging violent disorder has not gone down well with many senior politicians. Footage of the suspended Labour councillor went viral last August after he suggested that far-right protesters should have their throats slit. Jones, 58, drew his finger across his throat and called demonstrators 'disgusting Nazi fascists'. On Friday, jurors found him not guilty after just half an hour of deliberations. Many were quick to contrast it to the Lucy Connolly case, whereby the wife of a Tory politician was jailed for 31 months during the Southport riots after writing 'set fire to all the… hotels [housing asylum seekers]… for all I care'. Some senior Conservatives certainly see it this way. Chris Philp, the Shadow Home Secretary, made that comparison explicit, writing that 'the development of two tier justice is becoming increasingly alarming.' He added that ministers 'must come forward with plans to ensure justice is handed out equally, regardless of the background or views of the perpetrator' but 'this Labour government seems to be quite happy with two tier justice'. His colleague James Cleverly, the Housing spokesman, called the verdict 'unacceptable', writing on X that 'decisions like this are adding to the anger that people feel and amplifying the belief that there isn't a dispassionate criminal justice system'. Clearly, this decision is a controversial one. But there is a crucial difference between the Jones trial and the punishment meted out to Lucy Connolly: she pleaded guilty so she did not receive a jury trial. Had she done so, she might well have been acquitted. Take the case of former Royal Marine Jamie Michael. Charged with stirring up racial hatred after Southport, he was acquitted by his jury after just 17 minutes. It was only five weeks' ago that Robert Jenrick was leading a big campaign against proposals to limit jury trials. For some of his fellow Tories to now rush to condemn them, off the back of one verdict, is an overreaction, given the essential pressure valve they function. All this matters because judicial reform is likely to be a cornerstone of the next government of the right. Kemi Badenoch is reviewing how Britain to leave the European Court of Human Rights; others want her to go much further. The last Tory administration found itself fighting endless battles in the courts, in a fruitless bid to halt illegal migration. Picking the right battles over the right principles is essential if the next government is to avoid repeating that fate.
Wales Online
3 hours ago
- Wales Online
Could Labour ban VPNs after users dodge online protection laws?
Could Labour ban VPNs after users dodge online protection laws? Some internet users have raised concerns that stricter online safety laws could include VPNs in the future Some internet ueers are concerned their VPNs are under threat (Image: Getty Images) Since Labour introduced new age verifcation methods as part of the Online Safety Act, VPNs have seen an uptick in popularity. Virtual Private Networks help to obscure someone's IP address and can trick a website into thinking someone is connecting from another country. In practice, this allows users to dodge age verification checks from websites that require them under the new laws. However, with the government pushing the controversial rules on sites and emphasising its necessity in protecting children from harm online, many are concerned that this relatively easy way of skirting the checks could be banned. One concerned user on Reddit raised this question and asked whether the government could actually ban VPNs. Difficulties faced in banning VPNs User GenericUser104 wrote in the r/homelab subreddit:"I've recently started using a VPN again. I used one a while back to sail the seas, and now I'm using Proton to get around the Online Safety Act in the UK. Now there's talk of them banning VPNs too. Surely this isn't something they can do—and if it is, how would I put things in place so it won't affect me?" In response, another user highlighted how it would be technically very difficult for the government to implement a ban on VPNs due to their extensive use in business settings as well as person. User hk135 said: "VPN's are used extensively in the Corporate world for remote working, this is where they originated as a means to securely connect to the network at Work or interconnect various offices and sites. "Blanket banning VPN's is a non-starter for corporate reasons. Not just this but also depending on how you define a VPN, if it is encapsulating traffic in an encrypted tunnel, then SSL in general would be covered. Article continues below "What about encrypted connections to Proxy servers, that would redirect traffic as well. The logistics of banning VPNs or even anything that hides (intentional or not) the source IP address is unworkable, it would make any kind of security on the internet illegal." Overseas restrictions on VPNs However, some other users pointed out that other countries have already placed bans and restriction on using VPNs at home. For example, citizens in China are only allowed to use certain VPNs that have been approved by the government. Meanwhile, the United Arab Emirates also has strict laws against using VPNs to access restricted content. Certain forms of restricted content can include calling services like WhatsApp. Similarly, user theantnest claimed: "As somebody who lived and worked in Dubai for a number of years, I can tell you that banning VPNs is totally possible. In the UAE every VPN website is blocked, it just won't load. And then they use deep packet inspection to detect VPN use and then throttle the traffic. "This even works on private VPNs like shoving a raspberry Pi running OpenVPN onto the network at your grandmothers house. The one caveat is that the UAE only has 2 ISPs that are both government owned. For it to work in the UK they would need to legislate that all ISPs must block VPN traffic by law." Does the government plan on banning VPNs? While concerns are being raised over a potential ban on VPNs, there is currently no indication from the government or other official bodies of this being put in place. In fact, the Science Secretary Peter Kyle told Sky News last month that he acknowledged VPN use was on the rise but stressed "the vast majority of adults" in the UK were following the rules. At the time, he said no plans were in place to ban VPNs, but added that he was looking "very closely" at how they are being used. He noted that "very few children" were actively looking for harmful content online and that the issue surrounding the law was that "harmful content comes and finds them". Melanie Dawes, the head of Ofcom, told MPs in May that people would use VPNs to get around the restrictions. 'A very concerted 17-year-old who really wants to use a VPN to access a site they shouldn't may well be able to,' she said. 'Individual users can use VPNs. Nothing in the Act blocks it. Furthermore, a spokesperson for the Age Verification Providers Association said that good quality VPNs provide a more secure way to connect to the internet. They added that AVPF does not support a ban on VPNs. Article continues below On its own website AVPF highlighted that digital services that want to remain compliant with the rules could detect VPN use, asses risk through behavioural cues, and flag users the option to verify their age or prove their location. A Government spokesperson said: "The Online Safety Act places no curbs whatsoever on what adults can say, see or access on the internet, unless it is something that would already be illegal, offline. "However, we make no apology for holding platforms to account, to ensure they take steps to prevent children from bypassing safety protections. This includes not encouraging content that promotes VPNs or other workarounds, when they are aimed specifically aimed at young users. More broadly, there are a range of legitimate reasons why users might use VPNs which do not cut across children's safety online."
