Hapless French cops get worse at preventing small boats from crossing Channel as they make mockery of £480m deal with UK
HAPLESS French cops are getting even worse at preventing small boats crossing the Channel — despite demanding more money from British taxpayers.
Police in Calais are making a mockery of the current £480million deal with the UK by stopping a lower proportion of illegal migrants this year, shock figures show.
6
6
6
It comes the day after The Sun told how officers refused to get their feet wet as an asylum seeker family struggled in water trying to reach a dinghy off Gravelines.
Analysis of Home Office data, which details how many migrants France claims to have prevented from making the journey, reveals the three-year cooperation agreement has changed nothing.
Since May 2024, there have been only two months in which French cops have stopped more migrants than the number arriving in the UK — last August and this January.
Our research also found that in March, for every migrant caught or made to turn back, 2.36 were picked up by the UK Border Force.
During seven days in late April, 1,312 migrants arrived, yet only 303 were stopped — a ratio of more than four to one.
Overall, three of the French police's five least effective weeks have come since the start of 2025.
Former Tory security minister Sir John Hayes yesterday said: 'These figures reveal what most people suspected — the French are half-hearted about what we're paying for them to do.
'Frankly, they've got enough people and resources to puncture every dinghy before it sets off. They should be doing all they can to stop these boats launching, not just standing around.'
Downing Street admitted there was 'more to do' in stopping small boat crossings.
But defending the France deal, Sir Keir Starmer's spokesman said: 'We have a stronger relationship with the French government. Ever closer cooperation is already bearing fruit but we do know that we need to go further and faster.'
France counts arrests, dinghy captures, and finds of smugglers' gear like boats and life vests as 'preventions'.
Scores of migrants board overloaded dinghies to make dangerous Channel crossing to UK - as French cops watch on
It is set to change the law to allow 'taxi boat' interceptions at sea — but could demand more cash for a new elite police squad.
However, militant police unions are blocking the measure and are instead instructing members to adhere to current guidelines that mean officers must stand back as soon as dinghies are in the water.
It costs £41,000 a year for the UK to house and feed each illegal immigrant in one of 210 hotels or other private accommodation.
6
6
6
Had France stopped as many people as had arrived this year, 2,905 fewer migrants would have entered Britain between January and the end of May.
That would have saved taxpayers at least £119million.
Last week, The Sun revealed Britain's annual bill to keep migrants in hotels and look after them totals £4.7billion. That is the equivalent of every penny of tax from 582,000 workers, or all the workers in Manchester.
More than 15,000 people have crossed so far in 2025 — up 42 per cent on this time year.
The Home Office was approached for comment.
BOUNCE CHECKS
By Martina Bet
REFORM UK claims taxpayers' cash is being 'explosively' blown on council waste — including trampolining for asylum seekers.
Zia Yusuf recently stepped down as the party's chairman but has returned to lead its newly launched 'Doge team' — inspired by Donald Trump's Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency in the US.
He told TalkTV: 'Some explosive things we've found councils spending money on. You can try taking asylum seekers and illegal migrants trampolining as an example.'
Mr Yusuf last month said Reform could take the Government to court to prevent migrants being housed in areas where it now controls the local councils.
And asked if the party's policy was to house migrants in tents, Mr Yusuf told the BBC: 'That's what France does.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
15 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Spending billions on unclean, risky energy? What a nuclear waste
Rolls-Royce pressurised water reactors have powered British nuclear subs since 1966, but small modular reactors (SMRs) aren't yet proven at scale anywhere on land (Rolls-Royce named winning bidder for UK small nuclear reactors, 10 June). Only three are operating worldwide: two in Russia, one in China. Argentina is constructing the world's fourth; is Labour simply keen to keep up with historical geopolitical rivals (Sizewell C power station to be built as part of UK's £14bn nuclear investment, 10 June)? The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) reported actual cost overruns of 300% to 700% for all four projects. Rolls-Royce claims costs of £35 to £50 per MWh; so should we triple this? The government says the SMR project would create 3,000 new low-carbon British jobs, but at what cost? The energy secretary, Ed Miliband, can't know the true costs yet, and three reactors doesn't scream 'economies of scale'. Yet £2.5bn is already 10 times more than Great British Energy has invested into simple, cheap rooftop solar, which democratises energy savings. The true cost of renewables must consider intermittency and balancing costs, but why not invest more in flexibility through distributed renewables and grid-scale storage? And what of energy security? SMRs may mitigate against Putin snipping offshore wind cables, but increased reliance on imported uranium, and a heightened nuclear waste security threat, are significant risks. Last May, the IEEFA concluded that SMRs 'are still too expensive, too slow and too risky', and that we 'should embrace the reality that renewables, not SMRs, are the near-term solution to the energy transition'. Has this truly changed? The climate crisis requires scaling all feasible solutions as fast as possible, but, with limited capital, we should prioritise those that make economic sense HillMBA student, Cambridge Judge Business School As Nils Pratley says, Great British Energy's budget has been nuked to divert funding away from local energy initiatives (11 June). But let's get away from the idea that SMRs are a cutting-edge technology. Rolls-Royce is proposing a 470MW reactor, the same size as the first-generation Magnox reactors. Their 'small' modular reactor, if it ever emerges, will use the familiar method of generating a lot of heat in a very complex and expensive manner, in order to boil water and turn a turbine. It will bequeath yet more radioactive waste to add to the burden and risk at Sellafield. In the meantime, if government SMR funding continues, it takes money away from opportunities for cutting-edge technical and social innovation, discovery and training all around the country, as schools, hospitals, community groups, network operators and all of us get to grips with renewables-based systems. This sort of innovation is necessary, it's already benefiting us and it needs full-on government support rather than uneasy compromises with an increasingly redundant nuclear DarbyEmerita research fellow, Environmental Change Institute I'm a Scot who moved to the US in 1982. I returned to the UK seven years ago. In my time in the US, I worked with a few contractors as a chemist and health and safety manager on a number of environmental clean-up projects, chemical, biological and nuclear. The nuclear clean-up sites I worked on directly and indirectly were Hanford in Washington state, and Rocky Flats, Colorado. The multibillion-dollar Hanford cleanup is ongoing. Most of the problems there are as a result of gross mismanagement of nuclear waste during the cold war. I very much believe in wind, solar and other environmental solutions to energy production. I am cautiously supportive of small‑scale nuclear energy, but outraged by this government's failure to include the costs of the disposal of past, current and future nuclear waste in its support of 'cheap energy'. Has Ed Miliband taken into account future waste management issues? Google Hanford cleanup to see the real expense. Can we trust this and any future government to protect the environment, public health and the taxpayer from future nuclear 'cost overruns'?Peter HolmyardEdinburgh The more I read about the government's nuclear intentions, the more it sounds like HS2 all over again, ie another financial boondoggle. Where are the detailed costings? What is our experience with cost overruns, eg at Hinkley Point C? What is the overseas experience with pressurised water reactors (the kind proposed for Sizewell C) at Olkiluoto, at Flamanville, at Taishan? Uniformly bad in all cases, actually. No matter which way you look at this, viz the future cost overruns, the facts that we consumers will be on the hook for them, that reactors are never constructed on time, that nuclear wastes are unaudited, that we have to import all our uranium, that the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated in 2023 that renewables are 10 times better than nuclear at lowering carbon emissions, all point to a remarkably poor decision by the government, sad to Ian FairlieIndependent consultant on radioactivity in the environment; vice-president, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
The Guardian
15 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Russia adviser Fiona Hill's alarming conclusion
Fiona Hill's assessment of the Russian threat to Britain is a classic example of how a seemingly rational argument based on a false premise and scanty evidence can lead to a mad conclusion (Russia is at war with Britain and US is no longer a reliable ally, UK adviser says, 6 June). It is especially alarming that this conclusion was reached by one of the three principal authors of the recent strategic defence review. The false premise is that Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is the first step to make Russia 'a dominant military power in all of Europe'. Evidence that Britain is already under attack is provided by 'the poisonings, assassinations, sabotage operations … cyber-attacks and influence operations ... sensors … around critical pipelines, efforts to butcher undersea cables'. It follows that Britain's economy and society must be geared up to resist the Russian menace. Deny the premise and the argument for a 'whole society' mobilisation against Russia collapses. What it reveals is the strength of the warmongering mood of official Britain. This is not to deny that we have to take precautions against the real danger of a significant US pullout, perhaps amounting to rendering article 5 of the Nato treaty meaningless, and that the Russians can be quite ruthless in exploiting an advantage if they think they have one. But this is a far cry from proposing, as the strategic defence review does, a national mobilisation in face of an immediate and pressing Russian Skidelsky Emeritus professor of political economy, Warwick University, Richard Balfe Former MEP, Anthony Brenton British ambassador to Russia, 2004-08, Thomas Fazi Author and journalist, Anatol Lieven Senior fellow, Quincy Institute for Responsible Statesmanship, Ian Proud Senior diplomat, British embassy, Moscow, 2014-18, Geoffrey Roberts Professor, University College Cork, Richard Sakwa Emeritus professor of Russian and east European studies, University of Kent, Brigitte Granville Professor of international economics and economic policy, Queen Mary University of London Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
The Sun
19 minutes ago
- The Sun
Long-awaited Casey grooming gang review links illegal migration with exploitation of British girls
A DAMNING review into rape gangs will directly link illegal migration with the exploitation of British girls, The Sun can reveal. The Home Office is expected to publish the long-awaited National Audit on Group-Based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse next week. 1 A source familiar with the report said its author, Baroness Louise Casey, specifically links illegal migration with the violence perpetrated against vulnerable girls. The Sun understands there are fears in the Home Office that knowledge of the link between undocumented arrivals and grooming gangs could trigger more civil unrest. The Home Office today refused to deny the involvement of illegal migration in the Casey report. A government spokesperson said: 'Nothing is more important than protecting vulnerable children, and we are determined to crack down on vile grooming gangs once and for all. 'That's why we ordered a rapid national audit to uncover the true scale of this horrific abuse. 'This report – alongside our response – will be published shortly.' The Casey review was tasked with building a 'national picture of what is known about current group-based child sexual exploitation' and to 'identify local and national trends'. It will also 'provide an assessment of what is known about the demographics of grooming gangs and their victims, including ethnicity'. It comes as a grooming gang have been found guilty of raping and abusing two teen girls in Rochdale in a five-year reign of terror. The seven men "passed" the victims around for sex and preyed on them in squalid flats and car parks in the town. They groomed the girls from the age of 13 and made them their "sex slaves" by plying them with gifts, including alcohol and drugs. The victims both had "deeply troubled home lives", which meant they were easy prey for the fiends. During a five-year horror ordeal, the girls were expected to have sex "whenever and wherever" the defendants and other men wanted. As well as flats and car parks, the predators abused the teens on rancid mattresses, in cars, alleyways and disused warehouses. Mohammed Zahid, 64, Kasir Bashir, 50, Mushtaq Ahmed, 66, Roheez Khan, 39, Mohammed Shahzad, 43, Nisar Hussain, 43, and Naheem Akram, 48, were today convicted. Three of the abusers, Zahid, Ahmed and Bashir were born in Pakistan and worked as stallholders on Rochdale's indoor market. Father-of-three Zahid - known as Boss Man - gave free underwear from his lingerie stall to both victims. He was previously jailed for five years after he engaged in sexual activity in 2006 with a 15-year-old girl who he met when she visited his stall to buy tights for school.
