French action ‘has prevented nearly 500 small boat crossings this year'
Speaking in the Commons, Ms Cooper told MPs the Government had five tactics to address small boat crossings, including strengthening the border and clamping down on illegal working.
Her statement came days after the Government secured a new agreement with France over returning migrants who had arrived on small boats.
She said: 'French actions have prevented 496 boat crossings this year, but 385 boats have crossed.
'And criminal gangs are operating new tactics, increasing the overcrowding of boats so that more people arrive, and loading them in shallow waters, exploiting the French rules that means their authorities have not been able to intervene in the water.'
It is unclear whether the figure refers to small boat crossings being stopped before or during attempts to leave the coastline, or by other means such as seizing boats from warehouses.
The Home Secretary referred to 'appalling scenes' of people clambering onto crowded boats in shallow waters, and said French police had faced 'disgraceful violence' from gang members behind the crossings.
She continued: 'We cannot stand for this. That is why the new action agreed with France includes establishing a new French Compagnie de Marche of specialist enforcement officers, with stronger public order powers to address increases in violence on French beaches and prevent boat launches before they reach the water.'
Some 22,492 people have arrived in the UK after crossing the English Channel, according to latest Home Office figures.
This is up 57% on this point last year (14,291) and 71% higher than at this stage in 2023 (13,144), according to PA news agency analysis.
Last week's agreement saw a deal struck for a one in, one out system that would see a small boat migrant exchange for a legal asylum seeker.
No details have been given about how many people will be covered by the scheme, but reports from France have indicated it could initially be limited to around 50 a week – a small fraction of the weekly average this year of 782.
Priority will be given to people from countries where they are most likely to be granted asylum as genuine refugees, who are most likely to be exploited by smuggling gangs and also asylum seekers who have connections to the UK.
The accord came at the end of a state visit by French President Emmanuel Macron to the UK.
Ms Cooper said: 'The new agreement reached at the summit last week means stronger partnership working with source and transit countries to prevent illegal migration.'
Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp rubbished the idea that progress had been made on the issue, and said statistics showed small boat crossings had risen under Labour.
Mr Philp said the 12 months since Labour's election last July had seen a 40% rise year-on-year in terms of crossings.
He said: 'The Home Secretary comes here today sounding rather pleased with herself. I'm afraid she has no reason to.
'A year ago, she promised to smash the gangs, she said again and again that was her plan, indeed it was her only plan. Yet today, there is no mention of what was once her favourite catchphrase.
'That's because her claim to smash the gangs has become a joke, an embarrassment to her and to the Government.'
He added that rather than closing asylum hotels, there were 3,000 more people in them than last year.
'She is setting records, just all the wrong ones,' he said.
Ms Cooper replied: 'This crisis, the small boats chaos, went on for 340 weeks under the Tories, a period in which when he was immigration minister, overall migration near trebled and small boat crossings increased tenfold when he was the immigration minister in charge.'
She later said the Government's plan would involve greater co-operation with other governments, rather than 'standing at the shoreline shouting at the sea'.
Ms Cooper said: 'We will best strengthen our border security by working with countries on the other side of those borders who face exactly the same challenges far better than just standing at the shoreline shouting at the sea.'
Conservative former minister Andrew Murrison asked the Home Secretary to respond to the idea that the UK was 'perceived as being attractive to illegal migrants'.
She replied: 'I do think frankly it has been too easy to work illegally in this country for too long, and we know that one of the things that the criminal gangs say to people is, 'it will be easy to get a job'.
'They will even give people discounts if they can come and work for those same criminal gangs operating in the UK.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
8 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Huge seaside resort built for 20k tourists bans foreigners weeks after opening
Despite years of delays and a grand opening ceremony, the world's most controversial Benidorm-inspired seaside resort has 'temporarily' prohibited foreign travellers from visiting A Benidorm-inspired seaside resort with 2.5 miles of golden sandy beach has sensationally banned foreigners from visiting, just 17 days after its grand opening. The Wonsan Kalma Coastal Tourist Zone might look like any other coastal destination at first glance. Complete with 43 hotels and camping sites that hold capacity for a whopping 20,000 visitors, the resort boasts a huge water park with thrilling slides, a cinema, theatre, 'recreation centre', and pristine beach. However, this seaside haven isn't located on the sunny Costa Blanca (although it is rumoured to be based on the Spanish hotspot). Instead, it's situated in the cruel dictatorship of North Korea, which has been accused of a series of gross human rights violations. These include detaining residents in prison camps for trying to flee, severely restricting the rights to freedom of expression, and rejecting international aid while people starved due to food shortages. But in 2017, North Korea sent a delegation on a trip to Benidorm so officials could take note of how the hotspot had designed many of its hotels and attractions. Following years of delay, the tourist park - believed to be a crucial part of Kim Jong Un's ambitions to boost tourism in the country - opened on July 1 this year. According to reports, the first droves of Russian tourists arrived at the resort earlier this month, with Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov branding the project a 'good tourist attraction' that he hoped would become popular amongst Russians. However, on July 18, North Korea updated its tourism website, declaring that foreigners are 'temporarily' not allowed to visit. This follows North Korea's decision to abruptly halt tourism from the West - including travellers from France, Germany and the UK, back in February. At the time of writing, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) advises against all but essential travel to North Korea. "The level of tension on the Korean Peninsula remains high. While daily life in the capital city, Pyongyang, may appear calm, the security situation in North Korea can change quickly with no advance warning about possible actions by the authorities," the body warns. "This poses significant risks to British visitors and residents." Even before the site had actually opened, it garnered heavy criticism from human rights groups - including the UN which warned of 'shock brigades'. This is where workers are subject to harsh conditions and long working hours without adequate compensation. Cho Chung Hui, a North Korean who effectively defected from the country, witnessed some of these brutal conditions, although he wasn't directly involved in building the resort. "The principle behind these [brigades] was that no matter what, you had to complete the task, even if it cost you your life," he told the BBC. "I saw many women who were under so much physical strain and eating so poorly that their periods stopped altogether."
The Herald Scotland
21 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Who does Labour exist to represent in Starmer's Britain?
Contrary to what many people remember the first Thatcher government, elected in 1979, was comparatively benign compared with what was to come – the miners' strike, mass unemployment, the economic vandalism of the 1980s, the Poll Tax – and Kinnock knew that it was simply a warm-up routine. If Thatcher was re-elected, he told the packed hall and a live TV audience on News at Ten, 'I warn you not to be ordinary. I warn you not to be young. I warn you not to fall ill. I warn you not to get old'. Read More: A politician so cruelly misrepresented in the Conservative media, Kinnock was not only the architect of New Labour, and arguably the best Prime Minister his party never had, he was also the greatest platform orator of his generation. Listening to one of his rousing, charismatic and intelligent speeches, was to be reminded of the power of collective ambition and the glorious possibility of change. Above all, he always stressed the importance of not overpromising and of delivering. Neil Kinnock (Image: PA) What is striking about listening to his words today – more than 40 years later – is that under the current leadership, they might equally apply to the Labour government. Labour leaders have always faced a perilous balancing act in appealing simultaneously to the party faithful and the wider electorate. There are those, like Tony Blair and Harold Wilson, who managed the neat trick of speaking effectively to both. Others, like Jeremy Corbyn and Michael Foot didn't even pretend to be interested in engaging with the latter and succumbed, inevitably to the gravitational effects of their own hubris at the polls. The current leadership appears to be the first in the party's history to speak to neither. Sir Keir Starmer's first year as Prime Minister has been marked by a dramatic collapse in public support, with his net approval rating now worse than all post-Thatcher prime ministers, with the exception of Gordon Brown, at the same stage. Key missteps include his controversial decision – alongside Chancellor Rachel Reeves – to cut winter fuel payments for pensioners. This move, justified by a disputed £22billion "black hole", alienated older voters and damaged his reputation, and his inability to deliver on key manifesto pledges accelerated that decline. A recent Public First poll revealed 39% of voters believe he has made no progress on any major promises, including cutting NHS waiting times (24%), restoring order to the asylum system (8%), or improving border security (12%). Tax hikes included in last year's Autumn Statement eroded business confidence, while a prisoner early-release scandal – where a freed inmate thanked Starmer for his "privilege" – deepened the sense of detachment. A disastrous first year was capped with the poor handling of the government's welfare bill, which squeezed through its final Commons stage, only after significant rebellion and concessions. The bill's passage followed weeks of chaos, with ministers forced to scrap PIP cuts for existing claimants and delay changes for new ones. Starmer's low-drama persona, once an asset against Tory turmoil, now appears indecisive, with Reform overtaking Labour in polls and Nigel Farage seen as a stronger leader. The most damaging impact of these failures may well be in the longer term, applied by voters who could be forgiven for wondering who Labour represents and what it stands for. If it is not there to support the 'ordinary, the young, the ill and the old' then what is its purpose? The party is still battling to overcome claims of antisemitism that took root under Corbyn's disastrous, sclerotic leadership. This week Susan Smith, director of the campaign group For Women Scotland claimed the party has an 'ongoing women problem' after Labour MP Tim Roca described gender critical activists as 'swivel-eyed'. While Blair had the benefit of a growing economy when he won a landslide victory in 1997, he also came into office with an identifiable political credo and a sense of purpose. The doctrinal prism through which all policy decisions were refracted, was reform – modernising the party and bringing it more in line with mainstream orthodoxy. While he inevitably alienated parts of Labour's base – not least through his disastrous and, ultimately career-defining, decision to support a US invasion of Iraq – he continued to command popular support. If there's one thing core voters and activists cannot argue against, it's winning elections. The problem for Starmer and his colleagues is that, more than a year into government, voters still have no idea what they stand for. Relying solely on competence for electoral appeal quickly becomes a liability when you make a series of demonstrably incompetent decisions. Before Starmer can begin to address his party's disparity in the opinion polls, he must prioritise reconnecting with its grassroots, to articulate more clearly his values and beliefs, to counter the threat, not only from Farage's snake oil promises, but also from Corbyn's new, and as yet unnamed, party of the far left. He could do worse than start watch another of Kinnock's former speeches, his leader's address to the Labour conference in 1985 when he took on Militant Tendency, the Trotskyist insurgency that threatened to subvert the party from within. His delivery was an object lesson in highlighting the futility of dogmatc obsession and was directed at Militant members who had captured Liverpool City Council, bankrupting it with profligate, illegal spending and then sacking its own employees because it couldn't afford to pay their wages. 'Implausible promises don't win victories,' he told a chastened hall. If Starmer can first convince his party's faithful of that abiding truth, he will be better placed to win over the wider electorate. Carlos Alba is a journalist, author, and PR consultant at Carlos Alba Media. His latest novel, There's a Problem with Dad, explores the issue of undiagnosed autism among older people
The Herald Scotland
34 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
We are paying a heavy price for the damage Thatcher did
The current crisis has been a long time in the making and many of the recent news items confirm that grim impression. Just look at the state of our former public utilities still in private hands with money pouring out to pay handsome dividends to investors and hefty bonuses to top management. Over and above, the right to buy council houses has depleted the building stock of the country to such an extent that homelessness is very much on the increase. And the treatment of miners at Orgreave at the hands of the police with their riot gear and their cavalry of mounted policemen was brutal in the extreme as we have been reminded today by footage ("There is a strain of delinquency at the heart of our [[pub]]lic bodies", The Herald, July 22). The Tory government of the day made sure that plentiful overtime pay was available to the police forces to crack down on demonstrations by striking miners, determined to exact retribution for the humiliation experienced by Heath's government at the hands of the miners. Margaret Thatcher's aim was to break the power of that particular group of workers to make sure the unions would be crippled and contained. We are now suffering the long-term consequences of Thatcher's pigeons transformed into vultures coming home to roost. A week used to be a long time in politics but the folk memory of the depredation wreaked on the political consensus which had previously served the country well until the advent of the puritanical monetarists has been branded deep into the psyche of the nation – so much so that the loss of trust in politicians can be traced to the time when attacks upon unions, privatisation and the introduction of competition into public services were the canaries in the coalmine. We are paying a harsh price for falling for the blandishments of Sid and his promises of easy money. Is there any way back from the ruin so inflicted upon the bulk of the UK's population? Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs. • Among the usual diet of vituperation and personal animus, Kevin McKenna ("There is a strain of delinquency at the heart of our public bodies", The Herald, July 22) throws in some remarks on miners' redundancy packages which require some comment. No miner got 'a few hundred grand'; they got on average less than £30,000, and when the pits closed few alternative jobs were available for them or their children. The last four pits in east Ayrshire closed within a few years of each other at the same time as many local factories, and the consequences for the local [[Ayr]]shire economy was dire. Labour had refused to support the miners, and the party's Ayrshire MPs were handed their jotters as well. GR Weir, Ochiltree. Read more letters Nationalisation move that worked Surely there can be no clearer example of the marginalisation of Scotland in the UK than the current media furore over the massive failure of private English water companies? Hardly once, over countless UK news interviews, was Scottish Water even mentioned. Unquestionably, the major central issue to raise with English politicians should be the very successful existence of nationalised water in Scotland. Despite covering one-third of the area of the whole of Britain, we have nothing like the problems encountered south of the Border. And Scots pay less than the English in water bills. Nationalised Scottish Water was secured through a referendum run by Labour-run Strathclyde Regional Council in March 1994. On a 71% turnout, an absolutely massive 97% – 1.28 million voters – supported retained public ownership of Scottish Water. Could we even imagine the so-called Labour Party doing this today? The London-run UK Labour Party explicitly opposes water nationalisation in England, preferring to continue Margaret Thatcher's privatisation policy, with attractive returns for private shareholders. Councillor Tom Johnston (SNP), Cumbernauld. Nuclear does not make sense Ian Mitchell (Letters, July 22) spouts the usual pro-nuclear propaganda of abundant, cheap, clean energy. He rubbishes "water and windmill" generation as being left behind at the Industrial Revolution but has obviously never heard of Norway, which generates 85% of its power by hydro-electric, or the Netherlands, which currently generates 30% by wind power with an expectation for this to rise to 70% by 2030. He talks of the toxicity of waste disposal from battery farms but seems unaware of the problems of disposal of the lethal waste from nuclear generation which has to be stored for thousands of years. The economics of nuclear power simply do not add up: huge set-up costs, a relatively short working life, massive waste disposal costs and most of all, decommissioning costs. We only have to look as far as Dounreay, which after a working life of less than 50 years was closed in 1994 and where the decommissioning will not be complete until the 2070s, some 80 years after it last generated anything apart from expense. David Hay, Minard. Going green means going poor Stan Grodynski (Letters, July 22) joins Stephen Flynn in being highly selective in defence of SNP policies. The claim that the UK Parliament has invested "tens of billions of pounds in English CCS projects" masks the fact that John Swinney continues to withhold planning requested by SSE to build a 900MW power station at Peterhead. This project would be a major customer of the Acorn project, yet no explanation for the delay is forthcoming from Bute House. Had Mr Grodynski read my letter of July 14 he would have recognised that zonal pricing is a myth to mask the problem that wind output is 50% too expensive for Scottish consumers yet the SNP refuses to campaign for a unit cut to wind prices or eliminating the 25% green levy to further reduce electricity prices. Stephen Flynn says that political parties which refuse to support renewable energy plans will leave Aberdeen looking like Detroit without reference to the fact that 200 job cuts a week in the oil and gas sector over the next five years, arising from the lack of [[SNP]] support for the industry, will turn Scotland from the Tay to the Moray Firth into a desert from which the area will never recover. The basic problem facing the Scottish economy is that renewable electricity at 25.6p/unit is too expensive compared with gas (6.3p/unit). Until wind energy can match that of gas then the impact on the cost of living for Scottish households will not be solved. Going green under current policies means going poor, especially when inefficient wind turbines require battery back-up, pump storage back-up and 25GW of hydrogen-fuelled gas turbine plant. Can Mr Flynn provide an estimate of the costs of these triple back-up systems which the SNP never adds to the costs of wind output? Ian Moir, Castle Douglas. How to stop the boats There has been yet more rhetoric from this disastrous Labour Government about stemming the numbers of illegal, mainly young men, arriving on boats from France. It says it is going to smash the gangs by targeting the criminal networks and individuals who supply the inflatables and the infrastructure. This is in addition to a recent joint announcement with the French President committing to a "one in, one out" agreement, whatever that's supposed to mean. Everyone is aware that none of these initiatives will make any meaningful difference to the numbers arriving. One thing and one thing only will stop this tragic exploitation of desperate people willing to pay to come here illegally and that is if they know that if they successfully land here they will be immediately put on a boat and returned from whence they embarked. Until this simple truism is accepted and acted upon, nothing will change. James Martin, Bearsden. What should the Government do to crack down on illegal immigration? (Image: PA) Knickers to all that The Scottish Greens Internal Elections Officer has verified that the count was conducted using iterative rounds of STV, specifically the Weighted Inclusive Gregory method, and was done as a bottom-up process ("Greens insist votes for MSP lists 'counted correctly'", [[The Herald]], July 22). In Romola, George Eliot put it more demurely than I might have with her "thou hast got thy legs into twisted hose". David Miller, Milngavie. Changing room questions Of all the issues aired about the presence of a biologically male doctor in a nurses' changing room in a Kirkcaldy hospital, one seems to have been overlooked. Why was Dr Upton not using a changing room for doctors? Were other doctors using the nurses' changing room? If so, we haven't heard about them. If not, why was he the exception? Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh.
