Healey slams ‘shocking' scenes of smugglers picking up migrants ‘like a taxi'
Hundreds of migrants are thought to have crossed the English Channel in small boats on Saturday, with at least six boats spotted leaving beaches in France.
French police officers were seen watching as migrants, including children, boarded at a beach in Gravelines, between Calais and Dunkirk, and authorities were then pictured escorting the boats.
French police officers watch a group of people thought to be migrants board a small boat leaving the beach at Gravelines, France (Gareth Fuller/PA)
French authorities said they rescued 184 people and that numerous boat departures were reported.
'Pretty shocking, those scenes yesterday,' John Healey told the Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips programme on Sky News.
'Truth is, Britain's lost control of its borders over the last five years, and the last government last year left an asylum system in chaos and record levels of immigration.'
French authorities escort a small boat leaving the beach at Gravelines (Gareth Fuller/PA)
The Defence Secretary said it is a 'really big problem' that French police are unable to intervene to intercept boats in shallow waters.
'We saw the smugglers launching elsewhere and coming around like a taxi to pick them up,' he added.
He said the UK is pressing for the French to put new rules into operation so they can intervene.
'They're not doing it, but, but for the first time for years, for the first time, we've got the level of co-operation needed.
'We've got the agreement that they will change the way they work, and our concentration now is to push them to get that into operation so they can intercept these smugglers and stop these people in the boats, not just on the shore.'
People thought to be migrants wait on the beach at Gravelines to board a small boat (Gareth Fuller/PA)
The highest number of arrivals recorded on a single day so far this year was 825 on May 21.
This year is on course to set a record for Channel crossings, with more than 13,000 people having arrived so far, up 30% on this point last year, according to analysis of the data by the PA news agency.
Sir Keir Starmer's Government has pledged to crack down on small boat crossings including with measures targeting smuggling gangs.
People thought to be migrants wade through the sea at Gravelines awaiting a boat (Gareth Fuller/PA)
A Home Office source said: 'We have developed strong co-operation with the French and it is important that they have agreed to disrupt these boats once they're in the water – and not just on the shore.
'This vital step now needs to be operationalised to protect border security and save lives.'
A Home Office spokesperson pointed to measures to share intelligence internationally, enhance enforcement operations in northern France and introduce tougher rules in its immigration legislation.
The remains of a small boat on the beach in France, following an unsuccessful attempt by people thought to be migrants to reach the UK (Gareth Fuller/PA)
'We all want to end dangerous small boat crossings, which threaten lives and undermine our border security.
'The people-smuggling gangs do not care if the vulnerable people they exploit live or die as long as they pay, and we will stop at nothing to dismantle their business models and bring them to justice.
'That is why this Government has put together a serious plan to take down these networks at every stage.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Why is defence such a hard sell? The same reason Starmer is struggling in the polls
Defence reviews and foreign policy resets seem to turn up almost as often as the Sussexes' lifestyle brand relaunches these days. Labour's strategic defence review this week comes less than two years after the Conservatives' hardly less detailed defence white paper in July 2023, which in turn was a 'refresh' of Boris Johnson's ambitious integrated review of defence and foreign policy of March 2021. By this measure, it must be doubtful if, come the 2030s, analysts will look back on Keir Starmer and John Healey's review and say it broke the mould. The Labour government was entitled to try to put its own stamp on defence policy, of course, and its review team of George Robertson, Richard Barrons and Fiona Hill did a good, reasonably independent job. Yet this 2020s pattern of repeated strategic adaptation and refocus feels like the new normal now. It is also true that grand strategy does not often survive prolonged contact with the real world. In wartime, as the US general, later president, Dwight Eisenhower once put it, plans are useless but planning is essential. Today, though, war is no longer an academic possibility. So defence policy must adapt afresh, and at pace. Labour's defence review does not always do this convincingly. Most of the imperatives and innovations of the day revolve around resisting the threat from Russia and adapting to the new weaponry of the drone and cyber age. At times, though, this is hard to reconcile with the review's dogged assumption that the transatlantic alliance will remain the bedrock of that resistance. Johnson's 2021 review aimed to recast British foreign policy in the light of Brexit. In some ways, like Johnson's delusional British tilt towards Asia, it represents a worldview that has gone with the wind. In others, especially on Russia, it describes a conflict that still confronts Starmer today. Yet Johnson's review came out as Covid was starting to upend the global economy and before Russia invaded Ukraine. The 2023 refresh took those newer convulsions on board but could not, in its turn, know about the most recent disruption: Donald Trump's return. It is pathetic and shameful that Trump's name does not appear once throughout the new defence review's 140 pages. Its absence reflects Labour's – and London's – bred-in-the-bone fear of offending the US president. Even so, it cannot disguise that this is a defence review for Britain in an age of greater US isolationism. Trump's unreliability and his administration's manifest contempt for Europe cast a long shadow over the whole document and over the government's determination, even in the context of next week's Whitehall spending review, to prioritise defence in line with Nato urgings. Since history never stops, this week's review may itself soon look out of date. Events may grab hold of the steering wheel at any time. China may invade Taiwan, for example, or Russia turn up the heat in the Baltic or against Moldova. Iran may finally test a nuclear weapon. Trump may annex Greenland. Even the ending of the Ukraine war, not just its continuation as before, would necessitate a big course correction and reshifting of priorities for British policy too. If there is a thread running through the document, it is that 21st-century Britain is a big, but not a global power, whose security priority lies in Europe, not elsewhere. The overriding goals for British defence policy are thus, as always, to defend the nation against direct threats, and to make the necessary contribution to the maintenance of peace, freedom and commerce on the European continent. Brexit did not change that. But it was a dramatic illustration of how easy it is to delude a nation that there are magic answers to grindingly difficult problems. It is a mistake, however, to seek blind refuge in the belief that the world has always been a conflicted and messy place, and therefore to assume that 2025 is merely another unfortunate iteration of it. This may indeed be true in a very long view sense. But it does not adequately explain why 21st century governments in many liberal democracies – not least in Britain – struggle to mobilise national support to bring about almost any big and effective change, not just in defence policy but domestically. It is not enough to blame Russia alone for the suffering in Ukraine, or to denounce the United States uniquely for turning its back on European security – even though both are hugely culpable. Part of the problem also lies closer to home. The issue is that while the liberal democratic nation state is the only meaningful game in town, it is no longer delivering what it once seemed uniquely capable of providing for its people. The run-down of defence following the end of the cold war is merely one example of this widely felt failure, albeit an important one. One can select others from most areas of national life. They range from not embracing the digital revolution sufficiently to help rebuild British industry and education, through the failure to prioritise the care of an increasingly ageing population and the cynical depletion of parts of the welfare state, to the shameful pollution of rivers and lakes, the disdain for localism and the wilful neglect of national culture. The results of this are inescapably wounding to politics itself. The most striking thing that has happened in the last 11 months is that Labour has managed to turn an election victory into what looks increasingly likely to be an election defeat when the time comes. Why has this happened? Not because Starmer and his ministers are bad people, or because they have bad values or even bad policies. Certainly not because voters want the Conservatives back. It has happened because liberal democratic governments are no longer able to command the necessary sustained public confidence, even through rocky times, to deliver what people once instinctively looked to them for. That was true of the defence review this week, which was launched on to a sea of scepticism about Labour's ability to pay for its plans. It will be even more true of the spending review in a few days' time. The strands that once meaningfully bound people together within a shared national framework are weaker now. They may not be irreparable. But repairing them requires a lot of humility as well as much determination and a sprinkling of genius. There are no quick answers and it is a massively hard task. Martin Kettle is a Guardian columnist
Rhyl Journal
2 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
UK must tackle energy bills as firms face £24bn in extra costs
Rain Newton-Smith, chief executive of the business group, will tell business leaders and politicians at the CBI's business dinner on Thursday that sky-high energy costs are an 'anchor on our ambition'. At the event in London, she will call on the Government to come up with a 'serious plan' to cut energy costs and invest in energy security to help make the UK and businesses more competitive. The CBI said almost 90% of British businesses have seen their energy bills rise over the past three years, with a third seeing them rocket by more than 50%. Four in 10 firms are reducing investment as a result, according to the group. Higher energy bills come on top of significant increases in staff costs, with the CBI estimating the recent rise in national insurance contributions (NICs) and past three minimum wage hikes since 2023-24 is costing companies an extra £24 billion each year. Ms Newton-Smith will say: 'Business is now straining under £24 billion in extra costs per year. 'That's more than the cost of Crossrail. More than the Home Office budget – on business, every year.' She will add: 'With costs running so high, there is one issue we absolutely must tackle. 'Without it, any industrial strategy, any serious plan for economic security will fall flat on its face. Energy.' She will say the rising cost of energy 'isn't just a cost issue'. 'It's a jobs issue. An investment issue. A security issue. 'Because how can UK business compete with one hand tied behind its back – and the other straining to keep the lights on? 'This is an anchor on our ambition. A crack in our economic security. And it must be fixed.' Britain is becoming less competitive for business and industry due to expensive energy, with firms finding it 'harder and harder to stay in the UK' when power is far cheaper abroad, according to the CBI. Ms Newton-Smith will warn UK firms 'pay among the highest electricity bills in the world – 50% more than France or Germany, four times more than the US and Canada'. The CBI is making a plea to the Government to remove policy costs from electricity bills, but it also wants it to focus on low-carbon energy to help achieve economic security. Its recent economic report showed the UK net zero economy grew 10% and supported 900,000 jobs. Ms Newton-Smith will say: 'If economic security is our destination, then make no mistake: affordable, reliable, low-carbon energy is the road that gets us there, 'What we need now is a serious plan alongside the industrial strategy: to cut energy costs, to manage the shift from fossil fuels, to boost efficiency, storage and system flexibility. 'This Government has already shown it can put prosperity over politics on the world stage. Well now it must do the same for energy at home. 'Because this isn't about culture wars. It's about common sense.' A Government spokesperson said: 'Through our sprint to clean power, we will get off the rollercoaster of fossil fuel markets – protecting business and household finances with clean, homegrown energy that we control. 'We are already bringing energy costs for key UK industries closer in line with other major economies through the British industry supercharger – saving businesses £5 billion over the next 10 years.'
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Swinney: By-election is fight between SNP and Farage
Speaking to reporters on the final day of campaigning, Mr Sarwar said: "We're campaigning to win this by-election. "There's been lots of Reform noise, there's been lots of Reform smear. "There's been a lack of ambition from the SNP, misinformation from the SNP. Only two parties are trying to win here, the SNP and Scottish Labour." 'The best that John Swinney has to offer after 18 years in government is a campaign that says 'stop Farage'," he added. 'Nigel Farage cannot win here. Reform cannot win in Scotland. Never could. This is a straight choice — because only two parties are trying to win — between ourselves and the SNP.' He added that the only thing Mr Farage could achieve in this by-election, and in the 2026 Holyrood election, 'is help John Swinney'. Katy Loudon and John Swinney (Image: Jane Barlow/PA) Mr Sarwar also criticised the media for promoting the idea of a Reform upset. 'You are all obsessed by them — and you know, this pretence that they could win here. They cannot win here. Nigel Farage cannot win in Scotland. He does not understand Scotland. Does not care about Scotland. Could not give a damn about Scotland — and that is why we are not focusing on him.' READ MORE: The by-election was triggered by the death of SNP MSP Christina McKelvie in March. She was just 57 and had been on leave following a stage two breast cancer diagnosis. Ms McKelvie won the seat in 2021 with 46% of the vote, and a majority of 4,582. The SNP are favourites to hold on, but the party insist the race is close between them and Reform. In his final appeal to voters, Mr Swinney said voting for the SNP was a chance to 'defeat the gutter politics of Nigel Farage'. Speaking to journalists on Wednesday, he denied Mr Sarwar's allegation of misinformation. He told The Herald: 'My experience is that I am seeing SNP support firm and we are leading. I am seeing a lot of Reform support, which has been growing, and I am not seeing as much Labour support as I am seeing Reform support. So that is what I am feeling on the doorstep. 'When my team are processing all of this information, that is the picture that is emerging. And so Labour are out of it, Reform support growing and us in a leading position.' Reform UK has played down the likelihood of a win. During a campaign stop in Aberdeen earlier this week, Mr Farage said victory was 'improbable'. Senior party sources said second place would be a phenomenal result — and even a third-place finish would represent serious progress for the insurgent right-wing party. Their rise has also led to speculation about the future of the Scottish Tories. One Reform insider suggested the Conservatives could lose Larkhall altogether — or even fall to fifth place behind the Liberal Democrats. Davy Russell and Anas Sarwar (Image: Jane Barlow/PA) Back on the trail, Mr Sarwar was also forced to defend Labour candidate Davy Russell, a former senior Glasgow City Council official, who has been criticised for missing TV debates and local hustings. He said Mr Russell was 'here all the time' and dismissed the attacks as snobbery. 'I have seen pathetic comments about how he speaks,' Mr Sarwar said. 'But actually, it only helps reinforce the fact that he is from here and for here.' Asked whether Mr Russell had been an asset to the SNP, Mr Swinney said he could only speak about his own candidate, Katy Loudon. 'A candidate has to be able, on a given day when this constituency might be facing difficulty, to come into Parliament and challenge the First Minister of Scotland. And my candidate could do that,' he said. Meanwhile, Mr Farage has been banned from a butcher's shop in Larkhall. Strachan Craft Butchers posted on Facebook that the Reform leader had 'swanned in' with BBC cameras and party staff to buy a T-bone steak. They stressed the visit had not been planned and said they were now 'barred' from further political visits. 'We need our customers to know that we have never and will never support any party or political views,' the business said. 'What a palaver over one wee man. #Farageisbarred.' The result of the by-election is expected in the early hours of Friday. It will be the first major electoral test for both Mr Swinney and Mr Sarwar since last year's general election, when Labour regained its position as Scotland's largest party at Westminster and the SNP slumped to just nine MPs. The Herald will be reporting live from the count in South Lanarkshire with updates, reaction and colour through the night — including livestreams, interviews, expert analysis and a special emergency episode of Unspun Live.
