logo
Minister rejects claims UK not doing enough to deter small boat crossings ahead of Starmer-Macron talks

Minister rejects claims UK not doing enough to deter small boat crossings ahead of Starmer-Macron talks

The Guardian09-07-2025
Update:
Date: 2025-07-09T08:31:32.000Z
Title: Kiran Stacey
Content: Good morning. Yesterday Emmanuel Macron, the French president, enjoyed the best ceremonial aspects of his state visit – being hosted at Windsor Castle, addressing MPs and peers in the Royal Gallery at parliament, a state banquet. But today he is getting down to proper talks with Keir Starmer and, although they are expected to agree some new measures relating to curbing the number of small boats crossing the Channel, there are signs that the final deal might not be as wide-ranging as the UK government might have liked.
In their story about Macron's address to parliament, and Morgan Ofori report:
The British government has been hoping to use the trip to show that its 'EU reset' had borne fruit, including on the traditionally difficult subject of migration.
British officials have been hoping to sign a new deal that would involve Britain accepting asylum seekers who have a genuine family connection with the UK in return for being able to send others back to France. However, they had warned in recent days that it might not be ready in time for this trip.
And this morning the Daily Telegraph has splashed on a story saying Macron wants Britain to do more to reduce the 'pull factors' the encourage migrants to cross the channel. In their story, James Crisp and Charles Hymas say:
The Telegraph understands that Mr Macron wants Sir Keir to crack down on the UK's black market for labour and welfare payments and make family reunification for genuine asylum seekers easier as conditions for the deal.
An Elysée source warned that Mr Macron expected measures 'addressing the root causes of the factors that attract people to the United Kingdom', adding: 'These causes must also be addressed by the British.'
Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Cabinet Office minister responsible for post-Brexit relations with the EU, has been doing an interview round this morning. He sounded a bit more defensive than usual for a minister talking about small boats, and he was not talking up the chances of a 'one in, one out' deal. Here are the main points.
Thomas-Symonds insisted that the UK is already addressing the 'pull factors' affecting small boat crossings. Asked about Macron's supposed views, as set out in the Telegraph splash, he told the Today programme:
Addressing pull factors is exactly what we have been doing. That is why there's been over 7,000 arrests here in the United Kingdom dealing with things like, for example, illegal working which this government has been cracking down on.
He claimed that policy was moving 'in the right direction' on small boats. The number of crossings is at a record level for this time of year. But Thomas-Symonds told Today the numbers would have been even higher if it had not been for action taken by the British and the French. He said:
We have prevented, working together with the French authorities, and indeed beyond across Europe, 12,000 people from crossing the Channel who otherwise would have done.
We have seized 600 boats that otherwise would be being used in the channel.
When Emma Barnett, the presenter, said that having crossing numbers at a record level was nothing to boast about, Thomas-Symonds said he was not boasting. But he went on:
Preventing 12,000 people from crossing is most definitely something that is in the right direction …
To your point about numbers, we've seen, yes, over 21,000 have crossed so far this year. There was a 10-week period in 2022 when we had 20,000 people who crossed in that intense period.
But nobody, nobody, is boasting about those numbers.
There is no simple solution to that issue.
It is about it's not about gimmicks, it's not about performative politics, it is about doing the hard yards of solving this.
He claimed that cooperation with the French was already paying off. He said:
We obviously want to see, in the bilateral relationship with France, which is crucial, but also around Europe, more people smugglers being arrested. We want to see more people prevented from attempting that dangerous crossing, more prosecutions of people smugglers.
And you do that by deepening your intelligence sharing. That's what we're doing in Dunkirk, for example. I've been down to Dover, I've been across to France, I've literally seen this work happening, and it yields results. Just the last couple of weeks, we saw nine people in Lille sentenced nine people to 64 years in total for people smuggling offences. That's work between our National Crime Agency and the French authorities.
And he rejected claims that, by abandoning the Tories' Rwanda policy, the government had removed the deterrent for people tempted to cross the channel. When it was put to him that there was no deterrent, he replied:
Sorry, but we do have a deterrent, and the deterrent has been the 30,000 people who've been removed by this government who have no right to be here.
Knowing and having that in place, that people who have no right to be here will be deported, is a far more effective deterrent than spending £700m pounds on a gimmick that sent four volunteers to Rwanda.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.15am: Mark Wild, HS2 chief executive, and Lord Hendy, rail minister, give evidence to the Commons transport committee about HS2.
10.40am: John Swinney, Scotland's first minister, is on a visit to Falkirk community hospital to announce a further £85m for initiatives that improve the flow of patients through the health service.
Noon: Keir Starmer faces Kemi Badenoch at PMQs.
12.30pm: Sir Brian Langstaff, chair of the infected blood inquiry, publishes a report on how the compensation payment process is working.
After 12.45pm: MPs resume their debate on the universal credit and personal independent payment bill. They will vote on amendments at 6pm, and the vote on third reading will take place at 7pm.
1.15pm: Emmanuel Macron, the French president, arrives in Downing Street for talks with Starmer.
1.30pm: Pat McFadden, Cabinet Office minister, and Douglas Alexander, trade minister, give evidence to the Commons business sub-committee on economic security, arms and export controls.
2.30pm: Jo Stevens, Welsh secretary, gives evidence to the Commons Welsh affairs committee.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm at the moment), or message me on social media. I can't read all the messages BTL, but if you put 'Andrew' in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can't promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

High Court to hear bid to challenge Palestine Action ban
High Court to hear bid to challenge Palestine Action ban

The Independent

time8 minutes ago

  • The Independent

High Court to hear bid to challenge Palestine Action ban

The co-founder of the proscribed group Palestine Action is set to ask the High Court for the green light to challenge the Home Secretary's decision to ban the organisation at a hearing on Monday. Huda Ammori is seeking to challenge Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe Palestine Action under anti-terror laws, after the group claimed an action which saw two Voyager planes damaged at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. On July 4, Ms Ammori failed in a High Court bid to temporarily block the ban coming into effect, with the Court of Appeal dismissing a challenge to that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison, under the Terrorism Act 2000. The Government is opposing the bid for the legal challenge to be allowed to proceed, with the hearing before Mr Justice Chamberlain due to begin at 10.30am on Monday at the Royal Courts of Justice. Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'. Four people – Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, Jony Cink, 24, Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 36, and Lewis Chiaramello, 22 – have all been charged in connection with the incident, and are due to face trial in early 2027. Since the ban came into force, dozens of people have been arrested at protests in cities including London, Manchester and Cardiff, including an 83-year-old reverend. At the hearing earlier this month, Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, said the proscription was an 'ill-considered, discriminatory and authoritarian abuse of statutory power'. He also said that the Home Office 'has still not sufficiently articulated or evidenced a national security reason that proscription should be brought into effect now'. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also representing Ms Ammori, told the court that the harm caused by the ban would be 'far-reaching' and could cause 'irreparable harm to large numbers of members of the public', including causing some to 'self-censor'. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Mr Justice Chamberlain said that an assessment on whether to ban the group had been made as early as March, and 'preceded' the incident at RAF Brize Norton. Dismissing the bid for a temporary block, the judge said that the 'harm which would ensue' if a block was not ordered was 'insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force'. He added that some of the 'consequences feared by the claimant' were 'overstated'. At a late-night Court of Appeal hearing, the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Edis threw out a bid to challenge the High Court's decision, finding that there was 'no real prospect of a successful appeal'.

Judge set to rule on High Court challenge over Wimbledon expansion
Judge set to rule on High Court challenge over Wimbledon expansion

The Independent

time8 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Judge set to rule on High Court challenge over Wimbledon expansion

Campaigners are due to discover whether they have been successful in a legal challenge against the decision to approve plans to almost triple the size of the Wimbledon tennis site on Monday. Barristers for Save Wimbledon Park (SWP) told the High Court earlier this month that the Greater London Authority (GLA)'s decision to approve the plans last year was 'irrational'. The All England Club's proposal would see 38 new tennis courts and an 8,000-seat stadium built on the grounds of the former Wimbledon Park Golf Club. The GLA and the All England Club are defending the challenge, with barristers for the authority describing the decision as a 'planning judgment properly exercised'. Mr Justice Saini is set to hand down his ruling at 2pm on Monday. The plans were first submitted to both Merton and Wandsworth councils, with the park straddling the boroughs, in 2021, after the All England Club bought out golf club members with the intention of developing the land. In addition to the courts and associated infrastructure, seven maintenance buildings, access points, and an area of parkland with permissive public access would be constructed. The proposals also include work on Wimbledon Lake, which would involve building a boardwalk around and across it. After Merton Council approved the plans, but Wandsworth Council rejected them, the Mayor of London's office took charge of the application, but Mayor Sir Sadiq Khan recused himself from the process after previously expressing public support for the development. Planning permission for the scheme was granted by Jules Pipe, London's deputy mayor for planning, who said that the proposals 'would facilitate very significant benefits' which 'clearly outweigh the harm'. But a two-day hearing in London heard that the decision to grant planning permission was unlawful as Wimbledon Park – a Grade II*-listed heritage site partly designed by Lancelot 'Capability' Brown – was covered by restrictions on how it could be used. Sasha White KC, for SWP, said in written submissions that the land was subject to a 'statutory trust requiring it to be kept available for public recreation use' and that when the freehold was acquired, the club entered into 'restrictive covenants' governing its use. In court, the barrister said: 'You could not have a more protected piece of land within the planning system, frankly.' Mark Westmoreland Smith KC, for the GLA, said in written submissions that Mr Pipe received 'detailed advice' over the 'relevance' of the 'alleged' trust and covenants, and made his decision on the assumption that they existed. The barrister said that the decision was a 'planning judgment properly exercised and having regard to the appropriate and relevant factors'. Russell Harris KC, for the All England Club, said that planning officers 'acknowledged and had regard to' the trust and covenants, but deemed they were not 'material'.

Rising food prices driven by climate crisis threaten world's poorest, report finds
Rising food prices driven by climate crisis threaten world's poorest, report finds

The Guardian

time2 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Rising food prices driven by climate crisis threaten world's poorest, report finds

Climate change-induced food price shocks are on the rise and could lead to more malnutrition, political upheaval and social unrest as the world's poorest are hit by shortages of food staples. New research links last year's surges in the price of potatoes in the UK, cabbages in South Korea, onions in India, and cocoa in Ghana to weather extremes that 'exceeded all historical precedent prior to 2020'. Such price jumps not only affect local food security and health, particularly for the poorest in society, but have knock-on effects around the world. Unprecedented monthly temperatures in February 2024 after drought in late 2023 and early 2024 across Ghana and Ivory Coast, where 60% of the world's cocoa is grown, led to global prices for the commodity spiking by 300%. The high price of staples can have an impact on public health as low-income households cut back on expensive fruit and vegetables, according to the report from a team including the UK's Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), the European Central Bank (ECB), the Food Foundation, the Barcelona Supercomputing Center and Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. The study investigated examples across 18 countries between 2022 and 2024 where price spikes were associated with heat, drought and heavy precipitation. It found food price spikes can have a wider economic impact, making it harder for economies to keep down overall inflation and so, for example, bring interest rates down. A hot dry spring in the UK this year, for example, partly drove unexpectedly high UK inflation figures published last week, dampening expectations for further interest rate cuts this summer. The report also suggests 'high rates of inflation can directly alter election outcomes in modern democracies'. Maximilian Kotz, a Marie Curie postdoctoral research fellow at Barcelona Supercomputing Center and the lead author of the report, said: 'It is clear the cost of living played a role in last year's election in the US.' He added: 'These effects are going to continue to become worse in the future. Until we get to net zero emissions extreme weather will only get worse, but it's already damaging crops and pushing up the price of food all over the world. 'People are noticing, with rising food prices No 2 on the list of climate impacts they see in their lives, second only to extreme heat itself. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion 'Sadly, when the price of food shoots up, low-income families often have to resort to less nutritious, cheaper foods. Diets like this have been linked to a range of health conditions like cancer, diabetes and heart disease.' Raj Patel, a research professor in the Lyndon B Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin, said: 'Food price inflation is always political.' For example, people in Mozambique took to the streets when the price of bread shot up after extreme heat in Russia, a big wheat producer, prompted the country to block exports to protect meagre supplies in 2010 meaning the price of wheat soared globally. The research is published ahead of the UN Food Systems Summit Stocktake on 27 July, where world leaders will meet to discuss threats to the global food system.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store