
Channel crossing migrants should face prosecution if child dies
She added: 'Everybody who is arriving on a boat where a child's life has been lost, frankly, should be facing prosecution, either in the UK or in France.'
The Government has already included a new offence of 'endangering life at sea' in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill currently making its way through Parliament.
Ms Cooper has previously said this would allow the authorities to act against people 'involved in behaviour that puts others at risk of serious injury or death, such as physical aggression, intimidation, or rejecting rescue attempts'.
But on Friday, she appeared to go further by suggesting even getting on an overcrowded boat could result in prosecution.
She said: 'If you've got a boat where we've seen all of those people all climb on board that boat, they are putting everybody else's lives at risk.'
Crossings have increased in the past year, reaching 20,600 by July 2, a rise of 52% compared with the same period in 2024.
Some 15 children died trying to cross the Channel last year, prompting charity Project Play to warn that conditions were becoming 'more dangerous' for young people.
Advocacy co-ordinator Kate O'Neill, based in northern France, blamed policies aimed at preventing crossings for the increasing risk.
She told the PA news agency: 'Ultimately the children we're meeting every day are not safe.
'They're exposed to a level of violence, whether it's they are directly victims of it or the witness.
'We're ultimately at all times putting out fires… the underlying issue is these policies of border securitisation… that are creating more and more barriers to child safety and child protection.'
She said there was hope when the Labour Government took office a year ago that there would be some improvement, adding: 'This is not at all what we've seen.
'They continued to make conditions more difficult and more dangerous.'
She said: 'The smash-the-gangs narrative is not effective and it's harmful because ultimately the only way to put the gangs out of business is to cut the need for them.'
Meanwhile, Ms O'Neill said French police were already intervening in crossing attempts in shallow waters despite the changes to the rules to allow this having not yet come into force.
She said: 'This is not a new tactic… it's something that has been happening for a long time in Calais and surrounding areas.
'My feeling is that this is increasing based on the number of testimonies we're receiving from children and their families recently.
'It's really dangerous because the children often are in the middle of the boats.'
On Friday, the Home Secretary welcomed reports that French police were intervening in French waters to prevent crossings, and said she had been 'working very closely with the French interior minister' to ensure the rules were changed 'as swiftly a possible'.
Ms Cooper also declined to confirm reports the UK was looking at a 'one in, one out' policy that would see people who had crossed the Channel returned to Europe in exchange for asylum seekers with connections to Britain.
Asked about the policy, she would only tell Sky News that ministers were 'looking at a range of different issues' and 'different ways of doing returns'.
A boat carrying migrants could be seen off the coast of Gravelines in northern France on Friday morning as a family and dog walkers enjoyed the sunny weather on the beach.
A French authority boat followed the dinghy closely as it travelled along the coast passing big ships such as a DFDS ferry, and a French border control helicopter flew overhead.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Sky News
22 minutes ago
- Sky News
Palestine Action to be banned as terrorist organisation at midnight – after losing late legal challenge
Palestine Action will be banned as a terrorist group after losing a legal challenge less than two hours before the law comes into force. MPs overwhelmingly voted in favour of Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe the protest group under the Terrorism Act 2000 and Lords have backed the move. The law change, which adds Palestine Action to the list of banned organisations along with the likes of al Qaeda, ISIS and Hezbollah, will come into force at midnight. It makes membership of, or support for, the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison, while even wearing a T-shirt or badge with the group's name on attracts a maximum six-month sentence. Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action after two Voyager aircraft were allegedly damaged at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on 20 June, which police said caused around £7m worth of damage. But the High Court heard the decision had been taken before the incident and as early as March this year. Huda Ammori, the co-founder of Palestine Action, is seeking to bring a legal challenge against the Home Office with a hearing for permission to bring a judicial review set to take place during the week of 21 July. Her lawyers applied for "interim relief" on Friday to temporarily block the legislation from coming into force until that hearing, arguing the Irish author Sally Rooney, who wrote Normal People, was among supporters who fear the "ramifications". But Mr Justice Chamberlain refused the application, saying: "I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force." He refused permission to appeal but lawyers representing Ms Ammori applied directly to the Court of Appeal for a rare urgent hearing to challenge the decision. Three judges, including the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, refused permission to appeal in a ruling less than two hours before the ban was due to come into force. Around two hundred protestors earlier gathered outside court in support of the group, with some banging drums, waving Palestinian flags, wearing the keffiyeh scarf or holding placards and signs. Counter-protesters also arrived amid a heavy police presence. Raza Husain KC - one of 13 barristers inside a courtroom packed with journalists and members of the public - said his client Ms Ammori was inspired by the "long tradition" of direct action in the UK from suffragettes and activists protesting against apartheid and the Iraq war. "This is the first time in our history a direct action, civil disobedience group which does not advocate violence has sought to be proscribed as terrorists," he said. "We ask you to suspend, in the first instance until 21 July, what we say is an ill-considered, discriminatory, authoritarian abuse of statutory power that is alien to the basic tradition of common law and contrary to the Human Rights Act." Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also representing Ms Ammori, said, along with the hundreds of T-shirts in circulation, the red boiler suits associated with the group and even kaffiyehs could "arouse suspicion of membership". She said the ban would have a "chilling effect" on protest and free speech, criminalising "a huge range of behaviour", and having "severe and far reaching" consequences capable of impacting "vast numbers" of people across the UK and further afield. But Ben Watson KC, representing the government, said former members would still be free to express their views, and would not be treated any differently even if their protests involved direct action which is criminal. He argued a temporary block would be a "serious disfigurement of the statutory regime" and Palestine Action could challenge the home secretary's decision at a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. "The serious issue to be tried is met in full by the adequate alternative remedy that parliament has provided," he said. "Even if the court does conclude that there is some residual scope for judicial review… then we respectfully submit that the court needs to look at the bespoke regime that parliament has provided."


South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Reeves says welfare fallout ‘damaging' and declines to rule out tax hikes
The Chancellor warned there would be 'costs to what happened', as she faced questions about how she would cover a shortfall left by the Downing Street climbdown on planned cuts to disability benefits. The Government saw off the threat of a major Commons defeat over the legislation on Tuesday, after shelving plans to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip) in the face of a backbench revolt. The original welfare proposals had been part of a package that ministers expected would save up to £5 billion a year, with economists warning that tax rises are now likely to plug a gap left by the concessions to rebels. The fallout threatens to cause lasting damage to morale in Labour ranks, with some MPs calling for a reset in relations between the parliamentary party and the leadership before fractures widen. Images of the Chancellor crying in the Commons on Wednesday also spooked the financial markets and led to questions about her future, though a Treasury spokesman said the tears were the result of a personal matter and Downing Street said she would remain in post. In an interview with the Guardian newspaper, Ms Reeves said she had never considered resigning, adding: 'I didn't work that hard to then quit.' She said she had gone to Prime Minister's Questions because she 'thought that was the right thing to do' but that 'in retrospect, I probably wished I hadn't gone in… (on) a tough day in the office'. Ms Reeves added: 'It's been damaging. 'I'm not going to deny that, but I think where we are now, with a review led by (disability minister) Stephen Timms, who is obviously incredibly respected and has a huge amount of experience, that's the route we're taking now.' Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has said the Government is still committed to welfare reform, but ministers will now wait for the conclusions of the Timms review before implementing changes to Pip.


Glasgow Times
an hour ago
- Glasgow Times
Reeves says welfare fallout ‘damaging' and declines to rule out tax hikes
The Chancellor warned there would be 'costs to what happened', as she faced questions about how she would cover a shortfall left by the Downing Street climbdown on planned cuts to disability benefits. The Government saw off the threat of a major Commons defeat over the legislation on Tuesday, after shelving plans to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip) in the face of a backbench revolt. Rachel Reeves said she had never considered resigning as Chancellor (Jack Hill/The Times/PA) The original welfare proposals had been part of a package that ministers expected would save up to £5 billion a year, with economists warning that tax rises are now likely to plug a gap left by the concessions to rebels. The fallout threatens to cause lasting damage to morale in Labour ranks, with some MPs calling for a reset in relations between the parliamentary party and the leadership before fractures widen. Images of the Chancellor crying in the Commons on Wednesday also spooked the financial markets and led to questions about her future, though a Treasury spokesman said the tears were the result of a personal matter and Downing Street said she would remain in post. In an interview with the Guardian newspaper, Ms Reeves said she had never considered resigning, adding: 'I didn't work that hard to then quit.' She said she had gone to Prime Minister's Questions because she 'thought that was the right thing to do' but that 'in retrospect, I probably wished I hadn't gone in… (on) a tough day in the office'. Ms Reeves added: 'It's been damaging. 'I'm not going to deny that, but I think where we are now, with a review led by (disability minister) Stephen Timms, who is obviously incredibly respected and has a huge amount of experience, that's the route we're taking now.' Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has said the Government is still committed to welfare reform, but ministers will now wait for the conclusions of the Timms review before implementing changes to Pip.