
Huge boat of 60 migrants launch from French beach towards the UK - because police were in the wrong place
A huge boat of migrants was able to leave French shores this morning - because the police were standing in the wrong place.
French cops were no where to be seen when the boat carrying 60 migrants made up of men, women and children set sail from Gravelines.
Instead, they were standing half a mile away on the beach, despite expecting crossings on a clear morning of weather like today.
This year so far, more than 18,000 migrants have arrived via the Channel, in a record for this point in the year since data collection began in 2018.
One eye-witness said: 'It was comical. They had been out in force all morning and yesterday were patrolling the beaches for this morning.
'Then when it came to it they were nowhere to be seen. It was like a Carry On film. It was incredible.
'It was one of the biggest boats to launch in weeks as well. Men, women and children were on board. It was shocking.
'The police had positioned themselves in one place and they missed it entirely.
'It begs the question what the British taxpayer is spending millions of pounds a year on.'
Another eye-witness said French police had spent more time trying to intervene with the media observing the crossings than stopping them.
They said: 'The police caused issues for the media but were in the wrong place for a large crossing. It's a joke.'
It comes only weeks after it was announced that French police will now be able to stop the small boats while they are still in shallow waters.
French cops have typically only been able to intervene before refugees and migrants enter the water, unless they are rescuing someone who is at risk of drowning.
French authorities are reportedly set to introduce this new maritime doctrine from the beginning of July which would allow police to intercept dinghies up to 300 metres from the shore.
But French police unions are sceptical that the proposed measures can realistically be implemented, due to limited means and human resources.
'It's going to require quite a large number of boats, because we have to cover a strip of 300 metres along 180 kilometres so... this means aerial surveillance too,' Alliance police union representative Julien Soir said, adding it would required allocating 'hundreds of (additional) officers'.
Today is expected to be a busy day, as the calm water and warm weather make it likely for hundreds to set sail for the UK.
Trips across the Channel have become far more deadly over time, with 73 people passing away while trying to reach the UK in 2024 - five times the number in 2023.
It is thought this is due to ruthless smuggling gangs switching up tactics and heavily overcrowding boats, often forcing 80 people or more to cram into each dinghy.
Earlier this month, more than 50 police tried to stop as many as 200 migrants in Gravelines reaching the sea - and with the aid of teargas grenades stopped more than half.
But those who dodged police simply waited for the so-called 'taxi boat' to ferry them across the Channel while police remained under strict rules to not apprehend anyone in the sea.
A Downing Street spokesman said at the time that Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron agreed during a meeting at the G7 in Canada that the Channel situation was 'deteriorating'.
The pair both believe that 'migration should be a key focus' and they should 'continue to work closely with other partners to find innovative ways to drive forward progress', according to a No.10 readout.
The two leaders are reportedly working on a 'one in, one out' scheme where Britain would take on asylum seekers who have family ties to the UK in exchange for small boat migrants returned to France.
Details are yet to be finalised but five EU countries have already raised concerns about the deal.
Italy, Spain, Greece, Malta and Cyprus are said to have sent a letter to the European Commission over 'serious concerns for us, both procedurally and in terms of potential implications for other member states, particularly those of first entry', The Financial Times reported.
They are concerned that France will use existing rules that would send migrants to the first country in Europe they arrived in - with these five countries often being the first place they come to.
Hashtags

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


Daily Mail
30 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Broadcasters must air the view that trans women are women, media watchdog says
Broadcasters should air the opinion that trans women are women when covering transgender topics, the UK's media watchdog has reportedly said. Ofcom allegedly told GB News that transgender issues should not be seen as 'settled' despite the Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that the legal definition of a woman should be based on their sex at birth. The Telegraph say they have seen a letter from the watchdog where they tell the channel that broadcasters should potentially share the view that a woman could be someone who has been born a biological man. GB News had reportedly written to Ofcom asking them to confirm that the ruling had cleared up any confusion over whether a person could be addressed by their biological sex rather than what they identify as. The channel also allegedly asked Ofcom to confirm that broadcasters could refer to sports players by their biological pronoun and not gender identity. The newspaper say GB News posed the point that the ruling had made it a 'settled matter that a trans woman is not a biological female, and a trans man is not a biological male'. The channel reportedly added: 'Following the Supreme Court judgment we are of the view that (provided there is no deliberate intention to cause harm or offence), contributors should generally be able to use biological pronouns.' However, the watchdog is said to have responded that the ruling should be contextualised in the Equality Act, suggesting that a person's preferred choice of identity should instead be used on air. The newspaper went on to say that Ofcom labelled GB News's propositions as 'dogmatic' and that the topics required 'nuanced decision-making'. Their response allegedly said that they did not follow the thought that the Supreme Court ruling had 'settled' wider debate about the 'appropriate meaning, usage and effect of such terms in all contexts outside the scope of the Equality Act'. They are alleged to have said that this includes 'in broadcast programmes in which issues relating to sex and gender-based rights are discussed generally', which they say 'the judgment does not purport to do so'. The Ofcom response reportedly continued to say that each broadcaster has a right to 'freedom of expression' as well as the 'editorial discretion which uncontroversially accompanies the exercise of those rights on issues of significant public interest'. An Ofcom spokesperson said: 'Ofcom is a post-broadcast regulator. 'In line with the rights of broadcasters and audiences to freedom of expression, our rules allow broadcasters editorial freedom to choose how to cover issues in their programmes subject to the Broadcasting Code. 'Our assessment of whether content complies with the Broadcasting Code is always fact-specific and takes into account all relevant contextual factors, requiring nuanced decision-making, and not a "one size fits all" approach.'


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
As three submarine captains are stripped of their OBEs... How one brave woman – with the Mail's help – exposed a culture of sexual abuse, vile misogyny and bullying among the Royal Navy's top rank
For more than a century, the Royal Navy's submarine service has operated behind a thick curtain of secrecy – a shadowy world of steel corridors and sonar silence, where power is absolute, scrutiny seemingly minimal and those in command are lionised as guardians of our country's deadliest weapons. But now, that carefully curated image is unravelling as the elite service faces perhaps its most damning reckoning yet.


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
DANIEL HANNAN: Britain used to be a society where people worked. Now, one in 10 adults is claiming benefits. I know the exact moment everything changed... and this is why we're now heading towards disaster
How did it happen so suddenly? How did we go from being a society where most people had jobs, to one where one in ten working-age adults is claiming incapacity or disability benefits? How is it nearly 3,000 people a day are signed off as too sick to work – from 2,000 under the Tories? And that the number of claimants is expected to go from 3.3 million to 4.1 million by the end of this Parliament?