Starmer to discuss ‘global problem' of illegal migration with German Chancellor
Writing in the Sunday Express newspaper, Sir Keir said Mr Merz's visit to the UK will include talks on 'what more we can do together to prosecute criminal networks and prevent people smuggling to the UK'.
'The networks of these criminal gangs stretch across countless countries and legal systems, showing no respect for our borders,' he added.
'We'll go further to tackle this shared issue together.'
According to the Home Office, 353 people crossed the English Channel by small boat on Friday, just a day after the Prime Minister signed a deal with French President Emmanuel Macron aimed at deterring migrants from making the perilous journey.
This was down from the 573 people who crossed on Thursday, the first time any such journeys were made in a week.
More crossings were witnessed on Saturday, but the full figures are yet to be published.
Border force vessels and the RNLI were called out on both Thursday and Friday to reports of multiple boats crossing the channel, the Coastguard said.
A statement from the Coastguard said: 'HM Coastguard has been co-ordinating a response to multiple incidents involving small boats in the Channel on 10 and 11 July.
'UK Border Force and RNLI vessels have been sent as part of this response.'
Under the terms of the deal agreed by the Prime Minister and Mr Macron, the UK will be able to send migrants back to France for the first time in exchange for asylum seekers with links to Britain.
The so-called one in, one out deal is due to begin in weeks on a pilot basis, but needs final legal verification from the EU.
Downing Street has indicated ministers expect the EU to support the arrangement, amid concerns among some European governments that migrants who have travelled to Britain could end up back on their territory.
No details have been given about how many people will be covered by the pilot, but French officials had indicated it could initially be limited to about 50 a week, a small fraction of the weekly average this year of 782.
Sir Keir wrote: 'This is what serious, practical solutions to global problems look like.
'We will do our duty as a compassionate country, accepting genuine asylum seekers who respect our rules and our way of life. That is fair.
'But people who try to make the crossing illegally will soon find themselves back where they started. That is a real deterrent.'
At least 21,000 people have already made the journey since January, putting 2025 on course to be a record year for crossings.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Starmer's fury over Afghan data breach as he warns Tories ‘have questions to answer'
Keir Starmer has vented his fury over the cover-up of the catastrophic data breach that risked the lives of up to 100,000 Afghans, as it emerged no one had faced action over the huge blunder. The prime minister said the leak should never have happened and that Tory ministers have 'serious questions to answer', a day after an unprecedented superinjunction was lifted. Ben Wallace, who was defence secretary at the time the draconian legal order was granted, earlier said he took full responsibility for the leak, which happened when an MoD official released a spreadsheet containing the names of 18,000 Afghans "in error". But questions have been raised over why no one has been fired over the breach, which put the lives of those with links to UK forces in danger of reprisals from the Taliban, amid calls for further investigation. It comes as the chair of a powerful Commons committee has written to the Information Commissioner, applying pressure for a rethink on its decision not to investigate the breach, which cost the taxpayer billions in relocating thousands of affected Afghans to the UK. At the start of a tense Prime Minister's Questions, Sir Keir expressed his anger, telling MPs: "We warned in opposition about Conservative management of this policy and yesterday, the defence secretary set out the full extent of the failings that we inherited: a major data breach, a super injunction, a secret route that has already cost hundreds of millions of pounds. "Ministers who served under the party opposite have serious questions to answer about how this was ever allowed to happen." He suggested the Conservatives should "welcome" scrutiny from the Commons Defence Committee, which has vowed to investigate. In a dramatic intervention just hours later, right-wing former home secretary Suella Braverman revealed that there were splits in the Tory government over how to deal with the breach and said she had opposed the superinjunction and the new secret route set up to bring those affected to the UK. In a scathing statement, Ms Braverman condemned the former Tory government, then led by Rishi Sunak, in which she played a major role before she was sacked by the former prime minister. She said: 'There is much more that needs to be said about the conduct of the MoD, both ministers and officials, and the House of Commons is the right place to do so. I hope we have the opportunity soon. 'What has happened is outrageous and must never happen again. We must therefore be very clear about what that was and how it happened. 'The cover-up was wrong, the super injunction was wrong, and the failure to stop unwanted mass immigration has been unforgivable. So, I am sorry: the Conservative government failed you and its leaders let you down. It wasn't good enough then. It's not good enough now.' Mr Sunak, ex-defence secretary Grant Shapps and former armed forces minister James Heappey, who oversaw the cover-up, have all been contacted for comment, but none have broken cover and have all remained silent on the breach. Amid calls for further investigation into the breach, Defence Secretary John Healey said that 'accountability starts now' after admitting that he was uncomfortable with the way that the information had been covered up for three years. The Commons Defence Committee confirmed it would launch its own inquiry, and Dame Chi Onwurah, chair of the Commons committee for science innovation and technology, is writing to the Information Commissioner pushing for an investigation. The Information Commissioner has so far declined to hold its own probe, despite previously issuing a fine of £305,000 for a much smaller MoD data breach. Dame Chi told The Independent: 'A leak of this magnitude is, of course, extremely worrying and the fact that it happened in the Ministry of Defence brings the additional dimension of security concerns. The Defence Select Committee Office (ICO) will be undertaking a full inquiry, in the meantime I will be writing to the Information Commissioner to ask for more details on his office's role in this case.' Jon Baines, a senior data protection specialist at Mishcon de Reya, expressed bafflement at the commissioner's attitude to the breach. He said: 'I have not seen such unanimous bafflement from the data protection commentariat at the ICO's lack of apparent interest. 'There is a potential argument that there is no point in a big fine against the MoD when it would punish the public purse. 'Enforcement is not just about fines. The information commissioner has the power to lay a report before parliament. I have been banging on for years about the issue of hidden data in spreadsheets, and if I were the commissioner, I would be thinking about how I can raise the issue. 'A report before parliament would give them publicity, raise the issue and seize parliament.' The ICO has not responded to The Independent 's request for comment. Meanwhile, a member of the defence select committee has warned against naming and shaming the individual responsible for the breach and said the committee should instead look at a failure of government. Confirming the committee would launch an inquiry, its chair, Labour MP Tan Dhesi, told BBC Radio 4's The World at One Programme: "We want to get to the bottom of what has happened on behalf of parliament, which has been sidelined for too long on this issue.' "Ultimately, I think the fact there has been no parliamentary scrutiny, that nobody's been held to account on this, is just not on at all." Leyton and Wanstead Labour MP Calvin Bailey, who was a key figure in organising flights out of Kabul when allied forces went into a chaotic retreat as the Taliban swept to power in 2021, called for 'proper scrutiny' on the matter. He said: 'We need to go back and give proper scrutiny to everything, not just the data breach, the whole culture management and oversight of the operation, of the extraction recovery, the foreign policy and the military engagement and involvement. 'We will probably find that people were working under duress and pressure, because there were too few people to deal with the crisis.' He also warned that the defence committee was 'best placed to do the necessary work' as a full public inquiry 'would take too long and be too expensive'.
New Statesman
23 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Why Keir Starmer has purged Labour rebels again
Photo by Isabel Infantes - WPA Pool / Getty Images. Keir Starmer's premiership began with discord, not harmony. Just three weeks after Labour's landslide victory, seven MPs had the whip suspended for voting in favour of a SNP amendment backing the abolition of the two-child benefit cap (something Starmer has since described in private as his personal priority). Almost exactly a year on, and in the aftermath of the mass welfare revolt, Starmer has enacted new reprisals. Four Labour MPs – Neil Duncan-Jordan, Chris Hinchcliff, Brian Leishman and Rachael Maskell – have had the whip removed for 'repeated breaches of party discipline' while an additional three – Rosena Allin-Khan, Bell Ribeiro-Addy and Mohammad Yasin – have lost their trade envoy posts (all seven were among the 47 Labour MPs who voted against the welfare bill in its amended form). The latter move is unsurprising: trade envoys are appointed to support the government and, as such, are expected to follow collective responsibility. More contentious among MPs is the renewed targeting of backbenchers. But one Starmer ally was unrepentant: 'These people were openly and publicly organising against the government whose programme they were elected to deliver,' they said (three of the four whipless MPs were elected for the first time in 2024). 'Government doesn't work unless they feel the weight of rebelling against it in the flagrant way these guys did'. In language that enraged some inside Labour, Maskell wrote in the New Statesman: 'What happened last Tuesday, on 1 July, was more significant than a policy climb-down. Power shifted. Keir Starmer's government was forced to recognise that autocracy is no way to rule: power is given by consent and can equally be taken away.' By acting now, No 10 has sent a warning to would-be ringleaders of anticipated rebellions over special educational needs reform, the two-child limit and the forthcoming immigration bill. But the timing – a week before the summer recess – has stunned MPs who believed Starmer had entered a more conciliatory phase of his premiership – more carrot and less stick (Downing Street has spoken of 'the need to bring people with us'). And there are at least two unflattering historical comparisons that are being made among MPs. The first is with Tony Blair who endured numerous revolts but allowed rebels such as Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell to retain the whip even as they broke it hundreds of times. 'Both Blair and [Gordon] Brown were relaxed because they were always confident that they could win the argument and didn't need threats,' John McDonnell, who lost the Labour whip last July, told me. The second is with Dominic Cummings. It was Boris Johnson's strategist who in recent history pioneered the tactic of removing the whip from rebels – 21 Conservative MPs suffered this fate in September 2019 after seeking to thwart a no-deal Brexit. This was ruthlessness but for a clear purpose: removing all obstacles to the UK leaving the EU. The challenge for Starmer – after multiple U-turns – is that even sympathisers remain uncertain what his is. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Related
Telegraph
23 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Talking freely about Islam ‘feared more than any other religion'
People are more fearful of speaking freely about Islam than any other religion, a survey has found. Almost twice as many adults feel they have to hold back on expressing their views about the faith as they do for Christianity, according to research by the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE), which advises the Government. The study, to be published on Thursday, also found that Islam was the only religion which more people felt was protected 'too much' rather than 'too little'. A quarter of those who held back on speaking out on religious topics said they did so because of fears about their safety. Some 46 per cent said they had done so to avoid causing offence or starting an argument. The study, based on interviews with 2,500 people, was conducted by Ipsos UK for the CCE.
