logo
After years watching Channel migrant crisis unfold Brits have just about snapped – and it's killing Starmer

After years watching Channel migrant crisis unfold Brits have just about snapped – and it's killing Starmer

The Sun24-07-2025
CAST your mind back to Christmas 2018 when a few dozen migrants clambered into rickety dinghies off the French coast and headed for ­Britain.
Then-Home Secretary Sajid Javid flew back early from his family holiday to declare a 'major incident', MPs called for the Navy to be deployed and the public rightly demanded action.
2
2
You don't need me to tell you what ­happened next: over the next seven years 174,000 more would-be asylum seekers crossed the English Channel.
Billions of pounds of taxpayer cash have been ploughed into snapping up hotels for them to live in, with free bed and board.
The lives of vulnerable men, women and children have been tragically lost.
And families feeling the pinch have watched agog as successive governments throw good money after bad.
Yesterday's revelation that thousands of asylum seekers have been gambling with money from taxpayer-funded pre-paid cards was shocking.
But in many ways what is more depressing is that nobody is even really surprised any more.
All roads lead to migration
After years of hollow promises from ­politicians vowing to get a grip, voter patience is at breaking point — and the ­evidence backs it up.
Immigration has now leapfrogged the economy and health to become the ­number one issue for the electorate.
According to the pollster Scarlett Maguire, the public mood has taken a turn even in the last few months.
When trying to take the nation's ­temperature in focus groups, it seems that all roads lead to migration.
16 arrested after protests outside Epping migrant hotel as ring of steel ramps up around TWO asylum seeker centres
'Even when I ask people's views about housing or the NHS, almost always the voters will bring the conversation back to migration,' she tells me.
After years watching the Channel crisis unfold, it appears Brits have just about snapped. This does not bode well for Sir Keir Starmer.
In a recent YouGov poll, 55 per cent of us thought the Government was ­handling immigration 'very badly', and 22 per cent 'fairly badly'.
Just 14 per cent thought the PM was doing a good job — a dismal verdict on his attempts so far to get a handle on the scandal.
Ministers like to crow about statistics they insist prove the opposite. They point to an increase in the number of deportations, or that spending on ­asylum is down by a third.
All credible achievements, but, as one Starmer aide puts it: 'It's the visibility which is killing us. People see the boats, they see the migrant hotels and they just can't believe it.'
It is a point Labour MPs — once terrified to touch illegal migration for fear of upsetting their base — are starting to make.
Even those on the soft Left of the party are becoming more vocal, because the impact on their constituents is impossible to ignore.
That senior backbencher Meg Hillier publicly took Starmer to task on homeless families having to compete for housing with asylum seekers reflects the shifting public mood.
Or as one Labour MP tells me: 'You are always going to get a few left-wing ­back-benchers that see controlling our ­borders as a right-wing concept, which is clearly mental.
'But the party is waking up to the fact that the public is losing patience.
'The fact that many of my colleagues are talking about European ­Convention on Human Rights reform is quite something — it would have been unimaginable even a few years ago.'
The clock is ticking because currently it is Nigel Farage who is laughing all the way to the ballot box.
Jack Elsom
Figures around Starmer say he is finally recognising the scale of anger simmering through the population.
As protesters have rallied outside migrant hotels in recent weeks, Downing Street has been at pains to stress it understands their concerns. One insider says: 'Keir has become alive to the rage.
A year ago he was calling people far-right. You don't hear him say that any more.'
Some in the Labour tribe hope this is the moment the PM finally grasps the ­nettle and gets radical.
Yes, he has signed a returns deal with France and inked various other agreements aimed at flushing out the smuggling gangs.
But to quench the public's thirst for action, there is a sense among many ­Labour ­figures that none of this cuts the mustard.
One loyalist MP tells me: 'They do get how bad it is. But that now needs to feed into radical policy, with urgency.
'The French deal is genuinely very impressive but it will take time to come through. And we don't have that much time.'
The clock is ticking because currently it is Nigel Farage who is laughing all the way to the ballot box.
The public wants radical
The Reform leader's hardline stance on migration has earned him a commanding lead in the polls.
Some 36 per cent of voters say he is best placed to slash migration, compared to 11 per cent for Labour and a mere six per cent for the Tories.
His uncompromising promise to tow the boats back to France has gone down a storm with supporters, but met with mocking derision by detractors. They mock him at their peril.
As one down-to-earth Labour figure put it: 'We're idiots if we think the way to beat ­Farage is by saying his ideas are too radical — we need to understand, the ­public WANTS radical.'
Some of the hardliners in the party want a Thatcher-style 'purge of the wets' — with Attorney General Lord Hermer top of their list.
For decades much of the country has felt concerns about immigration have been suppressed Westminster politicians.
Many are now finding their voice for the first time.
And even the ones who are not speaking publicly will make their feelings known at the ballot box.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Minister denies migrant returns deal leaves open human rights loophole
Minister denies migrant returns deal leaves open human rights loophole

South Wales Guardian

time26 minutes ago

  • South Wales Guardian

Minister denies migrant returns deal leaves open human rights loophole

Dame Angela Eagle denied the agreement with France would allow for spurious claims to be used to avoid deportation after shadow home secretary Chris Philp questioned the wording of the document. The 'one-in, one out' deal coming into effect on Wednesday will see migrants ineligible to stay in the UK sent back across the Channel, in exchange for taking those who have links to Britain. The agreement contains a clause that says in order for people to be returned to France, the UK must confirm they do not have an 'outstanding human rights claim'. Critics have argued this could risk bogus applications being made to frustrate the deportation process and cause delays. Mr Philp said on Tuesday this section offered 'an easy loophole for lawyers', adding that 'France will not give us any data on the people they are sending our way… so we have no idea who they really are'. Borders minister Dame Angela said he was wrong, and that the clause was included 'precisely to ensure no-one can use 'clearly unfounded' human rights claims to avoid being returned'. She added: 'And we will do full security checks on any applicants, and reject anyone who poses a risk.' Home Secretary Yvette Cooper conceded earlier that the accord is not a 'silver bullet' to stop small boat crossings, but marked a step change as migrants will be sent back across the Channel for the first time. Speaking to the BBC, she declined to put a number on how many people would be returned under the agreement ahead of time, saying that she believed it could aid criminal gangs. She added: 'We will provide regular updates, people will be able to see how many people are being detained, how many people are being returned, and it is right that we should be transparent around that.' Speaking to reporters earlier, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said the deal would likely result in only small numbers of migrants being swapped with France and is 'not going to make any difference whatsoever'. Asked whether the Conservatives were partly to blame for the immigration and asylum situation, she told reporters: 'No I don't accept that at all, because what Labour are doing is just rubber-stamping all of the applications and saying they're processing.' It has been reported that about 50 a week could be sent to France. This would be a stark contrast to the more than 800 people every week who on average have arrived in the UK via small boats this year. Bruno Retailleau, France's interior minister, said the agreement 'establishes an experimental mechanism whose goal is clear: to smash the gangs'. The initial agreement will be in place until June 2026.

Rachel Reeves ‘must find £50bn' in tax rises or spending cuts in budget
Rachel Reeves ‘must find £50bn' in tax rises or spending cuts in budget

Times

timean hour ago

  • Times

Rachel Reeves ‘must find £50bn' in tax rises or spending cuts in budget

Rachel Reeves is facing a £50 billion black hole in the government finances and economists are warning that she will be forced to break Labour's manifesto pledge on tax in the autumn budget. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) said higher-than-expected public sector borrowing and weaker economic growth had left the chancellor with an 'impossible' choice between cutting spending or raising taxes to balance the books. Under present estimates, it said, Reeves would need to find £41.2 billion to cover the costs of weaker economic forecasts and tax reversals, plus a further £9.9 billion, if she was to have the same headroom as she had at the time of her last financial statement in March. Other economists said their projections also suggested that Reeves would have no choice but to 'pull the lever' of increasing income tax, VAT or employee national insurance to cover the shortfall. This would breach Labour's manifesto commitment to not raise taxes on working people. NIESR's latest economic outlook also found that the government's fiscal situation had sharply deteriorated since Reeves' statement in March. It found that total government expenditure was £14.3 billion higher than in the spring. The government's failure to pass its welfare reforms and its U-turn over winter fuel payments further increased spending by £15.2 billion. It also said that weaker output and employment growth compared with the Office for Budget Responsibility's (OBR) forecast in March implied lower tax revenue and higher welfare payments by 2028-29. NIESR's estimate for the fiscal shortfall is higher than estimates from City analysts who expect Reeves to face a shortfall of between £20 billion and £25 billion. However, even at this level the chancellor is likely to be forced to raise one of the main tax rates to make up the shortfall. This is likely to include freezing income rate thresholds for another year, pulling more people into the higher 40 per cent rate of tax. Stephen Millard, of NIESR, said that Reeves faced an 'impossible trilemma' between breaking her fiscal rules, breaching an electoral promise not to raise taxes on working people or hitting the government's spending targets. 'Can she fill that gap without breaking the manifesto commitment to raising taxes on working people? I think the quick answer to that is no,' he said. 'Fiddling at the edges won't do the job.' • Should Rachel Reeves raise income tax? Economists at Deutsche Bank think Reeves faces a narrower £20 billion gap that could be filled by extending the freeze on income tax thresholds beyond 2028 — raising about £7-£10 billion. The government could also announce no real-term spending growth at the end of the decade, raising an additional £5 billion, Sanjay Raja, UK economist at Deutsche Bank, said. He said: 'With growth at only 1.3 per cent and inflation above target, things are not looking good for the chancellor, who will need to either raise taxes or reduce spending or both in the October budget if she is to meet her fiscal rules.' Ruth Gregory, chief economist at Capital Economics, said they expected Reeves would miss her targets by up to £25 billion, but the figure could be larger if the OBR downgraded its growth forecasts for the UK economy. 'If the budget deficit is larger than £20 billion, Reeves will have to pull one of the big tax levers like VAT, income tax or employee national insurance to make up the difference,' she said. 'Given that the chancellor decided to increase the tax burden on businesses in the last budget by raising employer national insurance contributions, we would expect that this time the burden will fall on households.'

Minister denies migrant returns deal leaves open human rights loophole
Minister denies migrant returns deal leaves open human rights loophole

ITV News

timean hour ago

  • ITV News

Minister denies migrant returns deal leaves open human rights loophole

A minister has rejected opposition suggestions that the Government's migrant returns deal leaves open a loophole for human rights laws to be exploited. Dame Angela Eagle denied the agreement with France would allow for spurious claims to be used to avoid deportation after shadow home secretary Chris Philp questioned the wording of the document. The 'one-in, one out' deal coming into effect on Wednesday will see migrants ineligible to stay in the UK sent back across the Channel, in exchange for taking those who have links to Britain. The agreement contains a clause that says in order for people to be returned to France, the UK must confirm they do not have an 'outstanding human rights claim'. Critics have argued this could risk bogus applications being made to frustrate the deportation process and cause delays. Mr Philp said on Tuesday this section offered 'an easy loophole for lawyers', adding that 'France will not give us any data on the people they are sending our way… so we have no idea who they really are'. Borders minister Dame Angela said he was wrong, and that the clause was included 'precisely to ensure no-one can use 'clearly unfounded' human rights claims to avoid being returned'. She added: 'And we will do full security checks on any applicants, and reject anyone who poses a risk.' Home Secretary Yvette Cooper conceded earlier that the accord is not a 'silver bullet' to stop small boat crossings, but marked a step change as migrants will be sent back across the Channel for the first time. Speaking to the BBC, she declined to put a number on how many people would be returned under the agreement ahead of time, saying that she believed it could aid criminal gangs. She added: 'We will provide regular updates, people will be able to see how many people are being detained, how many people are being returned, and it is right that we should be transparent around that.' Speaking to reporters earlier, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said the deal would likely result in only small numbers of migrants being swapped with France and is 'not going to make any difference whatsoever'. Asked whether the Conservatives were partly to blame for the immigration and asylum situation, she told reporters: 'No I don't accept that at all, because what Labour are doing is just rubber-stamping all of the applications and saying they're processing.' It has been reported that about 50 a week could be sent to France. This would be a stark contrast to the more than 800 people every week who on average have arrived in the UK via small boats this year. Bruno Retailleau, France's interior minister, said the agreement 'establishes an experimental mechanism whose goal is clear: to smash the gangs'.

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