French Stopping Even Fewer Small Boats Since Deal With Starmer
French police are preventing even fewer small boat crossings since Sir Keir Starmer struck a deal with President Emmanuel Macron to tackle the crisis, the success rate dropping from 38% to an abysmal 28.7%. The Telegraph has the story.
Just over a quarter (28.7%) of migrants’ attempts to make the crossing have been stopped by French officers since the agreement was implemented in August.
This contrasts with the 38% of migrant crossings the French prevented in an equivalent 13-week period before the ‘one in, one out’ deal was struck with France, according to an analysis of official data.
As part of the agreement, the French Government pledged to adopt new tactics in which, for the first time, elite officers would intervene at sea, within 300 metres of the beaches, to intercept the people smugglers’ dinghies before they crossed the Channel.
However, the tactics have been delayed because of officers’ concerns that they could put the lives of the migrants at risk by stopping the flimsy boats at sea.
Amid growing frustration among UK officials at the delays, people smugglers are now using videos of French police doing little to stop migrants crossing the Channel to advertise their services on social media.
Chris Philp, the Shadow Home Secretary, said the French performance was “lamentable”.
“Preventing only a quarter of embarkation attempts is pathetic. No wonder migrants are using videos of French police standing around to illustrate how easy it is to cross,” he said.
“I saw this myself when I went to the Calais area in the summer, with French police ushering illegal immigrants onto a public bus towards embarkation points. We have seen 2,000 illegal immigrants cross in a four-day period recently. The Government has lost control of our borders.”
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“French Stopping Even Fewer Small Boats Since Deal With Starmer”
Well of course not, they don’t need to. Starmer has been quite clear, the problem is now solved by his brilliant deal with Emperor Macron.
I ask again, why should the authorities of any country prevent people from leaving said country?
I ask again, is it wise for a country to be dependent for its border security on another country’s border force?
I ask again, why can’t a country take charge of preventing people entering said country?
No. It’s nonsense. Why this constant attempt to blame the French mafia for the British mafia’s inability to protect its own borders? Is it – perhaps! – to distract from the real reason – that there are too many people in positions of power in Britain making huge profits from the whole affair, via grift itself and via thankyous for granting opportunities for grift? Is it perhaps also that there are too many people in positions of power in Britain who get a kick out of Divide and Conquer?
The onus is undoubtedly on the UK government, who aren’t even trying because it’s all deliberate. If it weren’t deliberate then why do the migrants get escorted by the French Navy to the middle of the Channel where the RNLI are waiting for the handover? It’s like a tag team effort. I’m not sure how many dinghies even make it all the way to Dover seeing as the RNLI just hoover them up to take safely to shore. And you’ve had a few I’ve read about where they were returned to France only to rock up again to the UK so I think the paying of people smugglers is only done from their country of origin, the Channel crossings they don’t have to pay for and can have as many tries as they like. The ‘Raise the Colours’ guys from Birmingham heroically stopped 70 migrants crossing, but they’ll just try again another day. This is the sort of dangerous, predatory filth washing up courtesy of the ‘Trojan Horse’ so-called asylum system; ‘He was making pleas and shouts from the dock… but that teenage victim now has justice.’ ”Charlie Peters reports from Oxford Crown Court where small boat migrant Amin Abedi… Read more »
It’s madness to think that France or any other country for that matter would want to help us in this regard, if it means it’s harder for illegals to leave their country. Who wouldn’t be happy seeing them leave?
Not really if you have seen the footage of around Gravelines and Grand Fort Phillipe as the immigrant scum make it a living hell for the residents. If you shut down the boats with a vengeance – there was footage of the scum carrying a dinghy through residential streets in daylight – then they will stop coming. Given how easy it is to get the French out protesting I am surprised they haven’t already. Or arrange for huntsmen to take out the dinghies. Surround their coastal towns with razor wire defences and setup vigilante patrols.
Yes, it’s obviously being done deliberately.
So this is just a glimpse of the horrendous reality that most won’t be aware of regarding the farcical ‘asylum system’, courtesy of a whistleblower; ”What we didn’t know until now, is nothing short of terrifying. The Home Office is allegedly waving through known criminals, in order to clear the backlog and fudge the numbers. In other words, the prevention of future rapes, stabbings and murders is taking a backseat to political expediency. Here is a summary of the most salient revelations: Caseworkers are forced to refer to asylum applicants as “customers.” Applicants repeatedly change their stories: for instance, an Iranian claims asylum for anti-regime political activity, then switches to being a Christian convert, and finally claims homosexuality. Each new claim blocks removal and secures housing/funding. The process repeats until appeal rights are exhausted—this can take between 7 and 10 years. Even if a deportation order is issued, it is “mainly voluntary.” Very few applicants ever get sent home, because the Home Office “hasn’t got the resources or the willpower to do it.” The rejected claimants “just disappear.” The whistleblower estimates hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers have ‘disappeared.’ And, indeed, when they abscond, the cases are closed as “implicit withdrawal”—this improves the statistics… Read more »
Thank you for this, sort of; it is terrifying.
It’s all and dog and pony show.
I do wish people would stop referring to 2TK’s (USELESS) deal as “One In, One Out”. It is nothing of the kind – that description is an out-and-out lie (even if it did work, which it doesn’t). It is “Two In, One Out”. Viz. : one migrant crosses the Channel into the UK. He is deported back to France and, in return, the Frogs send another migrant over here who is ‘legal’. It doesn’t take a brilliant mathematician to work out that two people have entered the UK whilst only one has departed. Duuuuh.
Add to that the likelihood of the deported one re-entering via another illegal crossing and you end up with “Two in, plus one”.
I have some sympathy with the French Police. For every dinghy, there are about 70 violent men, facing two or three police.
We need the military to deal with them. But of course that would be against the ‘Uman Rites of the “peaceful, desperate refugees.”
Naval blockade, job done. Our politicians utterly despise us and think the third world is a shiny beacon of humanity that needs to replace us pronto.