A mega dinghy has sparked a new phase of the Channel crisis (Image: SNSM)
Channel migrant crossings may continue for another three years, Andy Burnham has admitted.
The Prime Minister insisted there is “more law enforcement on the other side of the Channel”, leading to increased patrols near Calais.
But he refused to put a timeline on an end to the small boats fiasco insisting only that there is a “relentless focus” on the issue that has plagued British politics for the past six years.
And he conceded the UK and French Governments will have to “change our tactics” after smugglers launched mega dinghies carrying as many as 230 people.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
The startling development has prompted fears of a new phase in the crisis – as Mr Burnham was told to invoke a “war-time” suspension of some human rights to ramp up deportations with the organised crime gangs “scaling up”.
The startling development has prompted fears of a new phase in the crisis – as Mr Burnham was told to invoke a “war-time” suspension of some human rights to ramp up deportations with the organised crime gangs “scaling up”. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: “The Burnham boats crisis gets worse and worse. First, he tried to claim there was a plan that was working. But just a fortnight later he’s been forced to admit it’s actually chaos.”
Mr Philp said: “Each day of calm seas brings hundreds of illegal immigrants, including on massive mega dinghies.
“The illegal immigrants are mainly young men, many of whom have gone on to commit crimes including murder and rape. If Andy Burnham was serious, he would adopt the Conservative plan to leave the ECHR so illegal immigrants can all be deported within a week of arrival.”
Some 230 people were detected on a single boat in the early hours of Monday morning.
And this followed an emergency last week, when 173 people were rescued from a vessel.
Mr Burnham said: “I know people will have been worried to see that image yesterday.
“It shows that the gangs are changing their tactics, but so will we.
“We will now change our tactics and we will be relentless in chasing them down.
“I said that when I visited Dover just over a week ago, and I meant it, and I was there to change the conversation.”
Asked if he could guarantee the boats wouldn’t be crossing by the time of the next General Election, Mr Burnham told GB News: “It would be wrong, I think, for me to make a prediction now based on a timeline.
“I mean, I just can only promise to people what I know I can do and what I know I can deliver.
Andy Burnham has admitted the boats may keep coming (Image: Getty)
“And that is a relentless focus on this issue to deal with the public concern.
“I heard it on doorstep after doorstep in Makerfield, and I said to the people there and I say it to the country ‘I hear what you say’.”
And the Prime Minister defended Labour’s handling of the crisis.
He said: “The deal that we put in place, the payment-by-results deal, has created a change.
“There is more law enforcement on the other side of the Channel in summer 2026 than there was last summer, and that has led to quite a reduction in the number of crossings.
“But that’s not good enough. People will say to me, we don’t want any crossings. I understand that concern.
“There are further things that we are doing, and we will keep going at this issue until we deliver that eradication that people are looking for.”
The inflatable boat carrying 230 people was “buckling” in the water and could have led to a tragedy, French rescuers warned.
And smuggling gangs have spread out into Normandy so they can launch vessels destined for Britain.
Mega dinghies are launched in canals and travel along the coast picking up groups of migrants.
Lord Alton, the chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, said smuggling gangs are “scaling up”.
And the situation has become “serious enough” for the UK and France to trigger Article 15 of the ECHR, the senior Peer said.
Invoking Article 15 could allow ministers to temporarily suspend migrants’ rights to a family life – a key hurdle in the Home Office’s battle to deport tens of thousands of failed asylum seekers.
Lord Alton said: “The CCP loses no sleep as thousands of migrants are exploited for malign purposes, including the aiding and abetting of criminal gangs.
“These new mega dinghies are a scaling up and, to my mind, constitutes a serious enough crisis in which Article 15 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) could be invoked.
“It is a personal view but one which was previously mooted by Lord Blunkett and which Shabana Mahmood should revisit.
“Invoking Article 15 would allow the government to take temporary specific steps that suspend certain human rights obligations during a time of war, or a public emergency that threatens the life of the nation.
“It should never be used casually and would be a temporary but reasonable response.
“The UK and France should give notice of their intention to do this.
Jean-Marc Lamblin, the director of the SNSM’s Berck-sur-Mer branch, said: “Over the past three months, we’ve been seeing more and more 15-metre boats passing through.”
He added that when the 150-migrants per boat figure was recently surpassed, “we didn’t think there could be any more, but there really is no limit now”.
Government sources say the smugglers are being forced to resort to the ‘mega-dinghies’ to make the crossings financially viable due to smaller crossings being increasingly disrupted by police operations.
“Sustained pressure from law enforcement means the gangs are finding it harder to launch boats and are therefore being forced to place more people onto them,” said a government source.
Fury as Andy Burnham Admits Small-Boat Crossings Could Continue for YEARS – ‘It’s Chaos!’
The debate over illegal migration across the English Channel has returned to the centre of British politics, with growing frustration over how long it could take to bring small-boat crossings under control. For communities concerned about border security, the asylum system and the cost of accommodation, the prospect that the problem could persist for years raises difficult questions about the government’s strategy.
Andy Burnham has pledged to pursue efforts to stop the crossings, but he has also acknowledged the complexity of the challenge. In September 2026, he said his government wanted to stop all small-boat crossings but would not set a date for achieving that goal. His position highlights the gap between a political promise to end the journeys and the practical difficulties of delivering it.
The government faces pressure from several directions. Some voters want a more forceful approach to border enforcement and faster returns for people who have no legal right to remain in Britain. Humanitarian organisations, meanwhile, warn that dangerous crossings cannot be addressed solely through deterrence and that people fleeing persecution need access to safe asylum procedures.
The argument is not simply about how many boats reach British shores. It concerns whether the government can establish a system that is credible, enforceable and fair.
Why small-boat crossings remain so difficult to stop
The Channel is one of the world’s busiest shipping routes. Small inflatable boats carrying migrants and asylum seekers face serious dangers from changing weather, strong currents, commercial vessels and overcrowding. People-smuggling networks exploit those risks, charging vulnerable people to make journeys that can end in tragedy.
Stopping the crossings requires action on both sides of the Channel. British authorities must identify arrivals, assess asylum claims and enforce immigration decisions. French authorities must also contend with smugglers operating along an extensive coastline, often adapting their methods when police increase patrols at familiar launch locations.
The challenge becomes more complicated when criminal networks move to different beaches, use larger inflatable vessels or change the timing of departures. A successful operation in one area can push smugglers towards another.
Burnham has emphasised cooperation with France as part of his response. In August and September 2026, his government highlighted additional French policing resources and joint efforts to disrupt smuggling networks. Officials presented those measures as evidence that international cooperation could reduce crossings, while also warning that sustained pressure would be necessary.
Such cooperation may help, but it cannot guarantee that every attempted crossing will be prevented. The Channel is difficult to police continuously, and enforcement must balance border security with maritime safety and legal obligations.
For the government, the central question is how to turn operational improvements into a durable reduction in arrivals.
The political cost of refusing to set a deadline
When governments promise to solve a problem but decline to give a timetable, opponents often interpret the decision as a sign that ministers cannot deliver what they have promised.
That is particularly true of immigration, an issue on which voters have heard repeated pledges from successive administrations. Each new announcement is judged against earlier commitments, and public confidence can weaken when results appear slower than expected.
Burnham’s refusal to set a deadline leaves his government open to criticism. Reform UK and Conservative politicians can argue that a commitment to stop crossings means little without measurable targets, a clear enforcement plan and consequences when objectives are missed.
However, setting an arbitrary deadline would carry its own risks. Smuggling operations respond to enforcement measures, international conditions can change rapidly, and the government cannot control every decision made by criminal networks or foreign authorities.
A credible approach would therefore need to distinguish between targets the government can directly influence and outcomes that depend on international cooperation. Ministers could publish regular figures on detected arrivals, disrupted launch attempts, asylum-processing times, returns and the number of people awaiting decisions.
Those measures would allow the public to assess progress without pretending that a complex international problem can be solved on a precise political timetable.
The public is entitled to expect accountability. It is also entitled to information that explains whether a policy is working, why it may be falling short and what ministers intend to change.
Brexit and the argument over cooperation with Europe
Burnham has linked the small-boats crisis to the UK’s relationship with European neighbours, arguing that Brexit reduced opportunities for cooperation in certain areas. That position has added a constitutional dimension to the immigration debate.
Supporters of closer relations with the EU say stronger arrangements for information-sharing, law enforcement and the return of people whose claims have been rejected could help Britain address irregular migration more effectively. They argue that cross-border criminal networks require coordinated responses rather than isolated national measures.
Critics counter that closer European integration is not, by itself, a solution to the Channel crossings. They argue that the government must demonstrate precisely which arrangements would change enforcement outcomes and how any agreement would preserve Britain’s ability to control its borders.
Neither a closer relationship with Brussels nor a tougher public statement can substitute for a workable operational plan.
Any new agreement would need to clarify how people arriving irregularly would be processed, which country would take responsibility for individual cases, what safeguards would apply and how returns would be implemented. It would also need the cooperation of France and other relevant European partners.
The political debate is likely to intensify whenever ministers discuss revising Britain’s post-Brexit arrangements. For some voters, closer cooperation represents a practical response to a shared challenge. For others, it raises concerns about sovereignty and whether the government is revisiting Brexit without a clear public mandate.
The government will need to explain its proposals in detail if it wants to convince either group that its strategy is realistic.
Reform UK demands a tougher approach
The issue provides Nigel Farage’s Reform UK with a prominent platform for challenging the government’s record. Reform has made immigration control a central part of its political message, calling for stronger border enforcement and more extensive use of removals.
Its supporters argue that the state must demonstrate that entering Britain irregularly does not guarantee the right to remain indefinitely. They also point to the costs associated with asylum accommodation and the pressure that prolonged processing can place on public services and local communities.
The government must respond to those concerns with evidence and a clear explanation of its policies. But any proposal to return people to France or another country must also account for international agreements, legal procedures and the willingness of the receiving country to cooperate.
A policy can sound decisive in a campaign speech while proving difficult to implement in practice. The details matter: who would be eligible for return, how quickly decisions would be made, what happens to people whose claims are successful and how disputes would be resolved.
Reform’s proposals should be examined against the same standards as the government’s approach. Voters need to know not only what each party promises but also what it believes can legally and practically be delivered.
For Labour, the political risk is that a continuing flow of arrivals overshadows other priorities. For Reform, the challenge is to show that its alternative would produce sustainable results rather than simply a different set of promises.
The humanitarian consequences cannot be ignored
Behind the political dispute are people making dangerous journeys, including families and individuals who may be fleeing conflict, persecution or severe instability. Their circumstances vary, and arriving by small boat does not by itself determine whether someone qualifies for international protection.
The asylum system must establish who is entitled to protection and who does not meet the legal requirements. Delays can leave people in prolonged uncertainty, increase public expenditure and undermine confidence in the process.
A more efficient system would require sufficient decision-making capacity, access to legal procedures and effective arrangements for people whose claims have been rejected after the relevant processes have concluded. Where someone is entitled to protection, the government must fulfil its obligations. Where removal is lawful, it needs a practical way to carry it out.
Safe and accessible routes for people who qualify for protection may also reduce reliance on smugglers, although their effect would depend on eligibility, availability and the circumstances driving people to leave their home countries.
The government therefore faces a difficult balance: deterring dangerous irregular journeys, dismantling criminal networks, protecting people with valid claims and enforcing immigration decisions.
A strategy that ignores any one of these responsibilities risks creating further problems elsewhere in the system.
What would meaningful progress look like?
If small-boat crossings remain a problem over the coming years, the government will need to demonstrate that it is making measurable progress rather than simply repeating its commitment to act.
That means publishing clear data, explaining changes in arrival numbers and identifying whether enforcement operations are disrupting smuggling networks or merely shifting their activities to other locations. It also means addressing the time taken to process asylum claims and the practical obstacles to carrying out lawful removals.
Cooperation with France should be judged by its results. More officers, additional intelligence-sharing and new operational units may contribute to stronger enforcement, but the public will ultimately want to know whether fewer people are making dangerous journeys and whether decisions are being implemented effectively.
Ministers should also be candid about uncertainty. Weather, conflicts, changes in smuggling tactics and political decisions by other governments can all affect migration patterns. No responsible strategy can guarantee that every attempt will be stopped immediately.
Yet uncertainty should not become an excuse for failing to explain progress. The government can still set clear objectives, review policies when they fail and provide regular information about the results.
A long-running challenge demands more than promises
The suggestion that small-boat crossings could continue for years has understandably intensified debate about the government’s ability to regain control of the border. For many voters, the issue is inseparable from public confidence in immigration policy and the effectiveness of the state.
Burnham’s stated ambition is to stop the crossings, but the absence of a firm deadline leaves his government facing continued scrutiny. His administration will need to show that cooperation with France, action against smugglers and improvements to the asylum system can produce lasting results.
At the same time, the debate should not be reduced to competing slogans. A policy that promises immediate success without explaining how it would work deserves scrutiny just as much as a government that offers no clear timetable.
Britain needs an approach that is effective, lawful and transparent. That requires serious enforcement, functioning asylum procedures, international cooperation and a willingness to explain difficult trade-offs honestly.
The public will judge the government not by how often it promises to stop the boats, but by whether its policies deliver sustained improvements. Until that progress is clear, small-boat crossings are likely to remain a major political issue—and every new arrival will renew the demand for answers.