Migrants run to board a smugglers’ boat in an attempt to cross the English Channel off the beach of (Image: Getty)
More than 700 migrants are believed to have attempted to cross the Channel towards Britain, just 24 hours after Andy Burnham claimed the Government’s plan to stop small boats was “working”.
The crossings took place during one of the busiest days of the year so far, although the final number has not yet been officially confirmed by the Home Office.
On Wednesday, the Express reported how Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp spent the day monitoring departures from a beach in northern France and said one French officer told him they had orders not to intervene.
The Tory MP watched as French gendarmes stood by while more than 100 migrants gathered in shallow waters before attempting to board an overloaded inflatable boat bound for the UK.
People smugglers also appeared to have adopted a new approach, with boats reportedly being launched at the same time from multiple locations along the French coast.
The surge came after Burnham defended the Government’s handling of the Channel crisis on Tuesday.
“The numbers can fluctuate but, overall, boat crossings are down, down quite significantly year on year. So that does suggest the plan is working,” the Prime Minister said.
However, the scale of the latest crossings – which has not yet been officially confirmed by the Home Office – could suggest that the fall in migrant numbers is coming to an end.
Unofficial estimates suggested around 570 migrants had reached Dover by Tuesday evening, while three dinghies were still making their way across the Channel.
It was unclear whether those boats would cross the midpoint of the Channel and be picked up by Border Force before midnight, meaning they could be included in that day’s figures.
One of the boats used by traffickers was understood to have launched from Belgian waters earlier in the day, reports the Daily Mail.
The first arrivals were believed to have reached Britain in the early hours, only hours after the Prime Minister had expressed confidence in the current measures.
Later, Mr Philp confronted a French gendarme at Hardelot-Plage, south of Boulogne, asking: “Why have you allowed the migrants into the water? Why haven’t you stopped them?”
The officer shrugged and replied: “Our order is to let them go like that. We just have to say to them ‘Don’t do that, it’s dangerous’.”
At one point, Mr Philp waded into the sea just feet away from waiting migrants, who he said were predominantly young men from sub-Saharan Africa.
He also confronted a person on the dinghy who appeared to be a people smuggler, telling him: “You’re committing a number of criminal offences. You’re attempting to illegally enter the United Kingdom.”
The Tory frontbencher said the scenes he witnessed showed the failure of Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s new £662million deal with the French government.
Ms Mahmood said the three-year agreement, signed in April, would target dinghy departures through enhanced beach patrols and tougher tactics.
The Home Office said at the time that the deal would “slash crossing numbers”.
Mr Philp said: “Shabana Mahmood has paid half a billion pounds of our money unconditionally – yet I saw gendarmes doing nothing and they told me they had orders to take no physical action but just talk to the migrants.
“Andy Burnham just said there was no problem. I saw with my own eyes today how out of touch he is.”
At another location targeted by traffickers, dozens of migrants were seen sprinting towards the water at Gravelines, between Dunkirk and Calais, to board a dinghy.
Boats were also reported to have been launched as far south as Dieppe.
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.
One of Labour’s first actions after taking power was to scrap the previous government’s Rwanda asylum scheme, which had been designed to deter crossings and save lives.
Labour instead pursued an alternative plan focused on increasing operations by police and law enforcement agencies in an attempt to “smash the gangs”.
The approach initially failed to reduce crossings, with last year seeing the second-highest number on record at 41,500.
So far this year, there have been 13,376 arrivals, not including the latest unconfirmed total, representing a 45 per cent drop compared with the same point last year.
The highest number recorded so far this year was 710 arrivals on June 15.
Since the small boats crisis began in 2018, a total of 205,986 migrants have reached Britain.
Burnham has faced criticism for his silence on illegal migration since becoming Prime Minister on July 20, having not set out his own plans for tackling the crisis.
During a visit to Derby on Tuesday, he was asked whether he had a plan to deal with small boat crossings.
He defended the Government’s approach, saying: “The Home Secretary has brought forward a very rigorous plan in relation to this.
“Let’s remember, the numbers can fluctuate, but overall, boat crossings are down, down quite significantly year on year. So that does suggest that the plan is working.”
Burnham’s ‘Plan Is Working’ Claim Immediately in Tatters as Migrants Surge Across Channel
Andy Burnham’s defence of the government’s small-boats strategy has come under renewed pressure after another surge in Channel crossings raised questions about whether Britain’s approach to illegal migration is delivering the results voters expect.
The controversy centres on a familiar political dilemma: ministers point to reductions in overall arrivals, while critics focus on days when hundreds of people make the dangerous journey from France to the UK. Both figures matter, but they tell different parts of the story.
For Burnham, the challenge is to demonstrate that the government is making sustained progress rather than relying on favourable comparisons with previous years. For his critics, the latest arrivals provide an opportunity to question whether Labour’s promises to disrupt smuggling networks and strengthen border enforcement are sufficient.
The debate has become one of the most sensitive issues facing the government, combining questions of national security, humanitarian responsibility, public spending and confidence in the political system.
A Sudden Surge Puts the Government Under Pressure
The scale of individual Channel crossings can change sharply from one day to the next. Weather conditions, sea conditions, the availability of small boats and the activities of smuggling networks can all influence how many people attempt the journey.
On 23 September 2026, 781 people arrived in Britain in small boats, according to figures reported by ITV News the following day. It was the highest single-day total recorded so far that year.
The arrivals brought the provisional total for 2026 to 18,565 at that point. Despite the dramatic daily figure, the cumulative total remained 42 per cent lower than at the equivalent stage in 2025 and 26 per cent below the corresponding figure for 2024.
These comparisons illustrate why the argument over Labour’s strategy is complicated. A substantial daily arrival figure can expose weaknesses in border enforcement, but it does not automatically demonstrate that the overall strategy has failed. Conversely, a reduction in annual arrivals does not mean that the problem has been solved.
The government must explain both trends. If fewer people are crossing overall, ministers should identify which measures appear to be contributing to the reduction. If large numbers continue arriving on particular days, they must explain what is being done to address those vulnerabilities.
For members of the public who want tighter border control, percentages alone may not provide sufficient reassurance. They want to know whether the government can reduce arrivals consistently, disrupt the criminal networks organising crossings and ensure that immigration decisions are enforced.
Why Burnham’s Claim Has Become Controversial
Burnham has defended the government’s approach by pointing to the wider direction of the figures and the work being undertaken with French authorities.
The argument is that tackling smuggling networks requires sustained cooperation, intelligence gathering and enforcement rather than a single announcement promising immediate results.
That approach recognises a practical difficulty: the English Channel is a busy maritime route, and preventing every attempted crossing is a complex operational challenge. Authorities must identify boats, coordinate responses and manage incidents without putting lives at unnecessary risk.
However, the public expects a government to demonstrate that its strategy is more than a collection of initiatives. It needs to show that the measures are producing measurable results and that persistent weaknesses are being addressed.
A particularly high daily arrival total can therefore become politically damaging even when the wider annual figures show a reduction. It creates a vivid image of a problem that many voters already regard as unresolved.
Critics can ask whether the government has sufficient resources, whether its cooperation with France is effective and whether people who have no legal right to remain in Britain are being removed promptly.
The government, in turn, must explain how its approach differs from previous attempts and why the public should expect it to deliver more sustainable results.
The real test is not whether ministers can find a favourable statistic or whether opponents can highlight a particularly difficult day. It is whether the overall system becomes more effective over time.
The Smuggling Networks Behind the Crossings
The small-boats issue cannot be understood solely by counting arrivals. It also involves criminal networks that organise transport, collect payments and exploit people who want to reach Britain.
Smugglers may advertise routes, arrange access to boats and coordinate departures from the French coast. Their operations can adapt quickly when enforcement measures make one location or method more difficult to use.
That adaptability creates a challenge for British and French authorities. Arresting individual organisers may disrupt a network, but other people can attempt to take over its activities. Preventing departures in one area may also encourage smugglers to look for alternative beaches or launch methods.
A durable strategy therefore needs to target the organisations behind the crossings rather than concentrating exclusively on the people arriving.
This requires intelligence sharing, financial investigations, cross-border police cooperation and action against those supplying boats and equipment. It also requires attention to the safety risks created by overcrowded and unseaworthy vessels.
The humanitarian dimension is significant. People who pay smugglers may be placed in dangerous conditions, and journeys across the Channel can become life-threatening when weather changes or boats encounter difficulties.
A government that wants to reduce crossings must demonstrate that its policies are making the smugglers’ business model harder to sustain.
At the same time, ministers should provide evidence of enforcement results instead of relying on broad claims about disrupting criminal gangs.
Why Cooperation With France Matters
Because most small boats depart from the French coast, Britain’s ability to influence crossings depends partly on cooperation with France.
The two countries must coordinate surveillance, police activity, intelligence sharing and action against organised smuggling. Disagreements over operational responsibilities can complicate that work, particularly when decisions must be made quickly.
In September, Burnham met French President Emmanuel Macron as the two governments discussed additional police deployment intended to disrupt the launch of larger boats.
The discussions reflected an important reality: neither country can address the entire problem independently. British authorities control admission to the UK and make decisions about asylum claims, while French authorities have responsibilities for law enforcement on their territory.
Nevertheless, cooperation announcements must be followed by evidence that they are changing outcomes. More officers or additional surveillance may improve enforcement, but the public ultimately wants to know whether departures are becoming less frequent and whether smuggling networks are losing their ability to operate.
There are also limits to what enforcement alone can achieve. Smuggling organisations can adapt, and people fleeing persecution may continue searching for routes to safety if they cannot access practical alternatives.
This does not remove the government’s responsibility to enforce immigration law. It means that a sustainable policy must consider both the organisations facilitating dangerous journeys and the wider conditions that keep demand for those journeys high.
The Debate Over Asylum and Deportations
Once people arrive in Britain, another difficult set of questions arises. Authorities must establish identities, conduct appropriate checks and determine whether individuals qualify for international protection.
An asylum claim is not automatically accepted simply because someone reaches the UK. Equally, arrival by an unauthorised route does not by itself establish that a person has no valid claim to protection.
The government must distinguish between people who qualify for asylum, those whose claims are refused and individuals who may be removed under the applicable legal framework.
This process can be complicated by appeals, difficulties establishing identity, the availability of travel documents and cooperation with countries of origin. Human rights obligations and other legal safeguards also affect what the government can lawfully do.
Critics argue that slow processing and limited removals weaken deterrence, while supporters of a more legally cautious approach warn that rushed decisions can lead to wrongful removals and further litigation.
Burnham’s government must address these concerns through procedures that are both effective and lawful.
That means processing claims promptly, prioritising cases where there are clear grounds for removal, improving cooperation with other countries and ensuring that decisions are properly implemented.
The public has a legitimate interest in knowing whether the system is working. But accurate assessment requires more than counting arrivals on a particular day. It also requires information about decisions, removals, processing times and the outcomes of enforcement operations.
The Financial Burden on Taxpayers
The costs associated with asylum processing and accommodation have become another major source of public frustration.
When the government cannot process claims quickly or resolve cases effectively, it may have to provide accommodation and basic support for extended periods. That can place pressure on public budgets and make it harder for local authorities to plan services.
The longer-term financial implications depend on several factors, including the number of people requiring support, the cost of accommodation, staffing requirements and how quickly claims are resolved.
A credible government strategy should therefore explain not only how it intends to reduce arrivals but also how it will manage the people already within the asylum system.
Faster decisions can help clarify who is entitled to protection and who may be removed. Better accommodation planning can reduce unnecessary expenditure, while effective enforcement against smugglers can address the criminal activity driving dangerous crossings.
However, financial savings should not be assumed without evidence. Processing reforms require resources, and accommodation contracts may contain obligations that cannot be ended immediately.
The government needs transparent reporting that allows taxpayers to see whether expenditure is declining, whether services are becoming more efficient and whether promised reforms are being delivered.
For Burnham, demonstrating progress on these practical issues would be important to any claim that the plan is working.
Political Rivals Will Continue to Challenge Labour
Immigration remains an important political dividing line, and Labour’s handling of the Channel crossings is likely to attract sustained criticism from rival parties.
Conservative politicians may argue that the government needs tougher enforcement and faster removals. Reform UK may call for more radical measures, including a greater role for the armed forces and fundamental changes to Britain’s legal arrangements.
Other parties may emphasise cooperation with European partners, safe routes for refugees and action against the conditions that encourage people to rely on smugglers.
These proposals differ substantially, and each would need to be assessed against practical, financial and legal considerations.
For Labour, the immediate political challenge is to demonstrate that its own approach is producing results. Simply arguing that the problem is difficult may be accurate, but it is unlikely to satisfy voters who believe successive governments have failed to establish effective control.
At the same time, promising that every crossing can be prevented may create expectations that are difficult to meet. Ministers must explain what they can realistically achieve, how progress will be measured and what happens when the numbers rise despite enforcement efforts.
Credibility depends on acknowledging setbacks as well as improvements.
What Would Prove That the Plan Is Working?
A serious assessment of the government’s strategy should examine several indicators over a sustained period.
First, the total number of arrivals should be compared with previous years using consistent time periods. Daily figures can reveal operational pressures, but they are particularly vulnerable to short-term fluctuations.
Second, the government should publish meaningful information about smuggling networks disrupted, suspects prosecuted and the financial assets seized from criminal organisations.
Third, the public should be able to assess the speed and quality of asylum decisions, including how many people with no right to remain are removed and whether appeals and legal challenges are being resolved efficiently.
Fourth, the effectiveness of cooperation with France should be assessed through operational outcomes rather than announcements alone.
Finally, the government must explain whether its approach is reducing unnecessary accommodation expenditure and improving the management of cases already in the system.
No single measure can capture the whole picture. A reduction in arrivals may be encouraging, but it does not establish that every part of the system is functioning well. Equally, one day of unusually high arrivals does not prove that all enforcement measures have failed.
A balanced assessment requires multiple indicators, transparent data and a willingness to change policy when evidence shows that a measure is not delivering.
Conclusion: A Difficult Test for Burnham
The latest debate over Channel crossings highlights the difficulty facing Andy Burnham as he defends the government’s approach to small boats.
The reported arrival of 781 people on a single day in September was a significant event, and it understandably intensified questions about border enforcement. Yet the cumulative figures available at the time also showed fewer arrivals than at the equivalent points in 2025 and 2024.
Both facts belong in the discussion.
The government cannot claim success simply because one set of figures has improved, nor can its critics establish complete failure by pointing to a single surge. What matters is whether the overall strategy reduces dangerous crossings, disrupts smuggling networks, processes asylum claims effectively and enforces immigration decisions lawfully.
Burnham must provide evidence that the measures are delivering sustained improvements. He must also explain why significant daily arrivals continue to occur and what additional steps are being taken to address them.
Ultimately, the public will judge the strategy by its results. Clear statistics, effective enforcement, efficient case processing and transparent spending are more persuasive than political slogans.
The claim that the plan is working will remain open to scrutiny until the government can demonstrate that progress is consistent, measurable and capable of lasting beyond a favourable period in the figures.