Let's assume Sir Keir Starmer wishes to win the next election. Let's also assume he has no desire to be replaced as Prime Minister in the next year or two by Wes Streeting or Angela Rayner or anybody else.
He's a politician, after all, and politicians delight in power - Starmer more than most, I would think. I also suggest that he's at least averagely intelligent, and need to be able to weigh up the opportunities of any policy succeeding.
After the struggles, compromises and humiliations included in achieving high workplace, Starmer has no intention of throwing it all away. Why, then, does he show every indication of doing so?
On the single problem that might matter most to a bulk of voters, he is hurtling towards specific disaster, while rejecting himself any possibility of an escape route. I indicate the boats coming throughout the Channel.
Varieties of migrants doing the 21-mile journey are up by 42 per cent on the exact same duration in 2015. An analysis by The Times, utilizing similar modelling as Border Force, predicts that 50,000 individuals will cross the Channel in little boats in 2025. That would be an annual record - and a stonking ordeal for Sir Keir.
Peering into his mind, I reckon there are two main possible descriptions for his behaviour. One is that he is misguiding himself. He truly believes numbers will come down when the procedures he has taken start to work.
If Starmer still believes that his policies - tossing hundreds of millions at the French authorities, improving intelligence and utilizing improved police powers - will minimize the numbers, that really is the accomplishment of hope over experience. The other possibility is that he is already starting poorly to realise that his stratagems will not bear much, if any, fruit. So he and the Government have actually chosen to pull the wool over our eyes. A fatal method.
There have been two such examples in recent days. Having said in an online post on Monday that he felt 'mad' about the numbers crossing the Channel (how does he think the rest people feel !?) the PM made a slippery claim.
Sir Keir Starmer now has nothing powerful in his locker, Stephen Glover writes
faqtoids.com
Only 2,240 small-boat migrants were sent out home in the 12 months to March, 3 per cent fewer than in the previous year
He boasted that 'nearly 30,000 individuals' had actually been removed from the UK by this Government. Sounds excellent. But in truth this figure describes all kinds of migrants who have no right to be in our country. Only 2,240 small-boat migrants were sent out home in the 12 months to March, 3 per cent less than in the previous year.
A lie? Good God no! We should not accuse Labour prime ministers, far less Sir Keir Starmer KCB, PC, KC, MP, of informing deliberate fibs. Shall we opt for a statistical sleight of hand?
The other circumstances of the Government not being totally straight was the Home Office's claim earlier today that there have actually been more migrants this year since of pleasant weather. These are called 'red days', when the sea is calm.
But an analysis by my associate David Barrett in yesterday's Mail reveals that in temperate May last year there were 21 'red days' but only 2,765 arrivals, about 1,000 less than last month. In gentle June 2024 there were 20 'red days', though only 3,007 migrants were tape-recorded crossing the Channel.
The most probable explanation is that last May and June the Government's strategy to send out illegal migrants to Rwanda had lastly cleared relentless judicial blockage. Some, a minimum of, were discouraged from crossing the Channel for fear of being packed off to the main African nation.
The Rwanda plan was far from ideal - it was pricey, and accountable to legal challenge since the country has an authoritarian federal government - however a minimum of it had some possibility of preventing migrants. The inbound Labour Government threw away its only plausible ways of suppressing the boats.
Helpful for Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, who in a speech tomorrow will carry out to reanimate a strategy strikingly similar to the Rwandan one.
Starmer now has nothing formidable in his locker. Literally nothing. He can offer further millions to the French federal government however it will not make much, if any, difference. French cops will still loll around on beaches, thinking of the sand castles they made as kids, as they enjoy migrant boats setting off for Dover.
The fact is that the French will never ever strain themselves since every migrant who leaves their shores is one less migrant for them to fret about. It is ignorant to think of that they are ever going to be zealous on our behalf.
STEPHEN GLOVER: Keir Starmer is a soft male who can not comprehend the real wicked Britain is facing
Nor will Sir Keir's concept of improving intelligence and law enforcement be decisive. When it comes to reported intent to play with Article 8 of the Human Rights Act so regarding prevent phony asylum claims, that is welcome, however even if it becomes law it is unlikely to have much impact on overall numbers.
Are the PM and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper starting to stress as they understand they don't have a single policy likely to fulfil their guarantee of 'smashing the gangs'? If they aren't desperate, they jolly well must be.
Three weeks ago, Sir Keir was humiliated after he had praised talks over Rwanda-style 'return hubs' only minutes before his Albanian counterpart, standing a few feet away, dismissed any cooperation.
Maybe the Government will persuade the Kosovans or the North Macedonians to establish some sort of scheme. But if it does, it will take months, if not years, and individuals will question why Sir Keir cancelled a plan that he is at least partly attempting to revive.
I have actually no particular dream to throw Starmer a lifeline however, as I've suggested before, there's one possible course out of the hole he has actually dug for himself - though it would take massive decision and nerve for him to take it.
There are many uninhabited British islands off our coast and additional afield. Pick among them. Create a camp similar to those on the Isle of Man that housed alien internees during the War. Build hundreds of huts - instead of erecting less durable tents, as ex-Reform MP Rupert Lowe has actually proposed.
Recruit medical professionals and authorities to assess claims faster than takes place at present - and after that return most migrants to where they came from. The expense of establishing such a camp would be a fraction of the ₤ 4.3 billion spent last year on housing migrants and asylum hunters.
Can anyone tell me why not? Few migrants would expensive kicking their heels for months in a camp, however humane, so it would be a wonderful deterrent. Cross the Channel, and you will be our visitor - on a potentially windy island instead of in a four-star hotel.
Granted, in order to stave off vexatious legal obstacles we 'd probably have to derogate from the European Court of Human Rights, which would be an action too far for our careful Prime Minister.
But he doesn't have a better concept. In fact, he hasn't got any ideas at all that are liable to stem the growing varieties of individuals streaming across the English Channel.
faqtoids.com
Things can only worsen - and as they do Labour will sink ever lower in public esteem. Does Sir Keir Starmer really wish to be the signatory of his own political death warrant?
RwandaAngela RaynerLabourWes Streeting
1
By not Stopping the Boats, pM is Signing his Political Death Warrant
Camille Grant edited this page 2025-06-20 14:17:27 +08:00