eastpointeny

Let's presume Sir Keir Starmer wishes to win the next election. Let's also assume he has no desire to be changed as Prime Minister in the next year approximately by Wes Streeting or Angela Rayner or anyone else.

He's a political leader, after all, and political leaders enjoy power - Starmer more than the majority of, I would believe. I also suggest that he's at least averagely smart, and ought to have the ability to weigh up the opportunities of any policy prospering.

After the battles, compromises and embarrassments associated with accomplishing high office, Starmer has no objective of throwing everything away. Why, then, does he reveal every sign of doing so?

On the single concern that may matter most to a majority of citizens, he is hurtling towards certain catastrophe, while denying himself any prospect of an escape route. I imply the boats discovering the Channel.

Varieties of migrants doing the 21-mile journey are up by 42 per cent on the very same period last year. An analysis by The Times, using comparable modelling as Border Force, predicts that 50,000 individuals will cross the Channel in little boats in 2025. That would be a yearly record - and a stonking fiasco for Sir Keir.

Peering into his mind, I reckon there are 2 main possible explanations for his behaviour. One is that he is deluding himself. He truly thinks numbers will come down as soon as the steps he has taken start to work.

If Starmer still believes that his policies - throwing numerous millions at the French authorities, enhancing intelligence and using improved law enforcement powers - will decrease the numbers, that really is the victory of hope over experience. The other possibility is that he is currently starting poorly to understand that his stratagems will not bear much, if any, fruit. So he and the Government have chosen to pull the wool over our eyes. A .
redflagdeals.com
There have been two such examples in recent days. Having stated in an online post on Monday that he felt 'upset' 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 formidable in his locker, Stephen Glover composes

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

He boasted that 'almost 30,000 individuals' had actually been gotten rid of from the UK by this Government. Sounds excellent. But in reality this figure refers to all types 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 percent less than in the previous year.

A lie? Good God no! We mustn't accuse Labour prime ministers, far less Sir Keir Starmer KCB, PC, KC, MP, of telling deliberate fibs. Shall we opt for a statistical deception?

The other instance of the Government not being entirely directly was the Home Office's claim earlier this week that there have actually been more migrants this year because of balmy weather condition. These are called 'red days', when the sea is calm.
redflagdeals.com
But an analysis by my coworker David Barrett in yesterday's Mail shows that in temperate May last year there were 21 'red days' but just 2,765 arrivals, about 1,000 fewer than last month. In mild June 2024 there were 20 'red days', though only 3,007 migrants were recorded crossing the Channel.

The most possible description is that last May and June the Government's plan to send out prohibited migrants to Rwanda had actually lastly cleared relentless judicial obstruction. Some, a minimum of, were discouraged from crossing the Channel for fear of being loaded off to the main African nation.

The Rwanda scheme was far from best - it was expensive, and accountable to legal difficulty because the nation has an authoritarian government - but a minimum of it had some possibility of deterring migrants. The inbound Labour Government discarded its only plausible methods of curbing the boats.

Good for Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, who in a speech tomorrow will carry out to reanimate a plan strikingly similar to the Rwandan one.

Starmer now has nothing formidable in his locker. Literally absolutely nothing. He can give more millions to the French federal government but it will not make much, if any, difference. French police will still loll around on beaches, thinking about the sand castles they made as children, as they view migrant boats setting off for Dover.

The reality is that the French will never strain themselves due to the fact that every migrant who leaves their coasts is one less migrant for them to stress over. It is ignorant to envision that they are ever going to be zealous on our behalf.

STEPHEN GLOVER: Keir Starmer is a soft man who can not understand the real evil Britain is dealing with

Nor will Sir Keir's idea of improving intelligence and police be decisive. When it comes to Labour's reported objective to tinker with Article 8 of the Human Rights Act so as to preclude fake asylum claims, that is welcome, however even if it becomes law it is unlikely to have much effect on total numbers.

Are the PM and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper beginning to panic as they understand they don't have a single policy most likely to satisfy their promise of 'smashing the gangs'? If they aren't desperate, they jolly well should 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 couple of feet away, ruled out any cooperation.

Maybe the Government will persuade the Kosovans or the North Macedonians to set up some sort of plan. But if it does, it will take months, if not years, and people will wonder why Sir Keir cancelled a plan that he is at least partly attempting to revive.

I have actually no specific wish to throw Starmer a lifeline however, as I have actually suggested before, there's one possible course out of the hole he has dug for himself - though it would take massive decision and guts for him to take it.

There are numerous uninhabited British islands off our coast and additional afield. Pick one of them. Create a camp comparable to those on the Isle of Man that housed alien internees throughout the War. Build numerous huts - instead of setting up less sturdy camping tents, as ex-Reform MP Rupert Lowe has proposed.

Recruit medical professionals and authorities to evaluate claims quicker than happens at present - and then return most migrants to where they came from. The cost of setting up such a camp would be a portion of the ₤ 4.3 billion invested last year on housing migrants and asylum seekers.

Can anyone inform me why not? Few migrants would expensive kicking their heels for months in a camp, nevertheless humane, so it would be a wonderful deterrent. Cross the Channel, and you will be our visitor - on a possibly windy island rather than in a four-star hotel.

Granted, in order to stave off vexatious legal obstacles we 'd most likely have to derogate from the European Court of Human Rights, which would be a step too far for our cautious Prime Minister.

But he doesn't have a better idea. In reality, he hasn't got any concepts at all that are accountable to stem the growing varieties of people streaming across the English Channel.

Things can just get worse - and as they do Labour will sink ever lower in public esteem. Does Sir Keir Starmer really want to be the signatory of his own political death warrant?

RwandaAngela RaynerLabourWes Streeting