John Wall is a retired engineer and former Conservative county councillor in Hampshire.
If I had to choose two words to describe the current government, they’d be ‘institutional mediocrity’ which permeates almost everything it does, along with repeatedly proving Hayek’s “If socialists understood economics they wouldn’t be socialists.”
The case against mass immigration has prevailed, although some lefties haven’t got the memo, and, as the Conservatives presided over record figures and can be hit with “You had fourteen years!”, the main beneficiary is Farage and Reform.
Politically, “small boats” are the gift that keeps giving, a continual demonstration of the government’s impotence, and as true of Sunak’s as Starmer’s.
Sunak had the “Rwanda Plan” which, subject to continual lawfare, wasn’t operationalised before the 2024 election, and cancelled by Starmer. The principle was that if the person ahead of you bought a ticket to Britain but ended up in Rwanda why would you buy one? This followed the success of a return agreement with Albania which slashed the numbers.
Rwanda demonstrated that the Conservatives understood economics, the small boats started because of the success in preventing migrants stowing away in lorries, etc, they didn’t decide to come to Britain because of the small boats. Commentators are increasingly pointing out that the millions to be made make addressing the supply little more than whack-a-mole.
As the number can approach 1000 per day Rwanda could have quickly filled up, Sunak would have probably needed significantly more capacity to get the message to prospective migrants.
If migrants get here, they’re probably going to stay, assisted by the likes of “fox clubber” Maugham, which is why some have proposed transferring them for processing before landfall.
Reform’s suggested using the Royal Navy to “turn the boats back” which sounds fine until you realise these are overloaded inflatables, larger versions of children’s and not intended for the English Channel. The Navy’s ships could well swamp them and while the public don’t want migrants it’s unlikely they want them drowning either.
Migrants need to know that they’re probably not going to get to, or stay in, Britain. It has to be like betting on a rank outsider, not a one-horse race.
If the ‘one in, one out” arrangement isn’t significantly ramped up to provide a deterrent it’s unlikely to have an effect.
Farage’s recent proposals require legislation that would be subject to lawfare, agreements which may not happen and might still take several years to become operational.
There is truth in Macron’s contention regarding “pull factors” and more that could be done to create a ‘hostile environment’. This would require support from Labour backbenchers, too many of whom “see” asylum seekers not as economic migrants, and it’s uncertain how many could be deterred.
Belgium has shown the way with a zero-tolerance approach.
To be fair the length of suitable Belgian coastline is considerably less than the French, but the most important thing is to slash/puncture the boats. Do this often enough, the message spreads, potential migrants are dissuaded, the demand dries up and the gangs are out of business.
Although some in France see helping, or not hindering, migrants as in their best interests, reports such as ”Migrant shot dead amid increase in violence in camps in northern France” and ”On the beaches of northern France, exhausted police admit they’ve lost control” suggest that the French state has indeed lost control.
Isabel Oakeshott reports how this “has turned much of the historic and naturally beautiful coastline into a filthy, crime-ridden, third world hellhole”:
“…the dismal state of the Opal Coast and the once elegant little towns, where pavements, supermarkets and public transport hubs are now dominated by throngs of penniless young men from north Africa, Asia and the Middle East. They hang around train stations, loiter on street corners and do not bother with litter bins, a habit that is despoiling roadsides, woods and beaches. Verges and lay-bys are a fetid mess of discarded food wrappers, plastic bottles, crushed tin cans and soiled rags. Ditches have been turned into open air toilets, with migrants squatting in full view of passing traffic. Bushes and scrubland are littered with human faeces.“
There must be local criminality associated with the migrants, and trails of crime across France.
Starmer’s ineffectiveness leads to headlines like ”Migrant ‘mega dinghy’ brings record 107 people across Channel to Britain” suggesting operations ramping up, possibly also to counter “one in, one out.”
The more migrants the more French “collateral damage” and when crossings are impossible the number who are waiting to cross increases. Alarm bells should be ringing in the Élysée Palace as the beneficiaries are Le Pen and her Rassemblement National.
So, task the military, use meteorological, etc information, as the gangs do, to determine probable launching sites and surveillance technology to spot boats and direct soldiers. A few shots in the air will scatter people and a few bayonet thrusts makes boats unseaworthy.
If sufficient boats are dealt with the migrants will stop paying and the gangs, assuming they don’t want a firefight, will disappear for a rethink. Migrants will stop trekking across France, those waiting will disperse and locals will get their area and lives back. This should be in Macron’s interest.
In March 2023 £500m funding for the French was announced but the numbers are increasing. Ministers have claimed that crossings have been ‘prevented’, they actually mean ‘delayed’.
If Macron doesn’t undertake action as suggested above, we should stop paying. Nothing will change; an increasing number of migrants will still come but we’ve kept the money.
The situation in France will worsen and their electorate will back the populists promising simple solutions.