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

He's a political leader, after all, and political leaders delight in power - Starmer more than a lot of, I would believe. I also suggest that he's at least averagely smart, and should be able to weigh up the possibilities of any policy prospering.

After the battles, compromises and humiliations associated with attaining high office, Starmer has no intent of tossing all of it away. Why, then, does he reveal every indication of doing so?

On the single issue that may matter most to a bulk of voters, he is speeding towards specific catastrophe, while rejecting himself any possibility of an escape route. I imply the boats coming across the Channel.

Numbers of migrants doing the 21-mile journey are up by 42 per cent on the same period in 2015. 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 ordeal for Sir Keir.

Peering into his mind, I reckon there are 2 primary possible descriptions for his behaviour. One is that he is misguiding himself. He really thinks numbers will boil down as soon as the measures he has actually taken start to work.

If Starmer still thinks that his policies - throwing hundreds of millions at the French authorities, improving intelligence and utilizing improved police powers - will reduce the numbers, that really is the triumph of hope over experience. The other possibility is that he is currently beginning poorly to realise that his stratagems won't bear much, if any, fruit. So he and the Government have chosen to pull the wool over our eyes. A deadly approach.

There have actually been two such in recent days. Having stated in an online post on Monday that he felt 'angry' about the numbers crossing the Channel (how does he think the rest of us feel !?) the PM made a slippery claim.

Sir Keir Starmer now has absolutely nothing formidable in his locker, Stephen Glover writes

Only 2,240 small-boat migrants were sent out home in the 12 months to March, 3 percent less than in the previous year

He boasted that 'almost 30,000 individuals' had been eliminated from the UK by this Government. Sounds good. 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 mustn't accuse Labour prime ministers, far less Sir Keir Starmer KCB, PC, KC, MP, of telling intentional fibs. Shall we choose a statistical deception?

The other circumstances of the Government not being totally directly was the Office's claim previously this week that there have actually been more migrants this year since of balmy weather. These are called 'red days', when the sea is calm.

But an analysis by my associate David Barrett in the other day'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 gentle June 2024 there were 20 'red days', though only 3,007 migrants were tape-recorded crossing the Channel.
weldplus.com
The most likely explanation is that last May and June the Government's strategy to send out unlawful migrants to Rwanda had finally cleared relentless judicial blockage. Some, at least, were deterred from crossing the Channel for fear of being loaded off to the central African country.

The Rwanda plan was far from ideal - it was pricey, and responsible to legal difficulty due to the fact that the country has an authoritarian government - however at least it had some possibility of hindering migrants. The inbound Labour Government discarded its only plausible methods of curbing the boats.

Helpful for Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, who in a speech tomorrow will undertake to resurrect a plan noticeably similar to the Rwandan one.

Starmer now has absolutely nothing powerful in his locker. Literally absolutely nothing. He can provide more millions to the French government however it will not make much, if any, difference. French police 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 naive to picture that they are ever going to be zealous on our behalf.
fly-efi.com
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 prevent fake asylum claims, that is welcome, however even if it becomes law it is unlikely to have much impact on total numbers.

Are the PM and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper beginning to panic as they realise they don't have a single policy most likely to fulfil their promise of 'smashing the gangs'? If they aren't desperate, they jolly well must be.

Three weeks earlier, Sir Keir was humiliated after he had praised talks over Rwanda-style 'return centers' only minutes before his Albanian counterpart, standing a couple of feet away, ruled out any cooperation.

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

I've no specific desire to throw Starmer a lifeline but, as I have actually 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 numerous 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 throughout the War. Build numerous huts - instead of putting up less sturdy camping tents, as ex-Reform MP Rupert Lowe has proposed.

Recruit doctors 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 setting up such a camp would be a fraction of the ₤ 4.3 billion invested last year on housing migrants and asylum seekers.

Can anyone tell me why not? Few migrants would elegant 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 potentially 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 careful Prime Minister.

But he does not have a better idea. In fact, he hasn't got any concepts at all that are accountable to stem the growing varieties of individuals streaming throughout the English Channel.

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

RwandaAngela RaynerLabourWes Streeting