Andy Burnham has pledged that his government will be “relentless” in efforts to reduce the number of people arriving in the UK on small boats.

Speaking in Dover, the prime minister said progress had been made and that the authorities were “changing the whole approach” to tackle people-smuggling networks. He said enforcement officers working against gangs had been doubled on both sides of the English Channel.

Burnham said many people wanted the issue addressed and argued that tackling smuggling had to go alongside providing “safe routes” for those who need protection. He added that offering lawful options would remove part of the appeal for people involved in the gangs.

Ceuta Pushes Migration Talks Back Into Focus

Burnham’s remarks came as political debate over the UK’s illegal migration policy resurfaced following the arrival of tens of thousands of migrants who swam into the Spanish exclave of Ceuta on Thursday.

He said that 98% of those who made the journey to the African territory had been returned to Morocco, which he said had dealt with the immediate situation. He added there was a wider issue involving the Schengen area and the UK’s relationship with it, and said he would want regular dialogue with the European Union on those matters.

Enforcement Effort Scales Up

The Home Office said that the number of National Crime Agency (NCA) officers targeting smuggling gangs facilitating small boat crossings had risen to almost 800 from 376 at the start of 2025. Burnham also said there had been a similar doubling of French enforcement officers.

When asked whether he wanted to change the tone of the debate on small boats, Burnham said he wanted to “deal with the issue rather than play politics with the issue”. He said the public did not want the border to appear uncontrolled, adding that control needed to be restored while support continued for those who genuinely need it.

The Home Office also said on Sunday that there had been nearly 300 arrests of smuggling gang members last year, alongside the seizure of more than 1,100 small boats and engines. It said equipment confiscated by the NCA could have been used to help 72,000 more people come illegally to the UK, although the BBC said it was unable to independently verify the claim.

“Clearly, progress is being made, but we’re not complacent,” Burnham said.

Crossings, Returns And Wider Migration Data

Since Burnham became prime minister a fortnight ago, the number of migrants arriving in the UK on small boats has surpassed 2,000. He pointed to a Saturday figure of 326 people crossing the Channel.

Authorities say more people attempt the crossing in summer when conditions improve. Home Office figures show that small boat crossings so far this year are down around 43% compared with the same period in 2025.

Small boat crossings have become the most common way for people to be detected entering the UK illegally since 2020, and the topic has increasingly shaped wider arguments over immigration. Home Office figures also show the number of crossings has been on a downward trend since it peaked in 2022.

In May, the Office for National Statistics reported that net migration to the UK fell to 171,000 last year. That was almost half the figure for 2024 and the lowest level since 2012, with the drop attributed to fewer people arriving from outside the EU for work and study.

Graphic courtesy of BBC

Join the discussion?

3 August 2026

View full article

More cash going down the Drain paying agency's to look at how to stop the Boats. In two weeks over 2,000 have crossed since Burnham took over. The crossings have increased in 2026 up more in this time last year so far over 62,000 have come over the channel in only 7 Months. It is being reported that a Reform government will put the Royal Navy into the Channel to stop migrant boats.

1 hour ago, BarraMarra said:

More cash going down the Drain paying agency's to look at how to stop the Boats. In two weeks over 2,000 have crossed since Burnham took over. The crossings have increased in 2026 up more in this time last year so far over 62,000 have come over the channel in only 7 Months. It is being reported that a Reform government will put the Royal Navy into the Channel to stop migrant boats.

The number of crossings are down on the year.

They were zero when the Tories first came to power.

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The number of crossings are down on the year.

They were zero when the Tories first came to power.

Straight the de-imigrunting' with tales of Tory' mistermena quoting figures from propaganda'

This is Burnhams Labour right now' only 4% of these totally illegal arrivals get deported 96% are dumped in towns and villages to roam at will at average cost to the taxpayer of £42,000 pa a pensioner by comparison get's a maximum of £12,500 pa🤔

28 July 2026	26	1	0
29 July 2026	752	9	0
30 July 2026	72	1	0
31 July 2026	0	0	0
1 August 2026	326	4	0

7 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

More cash going down the Drain paying agency's to look at how to stop the Boats. In two weeks over 2,000 have crossed since Burnham took over. The crossings have increased in 2026 up more in this time last year so far over 62,000 have come over the channel in only 7 Months. It is being reported that a Reform government will put the Royal Navy into the Channel to stop migrant boats.

You didn't look at the graph, did you?

You also need to read up on maritime law, as do Reform, by the sound of it.

Laws can be changed by the Government as well.

10 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Laws can be changed by the Government as well.

Incorrect. There are international laws that the UK government cannot change.

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The number of crossings are down on the year.

They were zero when the Tories first came to power.

Who was in power is not the real issue.

Ther has always been an influx of migrants arriving illegally. The boats are just a new, and more efficient way. The figures have risen through the years by yhe escalation of war, some but not all involving UK forces.

There was a policy mentioned to "smash the gangs". Thst was supposed to replace the Rwanda scheme. Maybe the gang smashing should have started before the other scheme was cancelled.

Either way, there needs to be a deterrent. My suggestion would be to put all asylum claimants to work as part of their application. Salaries pay for their bed and board, the rest they keep. Also, regulate their movements when they are not at work.

That would sort the true asylum claims from the false ones.

12 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Incorrect. There are international laws that the UK government cannot change.

I didn't realize there was a world government. Did the UK population get a vote on this? I don't remember that. Who did we vote for?

Youravinalaff I suggest you google OpperationSovereign Borders in Australia .

29 minutes ago, James105 said:

I didn't realize there was a world government. Did the UK population get a vote on this? I don't remember that. Who did we vote for?

No. There isn't a world government. There are international laws, as I mentioned earlier.

36 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Youravinalaff I suggest you google OpperationSovereign Borders in Australia .

I suggest you "Google" the international organisations the UK are members of that Australia aren't.

24 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

No. There isn't a world government. There are international laws, as I mentioned earlier.

Right, since there is no world government then the UK can withdraw from the 1951 refugee convention. I presume sovereign states are allowed to do that....right? Then any illegal crossings are not "asylum seekers", they are invaders and can legally be dealt with by the military.

23 minutes ago, James105 said:

Right, since there is no world government then the UK can withdraw from the 1951 refugee convention. I presume sovereign states are allowed to do that....right? Then any illegal crossings are not "asylum seekers", they are invaders and can legally be dealt with by the military.

If they are not genuine asylum seekers, they can be sent back without leaving the Refugee Convention.

To have the navy patrolling the channel and sending boats back, the subject of the comment I replied to, would take a lot more withdrawing.

Just like Starmer "smashed" the gangs? 😄

Burnham is way out of his depth. He is also illegitimate and needs to call a general election so he has a mandate for all these dreams he pretends to have.

The Royal Navy CAN legally intercept and detain vessels in the channel so long as doing so does not break international maritime law e.g. endanger the lives on those in the detained vessel.

Let's assume that detention doesn't endanger lives. What happens next? The detained vessel cannot be returned to French waters or those on board returned to France without French government approval. So a standoff in mid-channel while other boatloads of illegal migrants wave a cheery greeting on their way through.

The Tories suggested something like this in 2021. It was a non-starter then and it's a non-starter now (without French agreement).

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/is-turning-back-migrants-at-sea-compatible-with-international-law/

2 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

Who was in power is not the real issue.

Ther has always been an influx of migrants arriving illegally. The boats are just a new, and more efficient way. The figures have risen through the years by yhe escalation of war, some but not all involving UK forces.

There was a policy mentioned to "smash the gangs". Thst was supposed to replace the Rwanda scheme. Maybe the gang smashing should have started before the other scheme was cancelled.

Either way, there needs to be a deterrent. My suggestion would be to put all asylum claimants to work as part of their application. Salaries pay for their bed and board, the rest they keep. Also, regulate their movements when they are not at work.

That would sort the true asylum claims from the false ones.

The Rwanda scheme cost £700,000,000 to deport 4 migrants who volunteered to be deported,

Your assertion that who was in power when the small boats crossings went from zero to tens of thousands is not the real issue is interesting.

The same party participated in the wars you mention while closing regular controlled routes to migrant ion.

Of course he knows its legal to board shipping in the English Channel we have been boarding Russian Tankers in our waters, he just trying to disrupt the thread with negative comments such as the trash about Genuine Asylum seekers. He knows full well the boats are full of illegals they are lifted without documents, so how can they be genuine. Last week he told me i was making false claims about the arrivals under Burnham where i informed him nearly a thousand had arrived under his watch, he of course denied it now 2 weeks into his leadership there has been over 2,000.

Edited August 3Aug 3 by BarraMarra

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Rwanda scheme cost £700,000,000 to deport 4 migrants who volunteered to be deported,

Your assertion that who was in power when the small boats crossings went from zero to tens of thousands is not the real issue is interesting.

The same party participated in the wars you mention while closing regular controlled routes to migrant ion.

At least Reform have told us what they intend to do if Elected. All Burnham wants to do is splash Tax payers money on more officials this will not stop the hundreds now crossing daily weather permitting.

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Rwanda scheme cost £700,000,000 to deport 4 migrants who volunteered to be deported,

Your assertion that who was in power when the small boats crossings went from zero to tens of thousands is not the real issue is interesting.

The same party participated in the wars you mention while closing regular controlled routes to migrant ion.

The crossings would have happened regardless of who was in government. It's a new system some prople smugglers came up with. When border force started intercepting the lorries with illegals inside, a new route was sought. These smugglers know what they are foung and know the laws they can get around.

There needs to be a deterrent. The Reanda scheme was one. It was removed without another being put in it's place. The monetary figure you wrote was for the plan to continue into the future too. The waste of money was it being cancelled eith no chance of getting the money back. It eould gave been better to keep it in place until an alternative was found which, to date, hasn't.

Edited August 3Aug 3 by youreavinalaff

5 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

At least Reform have told us what they intend to do if Elected. All Burnham wants to do is splash Tax payers money on more officials this will not stop the hundreds now crossing daily weather permitting.

What Reform have said they'll do is not doable.

Edited August 3Aug 3 by youreavinalaff

1 minute ago, youreavinalaff said:

What Reform have said they'll do is not doable.

Everything is Doable with effort. If it wasn't for the Conservatives slashing our Navy we would still have 2 Amphibious Assault ships capable of lowering there Aft end and sailing straight inside the vessel including a migrant boat however big the boat is.

22 minutes ago, RayC said:

Let's assume that detention doesn't endanger lives. What happens next? The detained vessel cannot be returned to French waters or those on board returned to France without French government approval.

If I didn't know you better Ray, I'd think it was finally dawning on you that this is actually a massive problem.

How to stop it? Simple. Remove the incentive.

Detain them on arrival and put them in detention centres. Similar to the IDC in Bangkok, but less luxurious. Tents in a field surrounded by barbed wire/chain link fences would do. A few months in there and they'll be begging to leave.

New arrivals would stop overnight. News would get out, nobody is going to pay hundreds/thousands of pounds and risk a channel crossing for 6 months in a cold field on Dartmoor.

As long as they know a free hotel, iPhone, 3 buffets a day and eventually social housing and a life on benefits awaits, they will continue to come.

All it takes is the will. Trump proved that.

The UK is not the world's Salvation Army, (although it seems to be trying for that award...). We are a sovereign country, not a charity. We should leave the ECHR and use the Navy to physically push back these boats, just as Thailand does with the Rohingya. The latter now completely bypass Thailand in their boats and head for Muslim Malaysia.

Tought action may seem c ruek, but it's better for the UK in the longer-term. Boat people will soon get the message that they are not welcome - the UK is full!

27 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Everything is Doable with effort. If it wasn't for the Conservatives slashing our Navy we would still have 2 Amphibious Assault ships capable of lowering there Aft end and sailing straight inside the vessel including a migrant boat however big the boat is.

No, that isn't doable and you probably know it isn't.

can't post the video clip here as the guy gets a bit swear laden towards the end, just hear the anger' in his voice' and multiply it 10 million times' if Burnham' does nothing but a total stop and deport the lid will come off simple as that🤔

This groundworker in Wales is furious as 4 Iranian men have been housed next to his sister and her children on a quiet estate in Haverfordwest. I’ve reached out to offer any support we can. This is totally unacceptable.

X (formerly Twitter)

Kiera Diss (@KieraDiss) on X

This groundworker in Wales is furious as 4 Iranian men have been housed next to his sister and her children on a quiet estate in Haverfordwest. I’ve reached out to offer any support we can. This is

36 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

No, that isn't doable and you probably know it isn't.

ok final one for you from me " How would you stop the boats there not small anymore "

1 minute ago, BarraMarra said:

ok final one for you from me " How would you stop the boats there not small anymore "

There needs to be a deterrent, as I pointed out in a previous comment.

4 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

Laws can be changed by the Government as well.

4 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

Laws can be changed by the Government as well.

SOLAS/SAR/UNCLOS rules cannot be changed by a single government!

12 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

There needs to be a deterrent, as I pointed out in a previous comment.

Is the Falklands available for resettling? They won't stay there long and will be begging to go back home.