Shocking Moment Migrant Leaves Child In The Sea During Horror Channel Crossing
This is the harrowing moment a migrant left an injured child and climbed onto a Channel dinghy as the stricken youngster was rescued.
Footage of the man carrying the terrified tot through the waves to a waiting taxi-boat emerged on the same day 781 people crossed. After a wave crashes into the small child near Berck, the migrant continues pushing towards the boat, which was already packed with asylum seekers.
A wave then carries the vessel into the pair, and the dazed child starts floating on top of the water. French lifeboat crews rushed through the water, lifting the shocked child onto a rescue paddleboard. But the man shockingly turns away and tries to climb onto the dinghy.
The bewildered child is then left sitting nearby, watching, as dozens of people flounder in the water, with others still trying to clamber onto the boat.
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: “This is a sickening and heartbreaking scene. A few weeks ago, I saw a similar embarkation myself, where the young male illegal immigrants pushed women and children off the boat.
“The needy are abandoned and young, often-violent men push their way to the front and enter the UK. Women have recently died during crossings on these boats in unexplained circumstances. This illegal immigration route must be completely ended.
“The French government is morally culpable for letting it happen on their beaches when they could easily stop it, as the Belgians have done. The charities supporting this wave of illegal immigration are equally guilty for what is happening, including for the deaths that have occurred.”
France’s Maritime Prefect for the Channel and the North Sea said the child had been taken into care after the incident on Monday afternoon.
The organisation said: “The gendarmerie and the fire service subsequently took charge of the child, and the prefecture’s land-based services then took over. The child was taken into care following a medical incident.”
The astonishing moment came as 781 people crossed the Channel – a record number for this year.
It will heap pressure on ministers as they desperately try to convince people the borders are secure.
Some 18,565 people have crossed the Channel this year, down 42% on the equivalent point last year.
New analysis has revealed the number of migrants to have crossed the Channel under Labour is greater than the number of full-time soldiers in the British Army.
Some 83,279 people have arrived in small boats, overtaking the 83,000 in the Army.
An average of 103 people per day have crossed the Channel in the 809 days since Labour won the keys to Downing Street.
Mr Philp said: “Labour has let an entire Army-sized population cross the Channel illegally.
“More people have arrived in small boats than we have soldiers defending Britain. That is completely bonkers. Labour has lost control of our borders and seems utterly incapable of getting it back.
“The Conservative plan is to end hotels and benefits for illegal immigrants and instead deport them.”
But Labour’s Lucy Powell, the Education Secretary, sensationally claimed that Border Force cannot intercept every single migrant crossing.
The Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, launched an “urgent review” as officials confirmed at least 21 asylum seekers arrived in Samphire Hoe on Tuesday.
Others are feared to be on the run, with the Home Office carrying out a “thorough investigation”.
And at least five migrants were detected at The Warren, a rocky stretch of coast near Folkestone, on Monday. The crossings were the first unauthorised landings in a year
Zia Yusuf, Reform’s Home Affairs spokesman, said: “This is an abject surrender of our borders by Lucy Powell and Labour. Every migrant boat can and should be intercepted, but this government is too gutless to deploy the Royal Navy and protect the British public from this invasion of undocumented fighting-age men.”
Mr Yusuf added: “It’s abundantly clear that this government will not stop the invasion of unvetted fighting-age males into our country.
“Instead, they are incentivising them with lavish police motorcades to their taxpayer-funded hotels, all while the British public struggles to afford to live in our own country.
“Labour’s promise to smash the gangs is in complete tatters. Without withdrawing from the ECHR and deploying the Royal Navy, the boats will keep on coming, and Brits will continue being forced to foot the bill for these invaders.”
Ms Powell echoed that language on Thursday but suggested not all crossings could be prevented.
Asked on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme if the situation was embarrassing for the Government, she responded: “(You) can’t stop everything all of the time.
“Of course, it’s a concern. That’s why the Home Secretary has demanded and ordered this urgent review, because this is not what we want to see. This is not acceptable.
“But the overall picture is an improving picture. It is hard, difficult work that requires constant, constant effort by our border forces, our security services, police, our partnerships with France and other countries.
“This is a mammoth and huge task, which is now starting to reap some dividends. But of course, you know where there are still issues arising, we must absolutely tackle them.”
Pressed on Good Morning Britain whether she stood by her statement, Ms Powell said: “I think you’re just taking that completely out of context.
“We are clamping down on small boat crossings every single day… we are sucking the oxygen out of it, we are taking steps, and there are many, many steps.
“It’s not an easy thing to do to just turn on a switch, turn off a switch overnight. We have to constantly evolve.”
A Government spokesperson said: “Our progress this year in tackling small boats is indisputable - with crossings down by 42% and the lowest recorded over the summer months since 2020.
“But this week’s events show that while the peaks we are seeing are far below those of previous years, we need to push further and harder in order to eradicate this vile trade.”
"🚨 BRANSON'S SCATHING ATTACK! — HE BLASTS TRUMP OVER PUTIN TIES AND URGES EUROPE TO STAND FIRM!"
British billionaire Sir Richard Branson has launched a fierce public attack on Donald Trump, accusing the U.S. administration of appeasing dictators and putting personal preferences ahead of American and allied interests.
The Virgin Group founder made his criticism in a LinkedIn post published this week, questioning why Trump appeared so willing to accommodate Russian President Vladimir Putin while Ukraine continues to face Russia’s invasion.
Branson described the administration as an “appeaser to autocrats and dictators,” arguing that its approach could weaken confidence among America’s traditional allies and undermine the interests of democratic nations.
He also raised a pointed question about the president’s relationship with Putin, asking why Trump seemed to flatter the Russian leader despite the continuing war and widespread international concern over Moscow’s actions.
The remarks come amid renewed controversy over a reported agreement involving Russian diesel supplies and a temporary easing of U.S. sanctions on Russian energy exports.
Trump has defended the arrangement as beneficial to fuel markets, while critics argue that allowing Russian energy revenues to flow could indirectly help Moscow sustain its war effort.
Branson called the deal deeply hypocritical, pointing to the contrast between Washington’s previous willingness to penalize countries purchasing Russian energy and its own decision to ease restrictions.
His criticism extended beyond energy policy. He also condemned Trump’s public attacks on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, describing the administration’s treatment of Ukraine as a betrayal during a period of war and suffering.
The billionaire’s intervention follows mounting concern in Kyiv and across Europe about the durability of American support for Ukraine, particularly as diplomatic efforts have struggled to produce a lasting settlement.
Branson also expressed alarm about reports involving restrictions on Starshield services used by Ukraine, a technology issue that has raised questions about the country’s access to crucial battlefield communications.
Some of Branson’s claims about the consequences of satellite-service restrictions have not been independently confirmed, and the details of decisions involving military communications remain disputed.
He urged European leaders to respond more decisively, arguing that the continent cannot simply wait for Washington to determine the future of Ukraine’s security and its broader relationship with Russia.
His proposed response reportedly included considering the use of frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine and supplying more advanced weapons, measures that would intensify the confrontation with Moscow.
The comments place Branson among a relatively small group of prominent business leaders willing to criticize Trump directly over foreign policy, despite the political and commercial sensitivities surrounding such interventions.
Branson has previously spoken out in support of Ukraine and criticized approaches that he believes would pressure Kyiv into accepting an unfavorable peace agreement with Russia.
The latest dispute also comes at a politically sensitive moment in the United States, with congressional midterm elections approaching and foreign policy increasingly intertwined with domestic debates over leadership and national priorities.
Supporters of Trump’s approach may argue that direct engagement with Moscow and energy-market flexibility can serve American interests, even when such policies provoke disagreement among allies.
Critics counter that concessions to Russia risk weakening deterrence and sending an unsettling message to countries relying on the United States for diplomatic, economic and military support.
The disagreement reflects a broader debate over whether negotiations and economic pragmatism can help end the war—or whether they could give Moscow additional leverage without securing meaningful concessions.
For Ukraine, the stakes remain immediate: continued military pressure, uncertainty over international support and the search for a settlement that preserves its sovereignty remain central concerns.
Branson’s intervention adds another prominent voice to the dispute, challenging the White House’s handling of Russia and demanding a stronger response from Europe as the conflict continues.
