On Question Time this week, Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones, debating the issue of Channel boat crossings with Reform’s Zia Yusuf, told the audience that “the majority of the people in these boats are children, babies and women”. Embarrassingly for Jones this is not true, and the grumbling audience knew it.

According to The Migration Observatory, in the year to 31 March 2024, 75% of those who arrived on small boats were male and aged 18 or over. Yesterday, the BBC reported Home Office figures: “In the first three months of 2025, there were 6,420 small boat arrivals where the age and sex of the person was recorded […] Of these, 81% (5,183) were adult men.”

The MP for Bristol North West has since taken to X to argue that his comments had been misrepresented, stating: “Of course the overall majority of people arriving illegally on small boats are men — but not ‘north of 90%’ as Reform claimed.” For the public increasingly frustrated at the lack of government action on stopping crossings, a difference of 10-15% is merely splitting hairs.

The problem is not solely that Jones is totally out of touch on the issue. Admittedly, the Channel crossings are not under the remit of Chief Secretary to the Treasury and when asked before the election about whether Labour would scrap the policy of voter ID, he conceded that he did not know because he “only saw economic policy”. He has continued this honesty in office too. But Jones’s previous honesty to plead ignorance leads one to wonder why he chose to gaslight the public with false statistics, rather than admit that he simply didn’t know.

One reason for this may be that Labour is struggling to find its feet while dealing with Britain’s immigration crisis, and that it is simply a problem the party would rather not have.

This was exemplified by Keir Starmer’s “island of strangers” speech. Despite him offering criticism of the negatives of immigration in the softest post-liberal language, and with a remarkably progressive framework, he was accused by Left-wing critics of deliberately aping Enoch Powell’s Rivers of Blood speech. Since, he has said he was sorry for his comments, and suggested he regrets them.

But perhaps Labour’s difficulty with the immigration crisis is most clearly seen in its slogan describing its approach: “smash the gangs”. Practically speaking, even if the current set of gangs were to be smashed, then they would simply be replaced by new gangs. So long as the same pull factors and financial incentives exist, then so will the gangs. As the late American investor Charlie Munger once said: “Show me the incentive and I’ll show you the outcome.”

It also signals that Labour is not intent on focusing on individual migrants. Instead, it wants to tackle the problem as one of criminal enterprise rather than an attack on border integrity and an undermining of citizenship. By framing the Channel crossings primarily as a question of smuggling gangs, Labour avoids both the politically fraught issue of the migrants themselves and the potential compatibility of different cultural practices and the broader question of Britain’s asylum and immigration system. It is a skillful piece of political misdirection designed to retain the moral high ground while attempting to signal toughness. It is, however, not skillful enough to evade the realities driving the crisis.

Now it is in government, Labour has no choice but to reduce immigration, particularly given the political threat Reform UK poses. But the language necessary to win over the vast swathes of the electorate for whom immigration is a priority is antithetical to the permissive views on immigration held by Labour’s most vocal progressive supporters.

The party’s current course — cautious and often contradictory — is successful only in undermining the electorate’s confidence in Starmer’s ability to manage immigration effectively. Until Labour chooses a clear line of advance, it will keep surrendering ground on one of the most vital fronts in Britain’s political landscape.

---

Tom Jones writes at The Potemkin Village Idiot.

93vintagejones

---