The Channel Crisis: Why the Real Problem Begins Long Before the Shore

Debates around illegal crossings in the English Channel often focus on what is most visible: small boats leaving the French coast and arriving in the UK. Governments respond with funding packages, surveillance measures, and promises of tougher enforcement. But this approach overlooks a more fundamental issue—one that begins long before migrants ever reach the sea.

The UK’s latest agreement with France reflects this pattern. A £662 million deal aims to reduce crossings through increased policing, surveillance, and operational cooperation, with part of the funding tied to performance. Yet despite years of financial commitments, results have declined. The proportion of crossings stopped by French authorities has fallen significantly, raising questions about whether enforcement alone can deliver meaningful change.

To understand why, it is necessary to look beyond policy and listen to those directly affected.

In my own experience, speaking with around 36 African asylum seekers who fled their countries in Africa to go to France, they all eventually rossed the channel to the United Kingdom, every single individual had passed through France. Their accounts reveal a consistent and troubling pattern. When asked why they did not apply for asylum in France, 22 individuals said they were simply unable to do so. According to them, there was no accessible administrative structure—no clear process, no entry point, no system to engage with.

Among those 22 individuals, ten had spent more than three weeks actively trying to access facilities or begin an application, without success.

Others described even more basic challenges. Many reported arriving in France only to spend weeks sleeping outside, with no access to adequate shelter. Drinking water, toilets, and washing facilities were often unavailable or extremely limited. Police vehicles would occasionally pass by, but without any meaningful intervention or support.

During winter, conditions became even more severe. Several individuals described sleeping in the cold without blankets or protection. These are not isolated accounts—they reflect a broader environment in which migrants feel not only unsupported, but effectively invisible.

This absence of engagement has consequences.

Most migrants are not seeking to disappear into the margins of society. On the contrary, many express a strong desire to follow legal pathways, to integrate, to work, and to contribute to the communities in which they live. But when no system is accessible—when there is no way to apply, no recognition of their presence—they are left with few options.

For many, that leads to the United Kingdom.

The UK is widely perceived among migrants as a place where, regardless of outcome, their presence will at least be acknowledged. Upon arrival, individuals are processed, and basic humanitarian conditions are generally provided—access to shelter, healthcare, sanitation, and, importantly, a functioning legal framework through which their case can be heard.

This contrast is a powerful driver of movement.

International observers have also raised concerns about conditions in northern France. UN Special Rapporteurs have previously highlighted the “inhumane” living situations faced by migrants, including lack of access to safe water, sanitation, and basic facilities. Reports have described individuals living in tents, washing in polluted water sources, and relying on severely limited infrastructure.

“Migrants and asylum-seekers along the northern French coast […] are facing an inhumane situation, with some living in tents without toilets and washing themselves in polluted rivers or lakes,” said Léo Heller, the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights to water and sanitation “We are concerned about increasingly regressive migration policies and the inhumane and substandard conditions suffered by migrants,” said Felipe González Morales, the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants. https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/04/1006481?gclid=Cj0KCQiA4OybBhCzARIsAIcfn9lCr4dWV8-qcpgj84TQFdBcb9AaTA43vkeoWpT53yMGaWUmbuiriWQaAmMQEALw_wcB [last accessed on 21/11/2022]

Such conditions do not just reflect hardship—they contribute to onward migration.

This is why the current policy focus is insufficient. Financial agreements, increased patrols, and enforcement measures may reduce crossings temporarily, but they do not address the underlying causes. As long as migrants encounter barriers to entering the asylum system and lack access to basic living conditions in France, the incentive to move onward will remain.

If meaningful progress is to be made, attention must shift to what happens at the point of arrival in Europe. Ensuring consistent administrative processing, access to asylum procedures, and humane living conditions would not only uphold international obligations but could also reduce the need for dangerous onward journeys.

Until then, the Channel will continue to be treated as the problem—when in reality, it is only where the problem becomes visible.