For Labour, the timing could hardly be more difficult.
Ministers have repeatedly insisted that the Government is taking action to reduce illegal crossings, strengthen border security and dismantle the criminal gangs responsible for organising dangerous journeys across the Channel.
Yet the sight of hundreds of people arriving in a single day, combined with the rare occurrence of boats reaching the British coast without being intercepted, has provided the Government’s opponents with a powerful opportunity to question whether its strategy is working quickly enough.
That is why today’s poll asks a simple but politically explosive question: Has Labour lost control of the UK’s borders?
The answer depends heavily on how the figures are interpreted.
Supporters of the Government can point to the fact that overall Channel arrivals are lower than at the same stage last year. Ministers can also highlight increased cooperation with France, additional enforcement measures and the work of Border Security Command.
They argue that stopping small boats is an extremely complicated operation involving several countries, organised criminal networks and rapidly changing tactics.
From this perspective, a reduction in the overall number of arrivals is evidence that the Government’s strategy is beginning to produce results.
But critics say that the public will judge the Government on what is happening on Britain’s shores rather than on long-term statistical trends.
The arrival of 781 migrants in one day provides an uncomfortable headline for ministers, particularly when the Government has repeatedly promised to tackle illegal Channel crossings.
The two uncontrolled landings have added another layer to the controversy.
Officials have stressed that such incidents remain extremely rare. But opponents argue that even rare failures expose potential weaknesses in surveillance, interception and coordination.
The political argument therefore centres on a fundamental question: what does “control” actually mean?
Does control mean reducing the number of boats compared with previous years?
Does it mean intercepting the vast majority of vessels before they reach British territory?
Or does it mean establishing a system in which virtually no unauthorised small boat can successfully reach the UK?
The Government appears to favour the first interpretation, while its critics increasingly demand the third.
That difference is likely to become increasingly important as the political debate develops.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has attempted to draw a clear line by describing uncontrolled landings as unacceptable. Her decision to order an urgent review by Border Security Command demonstrates that ministers recognise the political sensitivity of the issue.
At the same time, Lucy Powell’s admission that authorities cannot stop every boat has created a difficult political message for Labour.
From an operational perspective, the statement may simply reflect reality. No border system can guarantee that every vessel will be detected and intercepted.
But politically, such comments can easily be interpreted as an admission that the Government accepts a certain level of illegal immigration.
That is precisely the interpretation opposition parties have seized upon.
The Conservatives have argued that Labour’s promise to “smash the gangs” has failed to deliver the decisive reduction voters were promised.
Reform UK has gone even further, demanding much tougher measures and presenting the Channel crossings as evidence of a broader failure of Britain’s immigration system.
For Reform, the issue represents a major opportunity.
Nigel Farage’s party has built much of its political appeal around immigration, national sovereignty and border control. Every highly publicised arrival provides the party with another opportunity to argue that successive governments have failed to address the problem.
However, the Government can point to a major complication in the argument.
The number of people crossing the Channel is influenced by conditions in northern France, weather, the availability of boats, criminal smuggling networks and enforcement policies on both sides of the Channel.
Britain cannot simply dictate what happens on the French coastline.
That is why cooperation with Paris remains central to Labour’s strategy.
British ministers have been working with French authorities to prevent launches and disrupt smuggling operations before migrants enter the water.
The Government’s argument is that stopping people from reaching the Channel in the first place is more effective than attempting to intercept every boat after it has departed.
Opposition politicians remain sceptical.
They argue that unless migrants believe there is a realistic prospect of being removed from Britain after arriving illegally, the business model of the smuggling gangs will remain attractive.
This raises another difficult issue: what happens after people arrive?
The debate over accommodation, asylum processing, deportation and legal appeals is now closely connected to the Channel crisis.
Even when a boat is successfully intercepted, the Government still has to determine the identity and circumstances of those aboard, process asylum claims where applicable and deal with any legal challenges.
This can make the entire process lengthy and expensive.
For voters, the issue is therefore not simply about boats.
It is also about whether the Government can demonstrate that Britain’s immigration system has a clear beginning, middle and end.
A successful border policy would ideally prevent dangerous journeys, disrupt criminal gangs, process legitimate claims quickly and remove those who have no legal right to remain.
Labour will argue that it is working towards that system.
Critics will respond that voters have heard similar promises from previous governments for years.
That political fatigue could prove especially damaging.
The Conservative Party spent years promising to stop the small boats, yet crossings continued to rise during its time in office. Labour now faces the same problem, despite promising that it would take a fundamentally different approach.
This creates an opening for Reform UK, which can portray both major parties as having failed to solve the problem.
The political consequences could be significant.
Immigration remains one of the issues most capable of motivating voters who might otherwise be disengaged from politics. It also has the ability to cut across traditional party loyalties.
Some former Conservative voters have moved towards Reform because they believe the Conservatives were not sufficiently tough on immigration.
Some Labour voters may also become uncomfortable if they believe migration is placing additional pressure on housing, public services and local infrastructure.
At the same time, there are voters who strongly support an asylum system and believe Britain has a humanitarian responsibility to protect people fleeing war and persecution.
That means the debate is unlikely to disappear.
The Government therefore faces the difficult task of balancing border enforcement with Britain’s international obligations and the legal framework governing asylum and human rights.
Any dramatic policy change could trigger another political controversy.
But failure to demonstrate visible progress carries its own risks.
For Andy Burnham, the Channel crisis is particularly important because his Government wants to establish a reputation for competence.
The public may accept that no government can eliminate every illegal crossing. What they may find harder to accept is the perception that ministers are reacting to events rather than controlling them.
That distinction could determine how voters interpret the latest figures.
If crossings continue to fall over the coming months, Labour will be able to argue that its strategy is working despite occasional setbacks.
If numbers rise again, however, the recent uncontrolled landings could become part of a much larger narrative about a Government that promised to take back control but failed to deliver.
The next few months will therefore be crucial.
The Government will be judged not only by the number of boats that arrive, but also by how quickly it can process cases, disrupt smuggling networks, remove those without a legal right to stay and demonstrate that the border system is functioning effectively.
For the opposition, the objective will be to keep public attention focused on every failure and every new arrival.
For Labour, the challenge is to prove that isolated incidents really are isolated — and that the wider trend is moving decisively in the direction ministers have promised.
Ultimately, today’s poll gives readers the opportunity to decide which interpretation they find most convincing.
Is the fall in overall crossings evidence that Labour is beginning to regain control?
Or do the latest record-breaking arrivals and uncontrolled landings demonstrate that the Government is still struggling to secure Britain’s borders?
The answer could provide an important snapshot of public opinion on one of the most politically explosive issues facing Andy Burnham’s Government.