Ceuta is facing a migration crisis (Image: Getty)
Spain’s border crisis must act as a “wake up call” and lead to Britain leaving the ECHR, Andy Burnham has been told. Around 60,000 migrants stormed the Spanish enclave of Ceuta on Thursday as border controls collapsed, creating a diplomatic disaster for European leaders. At least 43 people died as men attempted to swim to Tarajal beach, with bodies seen floating in the water. Others were killed in stampedes as men surged across land borders. The Beni-Enza border between Morocco and Spain was also closed after hundreds of North Africans made it into Melilla. Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni warned of a European security crisis as she demanded Spain be booted out of the open borders Schengen Area.
But Shadow Home Office minister Katie Lam told the Daily Express: “This should be a wake-up call for our own Government who are, disgracefully, making essentially the same mistakes as the Spanish Government.
“As soon as they came to power, Labour scrapped rules introduced by the last Government which banned illegal migrants from seeking asylum. Fewer than one in six rejected asylum seekers are removed from this country. And now, the Home Secretary is talking about opening up more ‘safe and legal routes’, with ‘community organisations’ allowed to sponsor asylum seekers.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Migrants are swimming across to the Spanish enclave (Image: Getty)
“As Spain’s sorry example shows, if national governments won’t take their borders seriously, illegal migrants won’t either. A soft touch on mass migration today always means more mass migration tomorrow.
“If we want to prevent Europe’s immigration crisis from adding to our own crisis at the border, we must make clear that those who come to this country illegally will never be allowed to stay here.
“That means leaving the ECHR, and swiftly removing everybody who arrives here illegally. If we don’t act now, Spain’s self-imposed immigration crisis could soon filter through to our shores.”
The Spanish interior ministry claimed 37,500 of the arrivals who crossed into Ceuta had returned to Morocco. Some of the 43 people who died had drowned but some were also killed in a stampede to cross the breakwater fence at Tarajal beach. The death toll is expected to rise. The waters near the border fence were yesterday littered with buoys, shoes and other belongings left behind. Spain sent military and police reinforcements to Ceuta after the surge, while Moroccan authorities deployed water cannon trucks and reinforced security at the crossing-gates.
They also fired tear gas to keep people away. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez blamed human smugglers for the crisis, saying they “deceive so many young people, and ultimately lead many of them to their deaths — whether in the ocean or, as in this case, at Spain’s border in the autonomous city of Ceuta.”
But critics blamed a Spanish Supreme Court ruling – which barred migrants who arrived by sea from being deported – for the influx.
They fear it will lead to more people being transferred to the mainland. And Spain’s migrant amnesty led to almost 1.2 million people applying for the scheme during a 10-week period.
It was open to undocumented migrants who had been living in the country for at least five months by the end of last year, provided they had no criminal convictions.
Official figures this month show that more than 600,000 applicants have already been granted temporary work permits since the scheme closed on 30 June.
Ms Lam added: “Once in Spain, illegal migrants will be able to seek asylum en masse and, thanks to the EU’s new ‘Pact on Migration and Asylum’, will spread out across the continent, with all EU states obliged to host a share of them, or otherwise assist in (and pay for) their resettlement.
“So what possible deterrent is there for crossing illegally into Spain?”
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said: “Schengen allows these migrants an easy route to Calais and unless we leave the ECHR, we simply cannot stop them. In a few months time, they will all be queuing in Calais to cross the English Channel and illegally enter Britain.
“I support my friends Giorgia Meloni and Jordan Bardella who say they will take extraordinary measures to stop this invasion.” The Ceuta crisis has led to European leaders turning on each other, throwing the future of the Schengen Area into doubt.
Migrants clashed with police (Image: Getty)
Ms Meloni said: “The images coming from Ceuta are striking and demonstrate, once again, that uncontrolled illegal migration poses a concrete threat to the security of Europe’s borders.
“Italy will not stand by and watch. We are prepared to intervene to defend the borders and safety of citizens, including suspending the Schengen Area with Spain.”
President Donald Trump said: “I watched the catastrophe that took place. It looked like an invasion of a country.
“If you look at Spain, they don’t know what to do. They are coming in by the thousands. What this is is weak law, bad management but very liberal law. Nobody has seen anything like it.”
Jordan Bardella, the frontrunner to become the next French President, said: “This is an unprecedented deluge. Ceuta is Europe’s future if we do not put an end to this naive migration policy.
“In the face of this emergency, the European Union must immediately suspend Spain from the Schengen Area: the European peoples cannot be the collateral victims of the policy of Spain’s socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez.”
The President of France’s National Rally added: “Migratory flows don’t stop at Ceuta: these 60,000 migrants will head tomorrow to the European continent itself, with the blessing of his corrupt socialist friends in Spain. We cannot and must not let this happen. It is time to hold Pedro Sánchez and all the ideologues of population replacement accountable.”
Mari Rantanen, the Finnish interior minister, said: “Spain has completely failed to protect the external border of the Schengen area from infiltration.
“This cannot continue. All European countries must support Meloni’s proposal. Countries that do not fulfil their obligation to protect the external border cannot be members of Schengen.”
France’s interior minister, Laurent Nuñez added: “In response to the situation observed in the Ceuta enclave, I gave instructions as of last night to immediately strengthen the controls at the Spanish border.”
Prime Minister Andy Burnham refused to criticise Mr Sánchez’s policies but admitted that “more needed to be done”.
The Prime Minister said: “It’s a concerning situation and I know people will see those scenes and want something to be done, more to be done.”
He added that he was in contact with Spain to “provide support” but said the crisis was “a matter for the Spanish government”.
Shadow Foreign Secretary Dame Priti Patel called for strengthened procedures at both the English Channel and Gibraltar, where Labour recently agreed a deal to dismantle the land border with Spain.
“What steps will you take to protect Gibraltar from the risks of these illegal migrants being able to enter illegally should they reach mainland Spain?’ she wrote. ‘Have you assessed the risk of these migrants travelling towards the UK?”
Andy Burnham Must Take This Action to Stop Ceuta Migrant Crisis Reaching Britain
The migration crisis in Ceuta has raised urgent questions about European border security and the ability of governments to respond when large numbers of people cross a border in a short period. For Britain, the episode has prompted renewed debate about Channel crossings, international cooperation and whether existing arrangements are sufficient to prevent criminal smuggling networks from exploiting vulnerable people.
Andy Burnham has said Britain must be relentless in tackling small-boat crossings while recognising that people who genuinely need protection must have access to support. The challenge now is to turn that position into a clear, practical strategy that strengthens border control without confusing the situation in Spain with the separate circumstances facing the United Kingdom.
The crisis in Ceuta is a warning about the importance of preparedness. It is not, however, proof that a new migration route to Britain has emerged. In a written parliamentary answer on 8 September 2026, the Home Office said there was no evidence that the events in Ceuta had created a new route to the UK. The government also reported that more than 97% of those who crossed into Ceuta had returned to Morocco. <Cite refs={[“turn856713search1″,”turn856713search2”]}/>
That distinction is essential. Britain should take the implications seriously, but policy must be based on evidence rather than alarm.
What happened in Ceuta—and why Britain is watching
Ceuta is a Spanish territory on the North African coast, bordering Morocco. Its geographical position makes it an important point of contact between Europe and Africa, and its border has long been a focus of migration enforcement.
At the end of July 2026, an unprecedented surge saw tens of thousands of people cross into the territory from Morocco. Estimates changed as authorities assessed the scale of the incident, with the European Parliament’s research service later citing approximately 80,000 arrivals and reporting at least 141 deaths. The episode exposed serious challenges for border management, emergency response and cooperation between neighbouring countries. <Cite refs={[“turn856713search0″,”turn856713search4”]}/>
The scale of the incident inevitably attracted attention across Europe. Governments questioned how the crossing had happened, how quickly people could be returned and whether similar events might expose weaknesses elsewhere.
For British policymakers, the relevant issue is not whether everyone arriving in Ceuta will attempt to travel to Britain. There is no evidence establishing that. Rather, the crisis illustrates how rapidly migration patterns can change and how important it is for authorities to share information, identify organised criminal activity and prepare for unexpected developments.
It also highlights the consequences when emergency accommodation, legal procedures and local services struggle to cope with a sudden influx.
The lesson for Britain is to strengthen its ability to respond to changing circumstances without assuming that every European border emergency will automatically become a British one.
The first action: strengthen intelligence-sharing with European partners
Burnham’s government should prioritise timely information-sharing with Spain, France, Morocco and other relevant partners.
Authorities need to understand how people-smuggling networks organise journeys, how they communicate with potential migrants, which routes they use and how they adapt when enforcement increases. Information about suspected criminal organisers, forged documents and changes in transport arrangements can help agencies identify emerging risks before they become more difficult to manage.
Cooperation must also include clear procedures for responding to credible warnings. If intelligence suggests that a criminal network is preparing a large operation, relevant agencies should be able to coordinate their response, allocate resources and communicate with one another quickly.
Such cooperation does not require Britain to abandon its own border policies. It requires the government to recognise that organised smuggling is an international activity that cannot be addressed effectively by one country acting alone.
However, information-sharing should be subject to appropriate safeguards. Intelligence must be reliable, personal information handled lawfully, and operational decisions reviewed where necessary. Mistaken assessments can cause serious harm, particularly when they affect people seeking protection.
The objective should be better enforcement based on credible information, not broad assumptions about migrants because of their nationality or route of travel.
The second action: target the criminal networks behind dangerous crossings
Small-boat journeys across the Channel are often organised by people who profit from placing others in dangerous conditions. Smuggling networks can change launch locations, replace equipment and adapt their methods when police intensify enforcement.
A sustainable strategy must therefore focus on the people organising and financing these operations, rather than concentrating exclusively on those who arrive.
Britain can strengthen investigations into suspected organisers, improve cooperation with French law enforcement and use financial intelligence to identify the proceeds of organised immigration crime. Where evidence supports prosecution, authorities should pursue cases through the appropriate legal processes.
Technology can assist with surveillance and the identification of suspicious activity, but it should complement trained personnel and established procedures rather than be treated as a complete solution.
The government should also assess whether its enforcement resources are being used effectively. More spending does not automatically produce better results. Ministers should publish meaningful measures of progress, including investigations, prosecutions, disrupted operations and evidence about whether criminal networks are losing their ability to arrange crossings.
A strategy that measures only the number of people intercepted may miss the wider objective: reducing the capacity of organised criminal groups to exploit vulnerable people and undermine border controls.
The third action: make asylum decisions faster and more effective
Border security cannot be separated from the asylum system.
When people arrive in Britain and claim protection, authorities need procedures that establish their circumstances and determine whether they qualify under the law. Delays can leave applicants in prolonged uncertainty, increase accommodation costs and make it harder for the government to enforce final decisions.
Burnham should ensure that the system has sufficient trained staff, reliable case-management processes and clear procedures for dealing with complex applications. Decisions must be made carefully, but unnecessary delays should be identified and addressed.
People whose claims are successful must receive the protection to which they are entitled. Where claims are rejected following the relevant legal procedures, the government should pursue lawful returns where possible and appropriate.
This requires practical cooperation with countries of origin and other relevant states. Diplomatic agreements cannot simply be announced and assumed to work; they need clear terms, operational capacity and the cooperation of the countries involved.
A more effective system would help distinguish people who qualify for protection from those who do not, while reducing the uncertainty that currently affects applicants, communities and public finances.
The fourth action: establish clear rules for international cooperation
Ceuta has also exposed the importance of cooperation between neighbouring countries during a sudden border emergency. Spain’s experience shows that a country can face enormous operational pressure even when its authorities have established border procedures.
Britain should use its diplomatic relationships to develop practical arrangements for exchanging information, coordinating responses to organised crime and clarifying responsibilities when migration emergencies occur.
Any agreement must specify what each country is expected to do. Vague commitments to cooperate are unlikely to be enough when authorities are under pressure and political disagreements emerge.
The government must also distinguish between different legal situations. Someone entering Spain from Morocco does not automatically have a right to enter Britain, and a person arriving in Britain does not automatically qualify for asylum. Each case depends on the applicable law and the individual’s circumstances.
Similarly, an agreement with another country cannot guarantee that every person arriving irregularly can be returned there. Legal obligations, safety considerations and the receiving country’s willingness to cooperate all matter.
Burnham should therefore explain which agreements his government intends to pursue, what practical changes they would produce and how Parliament will be informed about their effectiveness.
The fifth action: protect safe and lawful routes for people in need
A serious border strategy must address both enforcement and protection.
Some people make dangerous journeys because they are fleeing persecution, conflict or other circumstances that place them at risk. Others may be seeking economic opportunities without qualifying for refugee protection. These situations must be assessed individually rather than treated as interchangeable.
Where safe and lawful routes are available to eligible people, they can offer an alternative to journeys organised by smugglers. Their effectiveness depends on the number of places available, eligibility rules, processing times and whether the routes are accessible to the people who need them.
Safe routes alone will not eliminate irregular migration. Equally, enforcement alone cannot resolve every humanitarian problem or prevent every attempt to cross a border.
The government needs a coherent system in which border enforcement, asylum decisions, international cooperation and protection obligations reinforce one another.
That approach would also help ensure that vulnerable people are not left at the mercy of criminal networks while authorities debate who is responsible for their situation.
Britain must not confuse a warning with an established threat
The political temptation during a major migration emergency is to present the most alarming possible scenario. Yet claims about what might happen must be distinguished from evidence about what has happened.
The Home Office’s September parliamentary response stated that the government had found no evidence that the Ceuta crisis had created a new route to Britain. It also said the UK was working with Spanish and Moroccan counterparts and continuing to monitor migration risks. <Cite refs={[“turn856713search1″,”turn856713search2”]}/>
That does not mean the government should ignore future developments. It means preparedness should be proportionate to the evidence available.
Ministers should explain what they know, what remains uncertain and which indicators would prompt additional action. If new intelligence reveals a specific threat, the government should respond accordingly. If the evidence does not support claims of an imminent new route, it should say so clearly.
Accurate communication matters because public trust is essential to effective border policy. Exaggerated claims can generate unnecessary anxiety, while dismissing legitimate concerns can undermine confidence in the authorities.
The public deserves neither alarmism nor complacency.
Accountability must accompany enforcement
Burnham should establish clear objectives for the government’s response and report regularly on progress. These could include the effectiveness of operations against smuggling networks, the time taken to process asylum applications, the implementation of lawful return decisions and the quality of cooperation with international partners.
The government should explain where policies are working and where changes are required. It should also account for the costs of enforcement and asylum accommodation, ensuring that public money is directed towards measures with demonstrable value.
No single measure can capture the full complexity of migration policy. A decline in arrivals may be significant, but it should be considered alongside evidence about smuggling activity, safety, asylum decisions and whether pressure has simply shifted to another route.
Likewise, the number of investigations or arrests is not enough on its own to establish that a strategy is succeeding.
A transparent assessment would allow Parliament and the public to examine the government’s record using evidence rather than political claims.
A measured response is the most credible path forward
The Ceuta crisis demonstrates how quickly a border emergency can develop and how difficult it can be for authorities to respond when large numbers of people arrive in a short period. It also shows the importance of coordination between neighbouring countries and of having effective procedures ready before a crisis begins.
For Britain, the practical priorities are clear: strengthen intelligence-sharing, disrupt organised smuggling networks, improve the asylum system, establish workable international agreements and maintain lawful routes to protection for those who qualify.
These measures will not guarantee that every irregular crossing can be prevented. They can, however, provide a more coherent framework for managing the risks and responding when circumstances change.
Burnham should be judged on whether his government turns its promises into effective, transparent and lawful action. The Ceuta emergency is a reason to examine Britain’s preparedness, not proof that a new route to the UK has already opened.
Ultimately, the public needs a border policy that is credible enough to enforce the law, humane enough to meet Britain’s obligations and practical enough to withstand unexpected pressure. That requires sustained work, international cooperation and honest reporting—not simply another political declaration.