Now EU states are humiliating Starmer over his pitifully weak migrant stance

Labour came to power last summer on a wave of discontent with the Tories for failing to get a grip on sky-high migration. Now Labour is proving to be worse, having reached the shameful milestone of 50,000 illegal migrants within 401 days of being in power - the same figure took 603 days under Rishi Sunak's premiership.

Smashing the gangs was always empty rhetoric; the cross-Channel trade is so lucrative that another smuggling group will quickly take their place, especially when so-called asylum seekers are willing to pay thousands of pounds to risk the crossing.

Still, if you get into the UK, any illegal migrants will receive thousands more in free accommodation, food, clothing and black market work.

Labour does not appear to understand the concept of meaningful deterrence. French President Macron is right to castigate Britain for its "pull" factor of easy benefits and its generous welcome funded by taxpayers and charities.

Having already spent £700m on the Rwanda scheme, you would have thought any sensible successor government would have given it a go, as anecdotal evidence suggested it was already having a discouraging impact in French migrant camps. But Labour recklessly dismissed it as a gimmick, and now US President Donald Trump looks set to benefit from our expenditure by sending 250 deported criminals to Rwanda. This is in addition to more migrants being relocated to other African countries including South Sudan and Eswatini (formerly Swaziland).

The US is not the only country to ignore human rights squeamishness, with both Denmark and Italy actively leading European efforts to end illegal migration by sending them straight to a third country outside the EU. In May, Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni and her Danish counterpart wrote an open letter challenging the European Convention on Human Rights saying it has gone way beyond its original post-war intentions and is now being exploited by an army of lawyers to prevent nations deporting failed asylum seekers.

Fear of human rights lawyers halting deportations was undoubtedly one of the reasons why Tory leader Rishi Sunak went for an ill-advised early election last year as he was warned that yet more migrants stuck on the tarmac for Rwanda-bound flights would not be a good look for the Tories.

Legal action will certainly confound Sir Keir Starmer's derisory one-in one-out deal with Macron - affecting only a paltry 50 migrants a week - as well as preventing the Home Secretary's promise to immediately deport foreign criminals. Rights to family life and the right kind of chicken nugget will be trotted out by lawyers earning yet more money from appeals. And, of course, with this government being headed by lawyers, including the all-star human rights advocate Lord Hermer, they will all bend the knee before every judgement.

But any attempt to extricate us from the ECHR will probably need a new government in 2029 and Britain simply cannot afford to wait that long. Earlier this week, Reform female politicians made a powerful call to end a process that is making many women and girls feel unsafe in this country as young male migrants are linked to an increase in sex crimes. Why should the human rights of foreigners take precedence over our own citizens?

The rank unfairness of it all and the subsequent rise in crime, including prolific shop-lifting, is fuelling civil resistance. Peaceful protests across the country will only increase if illegal migrants continue to be housed in hotels that threaten local communities.

Illegal migrants should be treated as the criminals they are and housed in secure encampments until they can be hastily ejected. Zero tolerance is having the desired effect in the US where Trump has abruptly reduced the invasion of his country with 6,000 migrants apprehended at his southern border for the whole of June, whereas that was the daily total a year ago.

Trump says he is willing to build as many Alligator Alcatraz migrant camps in Florida as needed to stem the flow and yet tough deterrents already seem to be doing the job within six months of him coming to power. Starmer should heed his American pal but who believes Labour can be as tough as Trump?

That is the issue. Whatever Starmer does, no one believes it will have the slightest impact on migration numbers because he and his government just don't have the guts to enact anything meaningful. The problem is Britons cannot afford to wait for a leader who does.