The latest Channel figures are likely to intensify the political debate over whether the Government is doing enough to tackle illegal migration, despite a significant fall in the number of people arriving compared with the same period last year.

For Andy Burnham, the figures provide both an opportunity and a warning.

On one hand, ministers can point to the 46 per cent reduction in arrivals compared with the same point in 2025 as evidence that closer cooperation with France and increased efforts to disrupt smuggling networks are beginning to have an effect.

On the other, more than 17,000 people have still crossed the Channel in small boats this year.

That remains a substantial number and means the issue is unlikely to disappear from the political agenda.

The latest undetected landing at Folkestone has added another complication. Five people were detained after a small boat reached the Kent coast without being intercepted by either British or French authorities.

For critics, the incident raises a fundamental question about border security: if even a relatively small vessel can reach the British coast undetected, how confident can the Government be that it has full control of the Channel?

The Home Office described the incident as isolated and rare, while stressing that an investigation was under way.

But politically, individual incidents can have an impact far greater than their numerical significance.

The small boats crisis has become one of the most visible symbols of Britain’s wider immigration debate. Images of overcrowded dinghies crossing busy shipping lanes have repeatedly appeared on television and social media, creating a perception among some voters that successive governments have failed to prevent irregular migration.

That perception presents Mr Burnham with a significant political challenge.

The Prime Minister has made border security a central part of his government’s agenda and has sought to demonstrate that Britain and France are working more closely together.

His meeting with Emmanuel Macron earlier this month was intended to reinforce that message.

The two leaders agreed that efforts to tackle small boat crossings needed to be scaled up, while additional French police officers have been deployed to help disrupt launches from the French coast.

The Government believes this cooperation is essential.

The vast majority of small boats begin their journeys from northern France, meaning British authorities cannot solve the problem simply by increasing patrols around Dover and other parts of the English coastline.

Stopping a boat before it enters the water is potentially far more effective than intercepting it after it has begun crossing.

That is why cooperation with French authorities, intelligence sharing and action against people-smuggling gangs are likely to remain central to the Government’s strategy.

Supporters of the Prime Minister will argue that the reduction in crossings demonstrates that this approach is beginning to work.

However, there is an important distinction between reducing crossings and ending the crisis.

A 46 per cent fall is politically significant, but it does not mean the problem has been solved.

Thousands of people continue to attempt the journey, and the gangs organising the crossings have shown an ability to adapt.

Smuggling organisations are businesses driven by profit. If one route becomes more difficult, they can search for another. If authorities intercept smaller boats more frequently, criminals may attempt to use larger vessels capable of carrying more people.

That development could make the situation even more dangerous.

Reports of so-called mega-dinghies have highlighted how quickly the tactics of smuggling gangs can evolve. Larger boats can carry hundreds of passengers, potentially creating a much more serious humanitarian and security challenge if something goes wrong at sea.

The Government therefore faces a race against time.

It needs to reduce the incentive to attempt the journey while simultaneously making the crossing itself more difficult for criminal gangs.

That is easier said than done.

One of the central arguments in the political debate concerns what happens to people once they reach Britain.

Critics argue that if migrants believe they will be able to remain in the UK while their asylum claims are processed, the incentive to make the journey may remain strong.

The Government, meanwhile, must comply with domestic and international legal obligations when dealing with people who arrive and claim asylum.

This creates a difficult political balancing act.

Ministers want to demonstrate toughness without undermining the asylum system or creating legal challenges that could delay removals.

The Government is also under pressure to speed up asylum decisions and returns for people who have no legal right to remain.

Opposition parties are likely to use every new arrival to argue that the Government’s strategy is not working quickly enough.

Reform UK in particular has made immigration one of its defining political issues. The party can argue that a reduction in crossings is not sufficient if the absolute number remains high.

The Conservatives face a similar challenge.

They must convince voters that they have learned the lessons of their own time in government, when small boat crossings increased dramatically despite repeated promises to bring the numbers down.

That history gives Labour an opportunity.

Mr Burnham can argue that his Government inherited a difficult situation and is now reducing the number of arrivals.

But there is a political danger in making the comparison with previous years too heavily.

Voters may care less about whether the number is lower than last year than about whether they believe the Government has a credible long-term plan.

The question being asked by many voters is therefore not simply whether crossings are falling.

It is whether the Government can eventually bring them down to a level that most people regard as manageable.

There is also the issue of cost.

Responding to Channel crossings requires significant resources, including Border Force personnel, police operations, accommodation, legal processing and immigration enforcement.

Every additional arrival can therefore create costs that extend far beyond the moment a boat reaches British territory.

That makes prevention particularly attractive to ministers.

If the Government can disrupt a crossing before it begins, it avoids not only the immediate danger at sea but also much of the subsequent administrative burden.

This explains why French cooperation has become such an important part of Mr Burnham’s strategy.

But cooperation can only go so far.

France faces its own political pressures and has its own legal and operational limitations. British ministers cannot simply dictate how French authorities manage migrant movements on French territory.

That means the relationship between London and Paris will remain crucial.

The coming months could therefore determine whether the Government’s current strategy is viewed as a genuine turning point or simply another temporary reduction.

Weather will also play a role.

Small boat arrivals tend to fluctuate significantly depending on sea conditions. A period of calm weather can produce a sudden surge, while rough seas can reduce crossings without any major policy change.

For that reason, a few weeks of falling numbers should not necessarily be interpreted as proof that the crisis has been permanently brought under control.

The longer-term trend will matter much more.

Mr Burnham will also have to consider the political consequences of every major incident.

A large boat arriving undetected, a serious accident in the Channel or a significant increase in crossings could quickly undermine the Government’s message.

Conversely, sustained reductions combined with faster removals and successful prosecutions of smuggling gangs could strengthen the Prime Minister’s position.

That makes border policy one of the most politically sensitive areas of the Government’s agenda.

The public debate is unlikely to be settled by statistics alone.

Supporters of the Government will point to the 46 per cent fall and increased cooperation with France. Critics will point to the more than 17,000 arrivals and ask why people are still able to make the journey.

Both arguments contain an element of truth.

The numbers are falling, but the problem remains substantial.

The Government has taken additional measures, but smugglers are adapting.

French cooperation has increased, but an undetected landing has demonstrated that no border system can prevent every crossing.

Ultimately, the question facing voters is whether these measures represent the beginning of a lasting solution or simply a temporary improvement.

That is why the latest figures will matter politically as much as they matter operationally.

Andy Burnham has made clear that he wants to be seen as a Prime Minister who can secure Britain’s borders while maintaining an effective asylum system.

The next test will be whether the Government can turn a reduction in crossings into a sustained downward trend.

Until then, the argument over whether the Prime Minister is taking the small boats crisis seriously enough is likely to remain one of the most divisive issues in British politics.

Have your say: Is Andy Burnham doing enough to tackle small boat crossings in the English Channel, or does the continued arrival of thousands of migrants show that the Government needs to take much tougher action?