Hostile rhetoric will not stop refugee children dying in the Channel

After the death of Alan Kurdi, the Syrian toddler pictured washed up on a Turkish beach, many promises and commitments were made by global leaders to step up their response to the migrant crisis. But today, five years on, we are facing an identical tragedy, and much closer to the UK’s doorstep, raising the question: did Kurdi’s death change anything?’

A five-year-old and an eight-year-old died after falling into the Channel when the boat in which they were travelling, in an attempt to reach the UK, capsized. It is the worst tragedy of its kind in the Channel.

Taking such a risk with one’s life, or children’s lives, will be beyond most people’s understanding. The conditions on Tuesday were particularly poor for a crossing, with rain and strong winds – most attempts are taken on calm, clear days.

The reasons people risk such a dangerous journey are numerous. They are frequently fleeing torture or death in their home countries. The conditions in northern France are poor and worsening, despite the help many charities offer, with frequent raids on migrant camps, and poor access to healthcare, basic supplies, and legal assistance. Migrants and refugees are often running towards the comfort of family, hoping to be reunited with loved ones in the UK.

Humanitarian groups, and some of Britain’s biggest cultural stars, are united in their belief that individuals will continue to want to travel to the UK for a wide variety of reasons. They say it is crucial that the UK government offers safe and legal routes for people to travel to the UK to claim asylum, as migrants cannot claim unless they are on British soil.

There are few safe and legal routes. Refugee groups say family reunion rules protected by EU law, known as the Dublin III regulations, are the most effective. But when the transition period ends on 31 December, the UK will no longer offer this route and the EU has dismissed alternatives offered by the UK as “not very operational”.

Last week, the government rejected a Lords’ amendment to its immigration bill that would ensure the provisions of the Dublin regulations would continue. Other “safe and legal routes” have been suggested by humanitarian groups and migration experts, none of which is being utilised by the UK government.

In 2016, the government accepted an amendment to the immigration bill proposed by the Labour peer and former child refugee Alf Dubs requiring the Home Office to accept an unspecified number of unaccompanied child refugees from Europe for resettlement in the UK. The government capped the scheme at 480 children, although there was no legal requirement to do this and, as the cap has been met, the scheme has, in effect, ended.

Related: Risking the Channel ‘death route’ to Britain – a photo essay

In October last year, Greece’s immigration minister, Michalis Chrisochoidis, asked fellow EU states to help. He wanted countries to take in some of the 4,000-plus unaccompanied children on Greek islands. The European commission ultimately responded and funded a scheme to transfer children off the Greek islands. So far more than 10 countries, including Norway and Switzerland, which are not in the EU, have taken part.

But the UK has refused to help. Instead, ministers have taken a hardline approach, vowing to make the crossing “unviable”. The UK government has appointed “a clandestine channel threat commander” to tackle people smuggling and is investigating methods of physically blocking asylum seekers from attempting to cross the Channel.

Ministers and officials have looked at using nets to disable boat engines, locking up migrants on oil rigs, sending them more than 5,000 miles away to Ascension Island in the south Atlantic, and using water cannon to create waves to push back vessels.

This is set against a backdrop of increasingly hostile rhetoric from the government directed at asylum seekers, and those who wish to help them. The home secretary, Priti Patel, has called the asylum system “fundamentally broken” and promised new laws to deny asylum to those using illegal routes to enter the UK.

All of which has caused dismay among humanitarian organisations, which do not doubt that migrants fleeing from dire circumstances will continue to take risks to reach the UK.