What right have Euro judges got to meddle?

DID the sight of a heavily pregnant woman and young children stumbling ashore on the south coast yesterday give the bleeding heart brigade pause for thought?

They were among more than 400 migrants who had crossed the Channel illegally in flimsy dinghies organised by criminal gangs of people smugglers.

Whatever suffering they might have endured in the past, they are coming here from France, hardly an unsafe country.

Radical protesters and activist lawyers insist they don’t want migrants to drown. Yet by striving to block Home Secretary Priti Patel’s plan to send them to Rwanda for asylum processing, these virtuesignallers are fuelling the evil trade.

British judges have declared the crackdown legal. So voters, who overwhelmingly back it, will be horrified that the inaugural flight was axed at the 11th hour after European judges intervened. This policy is meant to be a deterrent. If the European Court of Human Rights continues to meddle, the Prime Minister is right to consider withdrawing from its ambit.

Brexit was supposed to mean seizing control of our borders – not leaving them subject to rulings in Strasbourg.