UK coastguards downgraded 999 calls from refugees pleading for help as they headed to England days before the worst Channel disaster for decades, new internal documents reveal.
HM Coastguard potentially breached its own policy by categorising 999 calls from distressed passengers on as many as four small boats carrying 155 people as not in need of urgent rescue, according to analysis of incident logs obtained by the Observer and Liberty Investigates.
One of several downgraded calls involved a boat from which callers described “sick babies” on board. A coastguard helicopter observed that half of the passengers did not have lifejackets.
The coastguard logs from these incidents – chronicling reported small boat crossings four days before the 24 November 2021 tragedy that killed at least 27 migrants – do not say if rescue boats were ever launched.
Labour MP Olivia Blake, co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on migration, called for an investigation into the “extremely concerning” findings amid broader concerns over the government’s continued refusal to offer safe routes for the majority of refugees.
This week the official UK investigation into the mass Channel drowning in November 2021 will finally publish its findings amid fresh claims that families of the victims have been sidelined from the process.
A pregnant women and three children were among the victims, most of whom were Kurds from Iraq, who drowned after their inflatable dinghy capsized in dangerously cold waters after setting off from near Dunkirk.
The Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) report will disclose for the first time UK coastguard logs detailing its emergency response to the tragedy, though documents from French counterparts indicate a dithering response in which officials on both sides of the Channel wasted crucial hours passing the buck.
It is not known if the UK’s response to the mass drowning incident was also downgraded because logs relating to the tragedy have not been disclosed while the MAIB investigates.
However, new logs published today – disclosed after a 10-month freedom of information struggle – raise concerns over the UK’s approach to small boats crossings in the lead-up to the tragedy.
The logs also document another six reports of small boats on 20 November that were deemed by HM Coastguard to be of lower priority. Almost all of the 10 boats identified in the investigation were known to be in UK waters, with the location of two unclear to call handlers.
The revelations compound concerns aired during a previous investigation by the Observer and Liberty Investigates showing how the coastguard “effectively ignored” reports of 19 migrant boats in the weeks before the November 2021 mass drowning.
Maritime experts say the latest documents raise further questions over breaches of procedure and international law.
One former senior coastguard source, who requested anonymity, was “deeply saddened” by what they saw. An independent search and rescue consultant said there appeared to be a clear theme of some migrant vessel incidents in UK waters being incorrectly treated as less urgent and “being closed off” with “no information the vessel or people are safe”.
A spokesperson for the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA), which runs HM Coastguard, said “no vessel was abandoned” with aerial resources sweeping the Channel.
The MCA added: “All incidents in UK waters will be graded in accordance with international protocols and it would be inappropriate to comment further amid ongoing investigations.”
The logs raise further questions about underresourcing in the period immediately before the 2021 disaster.
At times, according to separate documents, only three operational staff were on duty in the coastguard’s Dover control room on 20 November, dealing with at least 110 reports of small boats. Staff must analyse reports and coordinate rescues while documenting steps taken and their reasoning.
Yet many of the 82 logs disclosed were so sparse they gave experts the impression staff may have been overwhelmed.
Labour MP Blake said the coastguard must be given the resources it needed to respond appropriately to distress calls.
Maria Thomas of Duncan Lewis solicitors, representing a survivor and families of 18 people who died in the 24 November drownings, said the “extremely concerning” findings underlined the need for a full and independent statutory inquiry once this week’s MAIB report is published.
“The families have been sidelined from the process for the past two years – they deserve answers,” she said.
Charities Care4Calais and the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) said it was shocking and unacceptable that urgent calls including those involving children have been downgraded.
Ravishaan Rahel Muthiah, spokesperson for the JCWI, said: “The blame should be squarely placed where it lies: in the chain of government policy that forces people to cross in boats in the first place while simultaneously underfunding the coastguard.”
Steve Smith, chief executive of Care4Calais, said: “‘Downgrading calls is a clear breach of the coastguard’s policy, where it’s made unequivocally clear that babies are on board a distressed boat in the Channel, raises serious questions about who was authorising such a decision.”
Coastguard policy dictates all “migrant vessels” should be graded as being in “distress”, meaning they require “immediate assistance” if in UK waters.
In 2021, downgrading to the less severe “alert” category, where immediate rescue becomes non-mandatory, was permitted once staff gathered enough information against a list of 15 criteria, including whether passengers asked for help, the vessel’s condition, and availability of lifejackets and fuel to complete the journey.
The rules have since been tightened, restricting the circumstances where downgrading can happen.
“In less than a minute the situation on board these unsuitable boats can change, so downgrading can be dangerous,” said Graham Warlow, a former coastguard watch manager who reviewed the records.
“It’s not unreasonable to assume the changes to this guidance following the tragedy may reflect concerns over incident handling at the time.”
One incident identified by the documents began at around 7.30am on 20 November 2021 as a flurry of calls came in from a boat reportedly carrying 25 people, including women and babies, who were struggling with cold conditions after being at sea for five hours.
“Its too cold theres ladies to sick babies [sic],” the caller is recorded as saying.
More than an hour later, Dover downgraded the incident to the “alert” phase after a helicopter spotted the boat – crowded with 20 people, of whom half had lifejackets, and apparently not on course to reach Folkestone for another six hours – and reported: “Nobody [is] in distress.”
Records suggest passengers made calls until 9.53am, but no rescue attempt is recorded, nor is there any record of the vessel being monitored or passengers arriving safely.
Operators closed the incident, recording they were “satisfied they would have been found” given the volume of traffic throughout the day.
Asked about the outcome of the incident, the MCA said there was “no SAR [search and rescue] requirement”.
However, the senior former coastguard concluded that at least six of the 15 criteria for downgrading had not been met and claimed: “On the basis of the little evidence we have from the logs I do not see that the [procedure] has been followed in this case.
The boat should have been monitored until its occupants were known to be safe. But the logs … are so poor that we cannot be sure this was not done any more than we can that it was.”
Three other reports based on calls for help from migrants resulted in an immediate non-emergency “monitoring” grading. One such call came in at 6.28am from a boat reportedly carrying 45 people, including children, all said to be without lifejackets. The incident was never upgraded to “distress”.
“Help help help,” the caller is recorded to have told the operator. “Fillinh [sic] with water – we die … we see Dover.”
No updates were logged until almost 10 hours later, when a coordinator marked the incident as finished, writing: “No further information, [last known position] not known/no longer valid.”
The logs also shed new light on an incident previously highlighted by Liberty Investigates, where a passenger known as Amjad claimed both UK and French call handlers refused to rescue him after he ran out of fuel near the maritime boundary at about 6am.
The newly released logs reveal the French relayed coordinates he shared via WhatsApp at 7.32am and again at 8am to their UK counterparts, who were both in UK waters.
Yet it was not until 9.23am that the UK upgraded the incident from “monitoring” to “distress” shortly before a French lifeboat recovered the boat following the intervention of a charity.
The log contains no evidence of coordination between the two coastguards, which international law requires, beyond the initial report. The MCA said it assessed the report as having “no SAR requirement”.
