There is never a good time to visit the migrant camp in Grande-Synthe, but now it looks particularly grim.
The mud is so deep that I see a man’s foot disappear up to his ankle as he comes to charge his mobile phone. A puddle has turned into a lake, straddling the width of the road that runs through the camp.
And as I chat to some of the people living here, they feed a brazier with both wood and hand gel to keep it burning.
It is a sorry, squalid and dangerous place, but it has a purpose. This is the staging post for people preparing to get to Britain.
Come to this camp and you can find a smuggler prepared to sell you passage across the Channel; someone who will tell you that, for a price, they can fulfil your dream of getting to the English shore.
A year on from the deaths of 31 people on a lightweight dinghy in the middle of the Channel, the appetite to make this crossing seems undiminished.
We meet Ahmed, who has already tried to get across the Channel and is determined to have another go soon. On his phone is the evidence – a map showing that he was nearly in English territorial waters when the engine on his boat had failed.
More on Migrant Crisis
Related Topics:
If he had just kept going a little further, then his rescuers would have taken him to Kent, rather than back to Northern France.
Then there’s Rebaz, who has spent months trekking here from Kurdistan. He has made the long, arduous journey despite the fact that the bottom half of his left leg has been amputated. He says it was ripped away when he was near an airstrike in Iraq.
Advertisement
Rebaz blames NATO for the injury, but is still determined to get to Britain because “life is better there – and I am going for the sake of the future of my children.”
When I ask him if he worries about the danger, or the spectre of people dying in the Channel, he shrugs and looks genuinely indifferent. “I am not scared,” he tells me. “Nobody here is scared. I have to go – I have no other option.”
It was that drive that propelled 33 people to get on that ill-fated boat a year ago, when so many perished and only two survived. Four bodies have never been recovered, including that of Twana Mamand Mohammad, who was 18.
A keen athlete, who enjoyed Taekwondo and football, he had always wanted to leave Iraq, see Europe and hopefully become a footballer in the Premier League.
His brother, Zana, described him as “no trouble – at home, in the street, at school, in his school teams and among his friends”. He was, he said, “the go-to person in the family”.
On the night he died, Twana had previously messaged his anxious brother to reassure him that all was okay, saying the boat was working fine and that they were on their way to Britain.
Instead, a little later the engine failed. Sky News has seen transcripts of phone and text conversations between people on the boat and French emergency services, and they paint a picture of chaos at sea, allied to hesitation and indifference on the land.
Those on the boat called the French emergency service line, but help was not sent.
Then they were told that they were, in fact, in British coastal waters, so should phone the UK authorities. They, in turn, said the boat was in French waters.
And so it went on until, hours later, with the buck being passed and information not being passed between the two authorities. The boat took on water but when the French were told this, the reply was that it was “English water”.
Eventually, awfully, the passengers went into the sea, hours after phoning to ask for assistance that never came.
Instead, it fell to a fishing boat to raise the alarm after spotting bodies in the water.
Zana is now in France, trying to find out more about the circumstances surrounding his brother’s death. He remains shattered by the tragedy and bewildered that desperate people could have been left without help.
“Because this incident happened in the waters between both countries our loved ones contacted both countries and requested assistance,” he says. “But none of them offered assistance.”
He says that he now tells people not to follow in his brother’s footsteps; to avoid this perilous crossing and think about their safety. And his advice, he says, is ignored.
“Whoever you tell not to embark on this boat journey, they say ‘Whatever God has in store for us – that will happen’.
“So I tell them the tragic journey of Twana but this migration continues. And it will continue.”
And he’s right. The number of people crossing the Channel has increased over the past year. Since the disaster in November 2021, around 44,000 people have arrived in Britain using a small boat.
It is evening in Dunkirk and a procession winds its way through the town – a memorial march to remember the 31 people who died.
It ends on the beach, where the names of the victims are read out and hand-painted signs, embossed with their names, are held up. Twana’s name is there, along with everyone else – a catalogue of mainly young lives cut short in the most harrowing of circumstances.
At the time, it seemed like the sort of tragedy that would demand change. But in reality, the boats are still leaving, the smugglers are still cashing in, and the camps are still buzzing with people.
And as long as desperate people continue to cross the world’s busiest shipping lane in feeble, flimsy craft, the prospect of another disaster seems, grimly, inevitable.
The US has announced it has increased its reward for information leading to the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
In a statement on Friday, the US treasury said up to $25m is being offered for information leading to the arrest of Mr Maduro and his named interior minister Diosdado Cabello.
Up to $15m is also being offered for information on the incoming defence minister Vladimir Padrino. Further sanctions have also been introduced against the South American country’s state-owned oil company and airline.
The reward was announced as Mr Maduro was sworn in for a third successive term as the Venezuelan president, following a disputed election win last year.
Elvis Amoroso, head of the National Electoral Council, said at the time Mr Maduro had secured 51% of the vote, beating his opponent Edmundo Gonzalez, who won 44%.
But while Venezuela’s electoral authority and top court declared him the winner, tallies confirming Mr Maduro’s win were never released. The country’s opposition also insists that ballot box level tallies show Mr Gonzalez won in a landslide.
Nationwide protests broke out over the dispute, with a brawl erupting in the capital Caracas when dozens of police in riot gear blocked the demonstrations and officers used tear gas to disperse them.
More on Nicolas Maduro
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:40
From July 2024: Protests after Venezuela election results
While being sworn in at the national assembly, Mr Maduro said: “May this new presidential term be a period of peace, of prosperity, of equality and the new democracy.”
He also accused the opposition of attempting to turn the inauguration into a “world war,” adding: “I have not been made president by the government of the United States, nor by the pro-imperialist governments of Latin America.”
Lammy: Election ‘neither free nor fair’
The UK and EU have also introduced new sanctions against Venezuelan officials – including the president of Venezuela’s supreme court Caryslia Beatriz Rodriguez Rodriguez and the director of its criminal investigations department Asdrubal Jose Brito Hernandez.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy said Mr Maduro’s “claim to power is fraudulent” and that last year’s election “was neither free nor fair”.
“The UK will not stand by as Maduro continues to oppress, undermine democracy, and commit appalling human rights violations,” he added.
Mr Maduro and his government have always rejected international sanctions as illegitimate measures that amount to an “economic war” designed to cripple Venezuela.
Those targeted by the UK’s sanctions will face travel bans and asset freezes, preventing them from entering the country and holding funds or economic resources.
Donald Trump has been handed a no-penalty sentence following his conviction in the Stormy Daniels hush money case.
The incoming US president has received an unconditional discharge – meaning he will not face jail time, probation or a fine.
Manhattan Judge Juan M Merchan could have jailed him for up to four years.
The sentencing in Manhattan comes just 10 days before the 78-year-old is due to be inaugurated as US president for a second time on 20 January.
Trump appeared at the hearing by video link and addressed the court before he was sentenced, telling the judge the case had been a “very terrible experience” for him.
He claimed it was handled inappropriately and by someone connected with his political opponents – referring to Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg.
Trump said: “It was done to damage my reputation so I would lose the election.
“This has been a political witch hunt.
“I am totally innocent. I did nothing wrong.”
Concluding his statement, he said: “I was treated very unfairly and I thank you very much.”
The judge then told the court it was up to him to “decide what is a just conclusion with a verdict of guilty”.
He said: “Never before has this court been presented with such a unique and remarkable set of circumstances.
“This has been a truly extraordinary case.”
He added that the “trial was a bit of a paradox” because “once the doors closed it was not unique”.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass had earlier argued in court that Trump “engaged in a campaign to undermine the rule of law” during the trial.
“He’s been unrelenting in his attacks against this court, prosecutors and their family,” Mr Steinglass said.
“His dangerous rhetoric and unconstitutional conduct has been a direct attack on the rule of law and he has publicly threatened to retaliate against the prosecutors.”
Mr Steinglass said this behaviour was “designed to have a chilling effect and to intimidate”.
Trump’s lawyers argued that evidence used during the trial violated last summer’s Supreme Court ruling giving Trump broad immunity from prosecution over acts he took as president.
He was found guilty in New York of 34 counts of falsifying business records relating to payments made to Ms Daniels, an adult film actor,before he won the 2016 US election.
Prosecutors claimed he had paid her $130,000 (£105,300) in hush money to not reveal details of what Ms Daniels said was a sexual relationship in 2006.
Trump has denied any liaison with Ms Daniels or any wrongdoing.
The trial made headlines around the world but the details of the case or Trump’s conviction didn’t deter American voters from picking him as president for a second time.
What is an unconditional discharge?
Under New York state law, an unconditional discharge is a sentence imposed “without imprisonment, fine or probation supervision”.
The sentence is handed down when a judge is “of the opinion that no proper purpose would be served by imposing any condition upon the defendant’s release”, according to the law.
It means Trump’s hush money case has been resolved without any punishment that could interfere with his return to the White House.
Unconditional discharges have been handed down in previous cases where, like Trump, people have been convicted of falsifying business records.
They have also been applied in relation to low-level offences such as speeding, trespassing and marijuana-related convictions.
Leicester City’s owners have launched a landmark lawsuit against a helicopter manufacturer following the club chairman’s death in a crash in 2018.
Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha’s family are suing Italian company Leonardo SpA for £2.15bn after the 60-year-old chairman and four others were killed when their helicopter crashed just outside the King Power Stadium in October 2018.
The lawsuit is the largest fatal accident claim in English history, according to the family’s lawyers. They are asking for compensation for the loss of earnings and other damages, as a result of the billionaire’s death.
The legal action comes more than six years after the fatal crash and as an inquest into the death of the 60-year-old chairman and his fellow passengers is set to begin on Monday.
Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s son Khun Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha, who took over as the club’s chairman, said: “My family feels the loss of my father as much today as we ever have done.
“That my own children, and their cousins will never know their grandfather compounds our suffering… My father trusted Leonardo when he bought that helicopter but the conclusions of the report into his death show that his trust was fatally misplaced. I hold them wholly responsible for his death.”
The late Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s company, King Power, was earning more than £2.5bn in revenue per year, according to his family’s lawyers. The lawsuit claims “that success was driven by Khun Vichai’s vision, drive, relationships, entrepreneurism, ingenuity and reputation.”
“All of this was lost with his death,” it adds.
The fatal crash took place shortly after the helicopter took off from Leicester’s ground following a 1-1 draw against West Ham on 27 October 2018.
The aircraft landed on a concrete step and four of the five occupants survived the initial impact, but all subsequently died in the fuel fire that engulfed the helicopter within a minute.
The other victims were two of Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s staff, Nursara Suknamai and Kaveporn Punpare, pilot Eric Swaffer and Mr Swaffer’s girlfriend Izabela Roza Lechowicz, a fellow pilot.
Investigators found the pilot’s pedals became disconnected from the tail rotor – resulting in the aircraft making a sharp right turn which was “impossible” to control, before the helicopter spun quickly, approximately five times.
The Air Accidents Investigation Branch described this as “a catastrophic failure” and concluded the pilot was unable to prevent the crash.
The lawsuit alleges the crash was the result of ‘multiple failures’ in Leonardo’s design process. It also alleges that the manufacturer failed to warn customers or regulators about the risk.
Sky News has contacted helicopter manufacturer Leonardo for comment.