Local police recently issued what they described as their “strangest appeal ever” after reports of a crocodile lurking in a Derbyshire canal. Not exactly the tropical climate they’re used to, unless the reptile was drawn by the promise of Greggs and a decent pint.
Naturally, the public did what the British public does best in moments of crisis: they panicked, speculated wildly, and posted blurry photos online. One image showed what looked suspiciously like a log with commitment issues. Another was clearly a discarded inflatable from someone’s stag do. But facts never get in the way of a good urban legend.
Plus, be it a croc or a stag do, you’re happy if you can avoid it on your night out.
The police, to their credit, took the matter seriously. They issued a statement urging caution and asking anyone with information to come forward. Presumably they were hoping for a local zookeeper, or at least someone who’s watched more than three episodes of Steve Irwin: Croc Files. Instead, they got a wave of TikTokers turning up with drones, fishing rods, and one bloke dressed as Bear Grylls who tried to wrestle a traffic cone.
Also, well done to the fishing rod guy. I wish I had that level of misplaced self-confidence.
It’s moments like these that remind you just how British our approach to danger really is. America gets alligators in swimming pools and responds with helicopters and SWAT teams. We get a rumoured crocodile in a canal and respond with sarcasm, disbelief, and a petition to name it “Colin.”
Is that because we Brits are so different to the Americans, or is that one of the differences between crocodiles and alligators? Alligators swim in fresh water, whereas crocodile illicit a piss-taking response.
Of course, the crocodile turned out to be a hoax. Or a misidentification. Or possibly a hallucination brought on by too much WKD Blue. The police concluded there was “no credible evidence” of a reptilian menace. Which is a relief, unless you’re the crocodile, in which case it’s a bit of a snub. Which is also one of the differences with an alligator.
But the story raises important questions. Like: why do we keep imagining exotic animals in British settings? We’ve had panthers in Cornwall, wallabies in Cumbria, and now crocodiles in Dudley. It’s as if the nation collectively decided that Countryfile wasn’t spicy enough.
Every few years people say there’s a lion on the loose in Essex and it’s always a normal ginger cat sat a bit closer than the photographer realised.
Maybe it’s escapism. Or maybe we just really want to believe that our canals are more exciting than they are. After all, if you’ve ever walked along one, you’ll know they’re mostly just damp corridors for joggers and ducks with attitude.
Still, I say let’s lean in. Let’s embrace the madness. Next time someone spots a giraffe in Grimsby or a kangaroo in Kent, let’s not question it. Let’s give it a name, a backstory, and a Twitter account. Because in a world full of grim headlines, sometimes you need a crocodile in a canal to remind you that Britain is still gloriously, eccentrically bonkers.
| ☕ TIP (Help by donating)
| 📻 LISTEN (to the new radio podcast)
| 📺 WATCH (YouTube)
It raises some interesting questions. Does it mean that the guy who came over here as part of his “one in, one out” now has to go back? Is there a “one out, one in” clause?
If he now gets deported again do we have to take another one back in return? That’s the biggest worry because it would then be possible to have one guy going to and from France and that could slowly empty the nation. Maybe that’s why France was willing to sign this deal. They had a guy who was willing to keep making the trip.
The scheme wasn’t looking great anyway. It was a slow start with very low numbers. It is only a pilot scheme and for a while it was true that it had sent more pilots to France than deportees. For a while, due to rules about people coming to the UK being able to bring family, there were more people who had come into this country than had left. That, in itself, may not be a problem, but it was called “one in, one out”. Even someone scraping a D at GCSE Maths can work out what ratio stats we should expect.
It seems that no one had planned for this eventuality. That’s almost the biggest sin. How could they not have seen this coming? If there is one thing we know about people who travel illegally from France who are then returned to France, they know how to travel illegally from the place they have just been sent to.
It was bad timing, politically. This news broke on the same day the number of migrant arrivals via the English Channel so far this year passed the total for the whole of 2024. And it’s not even Christmas, even though you’d never know that if you look in shops.
It’s a running total of 36,886, beating last year’s 36,816. Maybe it won’t go higher than that if Storm Benjamin can be persuaded to stick around till January.
The man who came back to the UK said it was because he didn’t feel safe in France. There’s a bit to unpack there. Does he feel safer in the UK? Has he seen all the news about knife crime? I mean, he has a point if he’s talking about the traffic around Arc de Triomphe, I’ll give him that.
He said, “When we were returned to France we were taken to a shelter in Paris. I didn't dare to go out because I was afraid for my life.”
It can feel pretty rough in Paris. Especially around Guard du Nord because there are lots of illegal mig… oh, hang on.
But to take his point more seriously, he added, “The smugglers are very dangerous. They always carry weapons and knives. I fell into the trap of a human trafficking network in the forests of France before I crossed to the UK from France the first time.”
So, that evidence suggests this will happen again. People who use gangs to get to the UK will fall foul of the gangs when they’re back in France.
Just 42 people have been returned to France so far under the agreement. Given the name, “one in, one out”, we can see just how far out it’s drifted. It’s 36,886 in, 42 out, 1 back in.
This story is across most of the front pages (Thursday 23rd October) and it is telling that not one of them has found a positive spin on this. The Guardian, the Metro, etc. That shows this isn’t a party political issue.
By definition we are not talking about a successful asylum applicant, and therefore we don’t need to discuss what role the UK should play in helping those needing refuge. If you have failed in your application and been deported to France we know we’re talking about someone who shouldn’t travel to the UK in a boat.
For balance I should mention that Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the Labour government had detained and removed more than 35,000 people illegally in the UK.
So that’s (36,886-35,000) in, (42-1) out. 1886/41. That’s 46 in, one out. Not as catchy though, is it?
Read more like this on Steve N Allen's Stacked
| ☕ TIP (Help by donating)
| 📻 LISTEN (to the new radio podcast)
| 📺 WATCH (YouTube)
.jpg)
