Nine aspiring politicians took part in a mock Commons debate on Nigel Farage's flagship migration policy, GB News's Senior Political Commentator Nigel Nelson

My wife Claire and I helped an MP this week with some work experience students aged between 14-19. All nine of them were looking for a career in politics of some sort.

So, we thought it appropriate to stage a Parliamentary-style debate. The youngsters were well mugged up on the Reform UK’ plan to enlist the Royal Navy to stop migrant Channel crossings.

It was, then, the perfect controversy to choose. Reform leader Nigel Farage should be pleased because it shows this policy has had some cut through with the young.

He might have been less happy with the following disputes over who would speak on which side.

That's why we made them pick lots. And told them they had to support or oppose whichever position they were allotted no matter what they really felt about it – just as MPs must sometimes do when under party orders

Yet despite some disagreeing with the arguments they found themselves putting forward because of the luck of the draw, they nevertheless entered into the spirit of the exercise with gusto..

The results were fascinating. And that was mostly because they followed the same pattern as debates on the subject which have been taking place all over the country.

The for camp pointed to the 14,500 migrants who have crossed the Channel so far this year and our inability to stop them.

They mentioned the 60,000 Moroccans able to pour into Ceuta and Spain’s failure to halt the tide. And warned we might face something similar unless drastic action was taken.

The against camp argued that numbers so far this year are lower than they were at this point last year – down 43 per cent on 2025.

And they said the Royal Navy was not there to ferry migrants back to the French coast and had better things to do such as defending us against the Russians.

These were all valid points. But then we came to the nub of this argument. Reform Home Affairs spokesman Zia Yusuf says migrants will be delivered back to France whether the French like it or not.

He said his party would try to get agreement to disembark arrested migrants at French ports.

But he added: “If the Elysee Palace refuses, make no mistake - His Majesty’s Royal Marines will disembark them safely on the very shore they left that morning”.

None of the young people used the words French sovereignty but they understood what it meant and could see that this would breach it.

The French interior ministry was more forthright: “This would constitute a violation of French sovereignty, as well as a violation of the law of the sea and international law,” it said.

And as hard as our mock Reformers tried to insist it would all work out in the end, their young opponents kept asking what would happen if the French continued to say no.

One even raised tit-for-tat action by the French. If Royal Marines dropped migrants off in France without permission, what would we do if French marines simply loaded them up again and brought them back to Britain in a game of human ping-pong?

There is also the question of gendarmes arresting our marines on the beaches for illegally entering their country.

If young people can identify the flaws in this plan quite so spontaneously, perhaps Nigel Farage would be wise to revisit it.