To think that the 'Calais Camp' situation needs to be resolved ASAP!

[Kreacherelf]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3413566/Port-Calais-closed-migrants-storm-harbour-make-Spirit-Britain-ferry-desperate-bid-reach-UK.html

This is just getting ridiculous now. France need to take this problem to the EU and ask for help dealing with it immediately. It has gone on for too long and needs to stop.

I don't know what the answer is. I think the UK should take anyone under 18, and their family members. Other than that, everyone else should have to apply for asylum in France or risk arrest. Not a perfect solution, but the only one I have.

I agree with taking people directly from camps in Syria.

The people in the camps in France are not refugees, in the strict sense. They are in a safe country and should claim asylum there or where they landed.

They are choosing to sit in that camp and wait for an opportunity to get here.

I don't understand why French SS and aid workers in the Jungle enable these vulnerable children to remain in these conditions.

Thanks Wasonthelist I knew someone would have a straight forward answer.

What's the point in taking a handful of 000's from the camps? What difference does that make bar a nod to humanity?

I say we take every single one back to agreed camps on the borders of their country. We then plough money into making those camps safe, providing healthcare and education, security and units for vulnerable unaccompanied minors.

We seek financial agreement to do this from every country, EU, USA, Asia and the wealthy Middle East.

Means the people can return to their own land when it stabilises (which may need to be facilitated), there is no pull to traffic to Europe as they simply won't be staying, for any reason at all. So no drownings. No mass culture clashes. Immigration based on a requirement/ skills basis only allowed.

Perhaps we could still accept refugees from countries where it is relatively stable but individuals are persecuted for political/personal etc reasons.

But in cases of mass warfare and immigration plan 1 stands.

I agree it is shocking that the french have not done more.

However, the Calais camp is in Front National territory, so there is little local political will to deal with it, and none at all at the national level. Informal camps have existed in the Calais area for over a decade now (since Sangatte closed in IIRC 2003). A lot of local French people think that the solution is for the French to stop policing the UK border, and move the problem to Dover - so when you wish the french would sort out the problem, be careful what you wish for!

Many refugees have applied for asylum in France - this doesn't seem to automatically entitle them to any support. There are upwards of 150 refugees in Paris who have made asylum applications but are living on the streets, and more in Lille. Some have been relocated to other parts of France while their asylum claims are processed - there is a fair bit of turnover in the camps, as many leave (either get to the UK, claim asylum and move elsewhere in France, or fall victim to trafficking, ill health or accidents).

Other refugees will not claim asylum in France because they wish to join family already in the UK, and won't be able to do so if they seek asylum elsewhere. And many speak reasonable english and little french, which is another disincentive.

Yes, to get citizenship in France, you must be fluent in French. Unlike the UK.

You do not need to be fluent in French to be a French citizen (I don't understand why people type stuff when it can so easily be debunked), you need level B1 in the european framework, which is the equivalent of a GCSE. Anyone who has ever done a language at school knows this is a verrrryyy long way from fluency.

It's no harder, and certainly a LOT cheaper, for a foreigner to get French citizenship rather than British (assuming they meet the usual requirements).

That's irrelevant for these people though, as most would prefer the UK on the grounds of family links, the fact that most speak some English, and because of the perceived better job prospects and lower levels of discrimination (they are in for a shock unless they end up in London).

The job prospects in the UK are better. France is not in a good state, economically speaking. In that sense it's entirely rational for people to want to come here. It does give the whole 'fleeing war and persecution' thing an overtone of opportunism though.

the young fit men should be sent back and fight for their country. they are violent, will use any violent means possible to smuggle themselves Illegally to the UK. they can use that agro to defend their own country.

elderly/children, absolutely need help.

why don't any countries outside Europe help? America/China/India/Australia etc etc????? why Europe?

and do you think once IS drive everyone out of Syria they'll sit back andf twiddle their thumbs? NO. they'll target the next one on their list, they are eveil bond villain megalomaniacs who want to conquer the world and drive everyone out of everywhere.

whwre is everyone supposed to settle then?

I think Spain is next on the hit list.

manatee I'm not sure the job prospects are better in the UK, except for those who have family or some sort of support network in a reasonably prosperous part of the UK. You'd be hard pushed to argue that job prospects were better on Tyneside than in Toulouse.

For ISIS.

Waypast I agree completely, I would vote for that. Financially supporting and providing multi agency teams to safe, resourced camps should be an international responsibility once the need arises in any one country. Plus much higher international pressure on countries where the resident population are driven out in hordes for reasons other than natural disasters.

The situation is ridiculous. The migrants who make it all the way across Europe to a camp in Calais are the most able. They should be processed in France or whichever 'safe' country they first arrived in.

Britain shouldn't be bullied into taking migrants like this. The behaviour of some of the migrants storming the ferries/breaking into trucks etc is criminal.

I'm voting out of the EU as Geanu encouraged the migrants then backtracked when they realised it was unworkable to absorb literally millions of people. I know the Calais issue has rolled on for years but I can't wait to vote out of the EU and no longer be bullied by Germany.

I say we take every single one back to agreed camps on the borders of their country. We then plough money into making those camps safe,

Didn't we give a load of extra money to this?

It does give the whole 'fleeing war and persecution' thing an overtone of opportunism though.

Yes it does

What Watpast said at 16:24.
All of it.

To be honest... I don't know WHY they want to come to the UK.

The UK is NOT paved with gold as they seem to think. Life here is much harder here (housing costs more, there's a real hierarchy between the haves and have-nots, etc.) than in most European countries.

Kreacher in order to get UK citizenship you must do a language proficiency test (unless you've got a degree from a British uni that was taught in English. Professional qualifications don't count).

What I don't get is this. How come France has no obligation to house these people but the UK does. I'm voting out of the EU as soon as I get a chance. Seems to be one law for them and another for us.

I can't understand why they are all so desperate to reach the UK - what do they imagine it is like here? I know people will say that they know some English, or have family here, but surely that's only true for a minority? I agree with the poster who said they should all be returned to refugee camps near to their country of origin - my concern is that if they are all allowed to go to whichever country they want, when peace is returned will they bother going back?

France has no obligation to house them for the simple reason that they haven't claimed asylum in France. They COULD, rather then sit in the mud in Calais, but they'd rather do that so they can try to get here. I have no sympathy with anyone who'd rather like in filth and squalor than ask for asylum. If they're so desperate for a warm bed, food and care they could ask for it in the western European country that they're already in or, for that matter, one of the several that they've tramped through to get to Calais. All the bleeding heart liberals who decry the 'terrible situation in Calais' conveniently overlook this very simple fact.

WidowWadman

Kreacher in order to get UK citizenship you must do a language proficiency test (unless you've got a degree from a British uni that was taught in English. Professional qualifications don't count).

Sorry for quoting all of this but im now puzzled by this; how do we have so many people living here who dont speak english then? How long does asylum seeker status last for, surely not indefinitely?
Or are the women i saw mentioned on the news the other night (in the news segment about women having to learn english) failed asylum seekers and are going to be sent back? How do they stay without any grasp of the english language?

One of the problems with just taking Syrians from Calais (are there even many there?) is that a) it's extremely easy to get fake papers "proving" you are Syrian and b) once you're here, and your asylum case is challenged, it then costs a huge amount of public money to investigate and send you back if it's proved you're lying. So all it does is provide an extra source of income to organised crime and putting extra pressure on people to pay them - in order to defraud the British authorities.

I do Country of Origin stuff sometimes in disputed asylum cases (pro bono, before anyone jumps in to attack!) and one of my countries of specialism was previously super-popular with Arabic speakers seeking UK asylum. Over a period of five years, and multiple case, the applicant was never once from the country they claimed to be. In many cases, it's ludicrously easy to prove that they are lying. What happens is that I then submit a report to their lawyer, giving the details and also a suspected COI - and then I never hear again. However, since the migrant crisis, I haven't had a single COI request - which leads me strongly to suspect that people who are not Syrian are claiming to be so.

Interestingly, one of the other COI countries I am a link for - and afaik, the only person in the UK who is - I have never, ever had an asylum case to deal with - yet it has only experience about 2 years of peace in the last generation.

People want to come to the UK, as PP have said, because it's ridiculously easy to disappear into the system, even if you're due to be deported. You can work here, live many to a room, and even not being paid the minimum wage, you can stash for your needs and, in many cases, send money home - there are vast amounts of money going from the UK to, for example, India and Somaliland, sent from the "illegal" economy, and in the case of Somaliland, it actually has a significant impact at state level. Most people want to come here to work - they don't want to come and suck money out of the system: but it is helpful that our system is relatively unregulated (by European standards) and that in extremis, you can eg access free healthcare.

I thought the rule was you had to claim asylum in the first country you arrived in. Not cherry pick the one who'll give you the best deal. this whole asylum thing is now totally discredited and needs to be re-thought completely. It's a terrible tragedy for those genuinely fleeing torture and persecution. But greed has taken away people's goodwill. Seeing pictures of those violent thugs attacking lorry drivers makes me mad. But I expect it's a bit of media manipulation.

Kelper - not everyone who is a resident is a citizen. For citizenship you need to evidence proficiency (the test is IELTS). I've gone through the process a couple of years ago.