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 am not sure why they would need to be put up in someone elses house on a permanent basis if they are, as someone up thread pointed out, the 'educated elite' who can work? I have given time and money to helping refugees because I was brought up on the " do as you would be done by " moral principle. I am not sure leaving all of them in neighbouring camps is particularly fair on Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan. I know we have donated aid but others have not.
I wonder whether the father of the 11 year old boy discussed up thread was hoping to reach the UK in the usual back of lorry style and then bring him over in some safer way? I doubt very much he brought him all the way fr wherever he came from only to abandon him in Calais for fun. Jumping to that conclusion smacks of dehumanisation.
I have heard that there are interpreters who have worked for the British army in Calais. Our MP is looking into it.

Has anyone else noticed, that of the EU countries who flung their doors open and welcomed one and all, the welcome mat is looking a little threadbare, in Sweden especially. They have experienced some of the most appalling criminal acts by refugees allowed into their country, including murder and rapes, and I can well understand why they have yanked the welcome mat back in. 80,000 being forcibly repatriated this year. How long before the rest of the EU follow suit? Never fear, Emily will have a platitudinous solution that will include the UK taking them all in no doubt.

You've mentioned it more than twice moreshabby. I is weird. If only Brits living in the UK can comment then maybe you should go through the thread and check out where people live. Good luck with that.

Just wondering - does anyone know how the Swedes are proposing to remove eighty thousand people?? I realise that if they have no valid claim and Sweden doesn't want them, they'll obviously have to go ... I'd simply like to know how??

Twice Emily, I can remember what I've posted even if you cant, you are obviously mixing me up with the person who is from the US

I do think the Spectator article is quite good, Bright - particularly in its emphasis on the fact that most Syrian refugees leave the relatively comfortable camps in bordering countries because they want to work: not come here to laze around on benefits as many seem to think..! If we can encourage a border camp economy as it suggests and that really works it sounds great. I still think we could combine that with a quota system in Europe though, particularly for those who speak relevant languages/ have family ties. And fair processing systems, everywhere: no smugglers and deaths at sea.

I don't think they will go quietly Puzzled judging by how they acted when trying to force their way into most countries.

'Just wondering - does anyone know how the Swedes are proposing to remove eighty thousand people?? I realise that if they have no valid claim and Sweden doesn't want them, they'll obviously have to go ... I'd simply like to know how??'

It will be almost impossible - not without imposing martial law, never mind the incredible cost of doing it and the legal necessity of finding a country willing to take them. That's why control of who enters the country has to be so strict, because once they're in it's far too difficult to remove them - something the open borders crowd knows only too well.

Thole let's just imagine that the UK govt agrees to accept every man, woman and child currently in Calais. No questions asked, no one refused. Once they're established here, where are you going to put them (you can't put them with Emily because she's not actually in the UK), so what accommodation, education, employment, health care will you provide. Don't forget that the schools are already over crowded, housing shortages are a national crisis and the health service is buckling under its own weight. Let's assume that you've got all of those criteria solved and everyone has managed to squeeze in.

What are you going to do with the thousands of new migrants/refugees who accumulated in Calais whilst you were dealing with the first contingent? And they keep coming, more and more and more. How long will it be before either every refugee or migrant is exactly where they want to be and is as happy as a sandboy ? Or the UK reaches the same state that Sweden has reached this week?

I am sure putting them up in your house is eluding to the current housing crisis we are in, that isn't a secret and was a policy of every political party during the last election.

There is also a recognised theory that the 'educated elite' make the jump first out of war torn countries, what is left are at best a few top adveredge wage earners, the rest are generally looking for any work which further supresses the lower wage bracket which leads to more in work benefits being needed (and we all know what they are being cut), there are many complex factors already here in the uk to just say in a nonchalant manner 'we should do more'.

You also have to be aware that it is not right leaning thought process fuelled by propganda either, there is a lot of agendas and miss information being pushed by all sides, the latest in Germany which is even being picked up by the liberal papers is that the recent report of a Syrian refugee who died waiting outside the processing office was in fact totally fabricated.

Sweden has already said it will charter planes to fly them home. But that's going to be a helluva bill for the Swedish taxpayer. It would've been a darn sight cheaper to have proper border controls in the first place. Like Britain has. Thank goodness.

They are not all educated elite. Plenty have got rid of finger prints and pretend to be Syrian and a lot are from North Africa although I agree that those who paid to get here must have more money than some left behind. Also even if you are educated you usually start at the bottom once here eg all those Asians were took in willingly expelled from Uganda and have done so much good for the UK started with nothing having lost every penny but worked very hard and worked their way up. Most people in the UK are not against all immigration by any means, just that we want it controlled, not massive numbers and that it is done in a way that accords with the law.

The 80 000 to leave Sweden will be sent on charter flights and it will be done over several years apparently.

The UK has an appalling record at expelling those who over stay their visa and making those who should leave go so we do need to control the entry as we are useless at removing those not allowed by law to be here,

Juneau Sweden is apparently approachin other countries within the EU to organise flights to repatriate them to their country of origin apparently. Finland has already agreed to do this so that "all flights are filled to capacity ". But it is, as you say, a mammoth task.

A lot of them will just disappear before they are removed, probably to Calais. which will of course be empty because we will have taken in all the previous occupants

I didn't say we should have everyone in Calais. I said we should have a quota system for clearly defined refugees, and processing centres. We shouldn't dehumanise anyone, & we should remember that this is a disparate group of people. How would we pay for it? They want to work... I accept we have a housing crisis and there would be assimilation costs, maybe we could make Google pay a bit more tax to help?

If I were in Sweden, I would be quite concerned about possible misbehaviour of some of the 80,000 if they know they are to be repatriated, if they feel they have nothing to lose. A Mumsnetter living in Sweden commented on another thread how a fellow student at her English class told her angrily that Sweden had 'lied' because they had supposedly promised new arrivals a house and car. The resentment caused by the disappointment of such deluded hopes, in a country where the police are now seriously overstretched, could cause significant problems. And of course among such a large number of people it is highly likely that a proportion will have already been engaging in criminal activity in their country of origin.

They tried to impose a quota system for refugees. It caused a seriously toxic political argument between the eastern and western EU states. As of 16 January 272 refugees have been resettled under the system.

They are not all educated elite.

Apparently this is another problem for Germany. The upside of them taking all these refugees was supposed to be the country gaining lots of skilled workers, but an initial assessment has discovered that most are completely unskilled and not suited to the labour shortages Germany is struggling with. That knee-jerk decision of Angela Merkel's is costing her country dear and I think it will bring her down.

They want to work, yes. But so do the thousands of young bright intelligent people who already live in the UK. But they can't get jobs either, apart from zero hours contracts. Young British people are struggling as never before to get into work. What have the Calais migrants/refugees got, that would give them a better chance of getting a job, that a young British person hasn't?

Sorry, there were a lot if young British in my last post apologies

Making google pay more tax is a separate issue, and no matter how much you think 'just get the rich/businesses to pay more tax' is a solution, there is a small window in what is acceptable in a globalised economy and extracting enough to help the countries citizens.

We already have a quota system, just because it is lower than other European countries doesn't mean we are evil or unempathic, we give more in aid than anyone in Europe to the route migrant camps, no matter how you try and spin it we are a small island with a natural border.

As an example, go visit any thread on here regarding house prices and see the emotive rhetoric against building more houses, that argument for building houses is using the official data of natural population growth and current expected immigration and it is meeting resistance from every political affiliation, that is using the official statistics that have recently been proved to be underestimated (on the longer curve).

I don't think anyone really is dehumanising, the situation requires a pragmatic approach and trying to argue the situation purely on emotive terms is just as dangerous IMO.

I don't know. They are all different. Some may be doctors with excellent English. Others may be completely unskilled. A lot depends where in the country they are put. Where I live we have a network - City of Sanctuary - who would help with assimilation.

kesstrel I think that was on this thread (the Mumsnetter in Sweden who said that a man in her Swedish class (she and two other students were the only ones who weren't asylum seekers as far as I remember) thought Sweden 'lied' to him about promising a house and a car. The man and his family were already living in a 3-bedroom flat.

There really is a problem with the expectations that people have who come from far-flung places. Most of it is probably due to the internet and social media. I mean... come on everybody... look at your social media account, such as instagram. Most people only publish the pretty side of their lives on there: holidays, evenings out... happy times. People see this and think life is better wherever you are, but they don't know the crap side of your life.

Britain is a very, very difficult country to live a comfortable life in. More so if you don't speak the language, have the right education, etc. I don't think I'd choose to live here if I were them, to be honest. They won't be happy here.

Even if they are all educated elite, it is wildly unethical to be basically setting out to brain-drain the entire middle class off a nation at war. How on earth is that nation expected to rebuild if the entire civil service goes and lives somewhere else?

A relative of mine worked for some years in a government advisory role in a post-conflict nation in West Africa. He told me one of the most enduring problems faced by a country recovering from war is that during the war anyone who can afford to leave - the middle and upper classes basically - will leave and many never come back. That leaves a gigantic skills gap when it comes to rebuilding the nation. That, in turn, means that the wrong people end up in power, or governments get taken over by kleptocracies or you end up with teetering systems and massive corruption. Because anyone who knows how to organise shit, and manage people, and get things done, has fucked off to live somewhere else.

This, above all else, is why the most compassionate thing to do is to support the creation and maintenance of livable refugee camps near the nation at war. Because then the refugees can return to their country once the war is over - including all those doctors and managers and businesspeople and bureaucrats and civil servants etc etc, the people who know how to make civil society function. If, instead, we have a de facto policy of creaming off into Europe anyone who can afford to pay people traffickers to get them there, post-confict Syria will be left trying to rebuild with only the people too incompetent, too indigent, too old or too young to have fled, and then violent opportunists move in and grab power.