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

[BillSykesDog]

As the first one is filled and the story is still current....

Re the point about Catholicism in Poland and Ireland. A lot of the ideas I mentioned have roots in Christianity anyway (do as ye would be done by, turn the other cheek etc). And the influence of the Church is very much waning in those countries anyway.

But also a bit of another derail which filled the thread, hence the new one...

I didn't read all of the previous thread (tbh the barely concealed racism was getting to me) but I'd still love to know how you "resolve" the situation to the satisfaction of the british and the french populatiobs, whose interests are somewhat opposed, but whose reticence when it comes to upholding refugee rights is rather similar.

As far as many french people are concerned, the cheapest and easiest way of resolving the situation would be to move the UK border from Calais to Dover.

And this may actually happen in the event of a Brexit ... So be careful what you wish for.

Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but a friend mentioned an issue around migrant organisations' requests for smartphones; she's not on MN and I offered to ask for views

She spoke about the undoubted lies folk are told by the people smugglers - the man who claimed Sweden was supposed to give him a house and car came to mind - but wondered why, if the phones can be used to plan ahead, they can't also give a more accurate idea of the real situation?

I said I thought some might research/believe only what they wanted to and perhaps give less attention to what didn't suit ... was I wrong?

tangerine I didnt read far back enough on the last thread and didnt realise GF meant grand father - I am sorry about that

Re the 20 mile stretch of sea, does anyone know why people dont try and cross the chanel in boats?

Well if you are making a desperate, risky journey you probably do want to be hopeful about what is on the other side...

Puzzled it is true generally that people give more credence to ideas that they already hope or believe to be true. I don't think we should expect refugees/ migrants to be an exception to this. The more desperate they are, the more likely they are to cling to false hopes.

In addition, don't forget that the chaotic (mis)handling of the refugee crisis has created fertile territory for people smugglers, whose interests are to deceive people about what may await them in their destination. So you have a potent mix of unscrupulous people who are highly incentivised to lie to refugees, exploiting desperate people who are predisposed to believe the lies.

The journeys are more than risky though: they are fatal.

I think they don't try to cross the channel is possibly due to the high traffic of ships, also maybe its too far to travel in a dinghy which would be the only boat they are able to get hold of.

allthemadmen the British and French coasts are well policed, and the channel even at Dover is a lot wider than the narrow channel between Turkey and Lesvos.

That said, it wouldnt surprise me to learn that a few migrants had made it across on private boats - probably further west where there is more private leisure shipping. It strikes me that it would be relatively easy, assuming you had the financial resources, to enter Britain illegally on a private boat via some of the Irish or Welsh ports. Or even on a ferry - we took the Roscoff- rosslare ferry route in summer and both DH and I remarked how easy it would be to get into the UK unchecked (there are no passport checks between the Republic and Northern Ireland, and you can get a ferry from Southern Ireland to Fishguard without passing any form of passport control).

Yes I meant risky as in there is a serious risk of death... The journey obviously isn't fatal for everyone. But I agree with Misti, when things are desperate, when you may be spending your life savings on sending your children on a life threatening journey, it is human to cling to hope of good things on the other side.

Re the Chanel. It is a feeder for the North Sea, v strong currents, quite rough & almost always icy. Also it is a v busy shipping lane, which means it would be a bit like trying to cross a 20 mile wide motorway on a moped. It is highly regulated & policed.

In addition, don't forget that the chaotic (mis)handling of the refugee crisis has created fertile territory for people smugglers, whose interests are to deceive people about what may await them in their destination. So you have a potent mix of unscrupulous people who are highly incentivised to lie to refugees, exploiting desperate people who are predisposed to believe the lie

And groups like the far left of course No Border they are totally unscrupulous too.

That said, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that a few migrants had made it across on private boats - probably further west where there is more private leisure shipping

I know a few have made it over in dingys or rowing boats.

RE Ferries: There an article a while back claiming people smugglers were using ferry uniforms to smuggle people over as ferry staff.

I have no doubt a hundred ways are being expoilted as well we lorries and so on, but I just wondered about smaller craft to get people in, and how would we ever know really?

bright

I know people have swam it though for charity etc

So you have a potent mix of unscrupulous people who are highly incentivised to lie to refugees, exploiting desperate people who are predisposed to believe the lies

Yes, I think this is true - there's also the point that someone genuinely traumatised may be in no state to make informed decisions

However what about the significant number of economic migrants, at least some of whom won't have come from the same sort of background? Might it not be hoped that they'd perhaps have more of an insight into what may lay ahead and spread the word?

Another boat capsized the other day. If people are trying to cross in the freezing winter, just imagine what it will be like in the summer!

We need to stop all of this. Stop people from doing the horrible dinghy-boat crossing, stop people from living in the 'jungle'... We need to stop it before it gets worse. I don't know what the perfect solution is, I guess there isn't one really. I think we are just going to have to go 'tough love' on these people and turn them away.

Personally I favour a two pronged approach. I would like to see huge, huge investment in the camps around Syria. We don't know how long people will be there, we need an infrastructure in these camps. Proper access to healthcare, education, sanitation. Even opportunities for businesses and work. Most importantly investment in security so they are safe places for people to live. I also firmly believe good conditions in these camps will weaken the pull of ISIS. Plus continue to airlift those at greatest risk and with serious health problems to the west.

The second is a naval blockade to turn back the boats, a concerted effort to arrest the people smugglers and smash their financial networks. Although I suspect that they would just grow another head so stopping the boats is most important.

That (investing in camps) might help with Syrian refugees, but it won't help stem the tide of other nationalities.
I don't think Europe has the stamina or will to operate a naval blockade - at least, not up 'til now. Events of the last few months, along with a look ahead to what's coming, might mean that changes though.

Yes, but given how dreadful things are around Syria and the way countries around them are struggling, I don't think that it would be morally right to stop the flow without making a real effort to make things better where they will be instead. I don't think that applies so much to other nationalities except for maybe Afghans and Iraqis, but we're investing there anyway.

Bill we are a major contributor to the aid there round the camps. Who is actually in charge of those funds and how to make camps better?

I am not seeing other solutions except naval blockade now.

People don't seem to want to live in the camps near Syria - no matter how nice they are. There are UN camps in Jordan (partly funded with Uk aid)that are 2/3rds empty - it is illegal to work in Jordan as a refugee but people would still rather take their chances working in the black economy in towns and villages than stay in the camps just waiting and existing. People need to feel they are working towards a future.

If we are to persuade refugees to stay in the camps in Turkey and Jordan then we need to negoiate with their governments so that training, education, work schemes, shops etc are allowed so that people don't feel they are animals in a zoo, being fed and watered but just existing. Perhaps many people don't really feel safe in the countries surrounding Syria - they may feel they would need to flee yet again if Isis move into those areas or would not return home if Assad is returned as overlord.

Improved refugee camps may well be part of the solution (if they can be funded adequately, and refugees' legal status and right to education and work is protected - good luck with this) but many of these people have already been in camps for years. How long do we expect them to put their lives on hold?

I also have an issue with the idea that a country like Lebanon can be expected to cope with huge numbers of refugees indefinitely - predominantly Syrian refugees make up 20% of Lebanon's population - while relatively (as a % of population) small numbers are set to "overwhelm" wealthy European countries (Cameron has suggested taking 30k Syrian refugees which is - wait for it - 0.05% of the UK population).

As regards Calais - I don't understand how people with small children think they will be able to stow away as a family and get to the UK. I think some people have just focused so much on getting to a particular place that they just can't give up on the idea despite the reality.

puzzled regarding your point about economic migrants. Those who can afford to do so, arrive by air - this is actually by the most popular route into the UK for illegal migrants, contrary to what you might believe from reading these threads.

The so called "economic migrants" in Calais are not from middle class families, and often they are just as traumatised as those escaping war zones - they may have been trafficked, and most will have arrived in northern France via a circuitous route involving a good deal of hardship. They are probably no more capable of assessing the benefits of migrating to the UK than a Syrian (and in most cases probably much less capable, due to lack of education). Many of them are very young, too - there are children no older than my 13 year old DS living without adult supervision in the camps. There is no way these children are capable of making sensible decisions about where they should migrate to.

Also, while legally there is of course a distinction between a refugee and other sorts of migrant whose right to asylum has not been demonstrated (what people like to call "economic migrants"), in practice this distinction is much less clear cut.

Mistgri

'Also, while legally there is of course a distinction between a refugee and other sorts of migrant whose right to asylum has not been demonstrated (what people like to call "economic migrants"), in practice this distinction is much less clear cut.'

No, it's crystal clear. It's only those who want the UK to take unlimited numbers regardless of the validity of their claim to asylum who seek to confuse the issue.

Mistgri

'Cameron has suggested taking 30k Syrian refugees which is - wait for it - 0.05% of the UK population'

And that 30k is far higher than the level desired by a majority of the UK population. As far back as September 2015, before the Cologne attacks, when the emotional blackmail to open the borders was at its height and Cameron agreed to accept 20K refugees, the result of a YouGov poll asking the public whether Britain should admit more refugees was as follows (yougov.co.uk/news/2015/09/06/no-increase-syrian-refugee-numbers/):

YES: 36%
No: 51% (24% saying keep levels the same; 27% saying fewer or none at all).

The latest poll relating to taking migrants from Calais is even more stark (www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12119288/Jeremy-Corbyns-Calais-migrant-plea-will-isolate-him-further.html):

YES: 15%
NO: 73%

I'm afraid democracy trumps virtue-signalling and hand-wringing every time.

People don't want to live in camps as they want to carry on living as normal life as possible even if that starting all over again in a far away country which I can understand

As for people being sold stories people will also believe to some extent what they want to believe and that will be based on what they have heard from the neighbours cousins friends who went to London once or what they have seen on TV. The UK is seen by many countries to be wealthy with a free health service, good free schooling with good benefits system and it's inconceivable with all that to believe that people struggle here. I have family abroad who think that anyone can get a council home and that we all have spare cash at our disposal (no matter how many times they are told this isn't true).

As for Calais camp it's been there for 20 years it will be there for another 20 years once in the UK it's easy to go missing. No need to constantly show id and there is a large amount if illegal employment.

By opening the borders we do encourage more people to come people will take risks as they are determined which I understand but we simply can't. Merkel made such a mistake we should have all been helping make the camps a better place and safer place to live.

I agree with DC we should take women and children directly from the camps